The Forum > General Discussion > Democrats Soft underbelly or Future of Democracy?
Democrats Soft underbelly or Future of Democracy?
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Page 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
-
- All
The National Forum | Donate | Your Account | On Line Opinion | Forum | Blogs | Polling | About |
Syndicate RSS/XML |
|
About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy |
>Exposed by worse liars you mean ?
No I don't. Though the American media are far from perfect, AIUI they're more committed to accuracy than the Australian media - and when their errors are exposed they don't keep repeating them and falsely accuse the people telling the truth of "fake news".\
>The swamp of Australia is it's public service & its bureaucrats. It needs draining & culling.
A frequently heard accusation, but a baseless one. Governments like slimming down the public service, but it's a false economy if (as usually happens) the work ends up having to be done by contractors and consultants at twice the price.
>It is beyonf me how some bureaucrats can earn hundreds of thousands a year more than the PM.
But how many do? And of those who do, is their pay rate performance related?
(Actual answers only please; your speculation is worthless)
>Little Councils of 2000 population have CEO's on $400 grand +.
Really? Which ones?
> it is nothing short of criminal when women bleat sexual abuse 30 years after they claim it happened.
The time elapsed doesn't alter the criminality. If the allegations are true then those women have done nothing wrong and the crime is entirely the fault of the accused. If the allegations are false then either the accusers are mistaken (which could credibly be the case for a single allegation, but not for so many IMO) or they're lying (which would be criminal).
I don't know who's telling the truth, but I think it's wrong to pass judgement before the evidence is heard.
>And, isn't it uncanny how the accused always have a higher position... AND aren't short of a quid or two.
No it isn't. Because were they not in that position: firstly fewer of the accusers would consider it worth the trouble of bringing those accusations forward, and secondly because it would not be so newsworthy if they did.
>I'm still waiting for a handicapped pensioner to be accused of indecent assault 30 years after the fact.
Not handicapped, but Rolf Harris was 80.
(tbc)