Posted by Belly, Tuesday, 21 May 2019 2:21:52 PM
CM quite weird, did you ever spend enough time watch that show to see what it was about?

Answer- Yes I watched Varney & Co, Cavuto, Making Money with Charles Payne, sometimes Auction Day, others. There were quite a few US shows.
Better in my view than the ABC

TV shows like art is so subjective.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-21/pauline-hanson-clive-palmer-greens-election-taxpayer-funding/11131196
I found this link confronting
And in all truth think we all should
CM yes understand , even I watched bits when they appeared, just for the laugh

- Political Correctness and Censorship Undermines the Basic Fabric Of Our Society And I can Prove It -

Socratic method

"The Socratic method, also known as method of Elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presuppositions. It is a dialectical method, involving a discussion in which the defense of one point of view is questioned; one participant may lead another to contradict themselves in some way, thus weakening the defender's point. This method is named after the Classical Greek philosopher Socrates and is introduced by him in Plato's Theaetetus as midwifery (maieutics) because it is employed to bring out definitions implicit in the interlocutors' beliefs, or to help them further their understanding.

The Socratic method is a method of hypothesis elimination, in that better hypotheses are found by steadily identifying and eliminating those that lead to contradictions. The Socratic method searches for general, commonly held truths that shape beliefs and scrutinizes them to determine their consistency with other beliefs. The basic form is a series of questions formulated as tests of logic and fact intended to help a person or group discover their beliefs about some topic, exploring definitions or logoi (singular logos) and seeking to characterize general characteristics shared by various particular instances."

Any attempt to vilify, marginalise and censor people or their views;
- To undermine this process of 'arguments based on merit', in turn undermines the very fabric of our society.

My point in the post above was why are parties who never won a lower house seat being handed millions?

Belly,

I do not wish to be critical of your views or beliefs, but I think you should accept as fact that we, Australians all, dodged a bullet by the Coalition winning this election.

To evaluate the underlying credentials of Bill Shorten as a potential PM one need only scrutinize his recent supporting of Chris Bowen for leadership of the Federal Labor Party, and his (Shorten's) coincidental undermining of Anthony Albanese's vying for this post.
All of Bill's prior espoused praise of 'Albo' (when Shorten beat him for the top job, in spite of Albo winning the general ballot) proves to be just appeasement of the masses who really wanted Albo at the top.
What does a cheap trickster really look like. Say no more.

Anyhow, let Labor regroup (hopefully with Tanya still as Deputy), and re-evaluate priorities, and then maybe a new 'Hawke' era of positive social and economic evolution in the best interests of Australia and all of its citizens of all persuasions may yet be realized in due course.

In the meantime, one must hope that the Coalition will continue to calm the waters and ensure smooth sailing and gradual incremental benefits for the majority and particularly for those most in need.

Cheers, and maybe a lottery win is not out of the question.