# Did John Howard "apologise" for interest rate rise?



## Julia (10 November 2007)

Much has been raked over amongst the various media in the last few days regarding whether John Howard's saying "I am sorry that interest rates have gone up.  I recognise the extra burden this places on families" (or words to that effect) actually constitutes an apology for said interest rate rise.

He later said that saying he was sorry that this had happened was not the same as him apologising for the rate rise.

The Opposition has quibbled that when Mr Howard said that his words above  he was actually apologising for the rise in rates, and that for him to say he was not, is simply playing with semantics.

What do you think?

I don't think saying he is sorry something has happened is at all the same as apologising - and therefore taking responsibility - for that happening.

e.g. if your mother has died, I will quite reasonably say "I am sorry to know that your mother has died".  That is entirely different from my saying "I apologise for your mother dying".


----------



## son of baglimit (10 November 2007)

*Re: Did John Howard "apologise" for interes rate rise?*

you have taken all the fun out of this thread julia - you already answered your own question.

the final bit reminds me of an old joke of someone returning from holidays and their housesitter explaining what happened to the cat, and then their elderly mother.


----------



## 2020hindsight (10 November 2007)

*Re: Did John Howard "apologise" for interes rate rise?*

Julia
I guess I could say "I am sorry I voted for him last time"

now would that mean that I regret it ?
or that I am apologising?

The man is full of hollow tricky changeable chameleon semantics. 
Likewise, he says he's sorry/regrets whatever his falling out with the abs - then next day says he "hasn't changed one iota" !!??

- full of shallow meaningless bs (imo).  



> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=212111&highlight=aboriginal#post212111
> 
> Malcolm Fraser:-
> The Government makes a commitment one minute to midnight to hold a referendum to mention Aboriginals in the Preamble to our Constitution. Such a referendum will almost certainly confirm that Australians generally want a fair go and a decent future for indigenous Australians, but that latter day commitment to a referendum by itself has little meaning.


----------



## Julia (10 November 2007)

*Re: Did John Howard "apologise" for interes rate rise?*

Son of Baglimit, yes, you're right I guess.  But that's just my interpretation.
I'm still interested in what others think.

2020, well obviously you regret your vote but you are not apologising to anyone for it, so I suppose you are agreeing with me, and therefore with John Howard regarding the difference between saying sorry and apologising.


----------



## doctorj (11 November 2007)

*Re: Did John Howard "apologise" for interes rate rise?*

I'm not sure why he's apologising.

- the reserve bank is independent
- i'd much prefer rate raises, rather than rate cuts on the basis that rises generally coincide with good times and cuts coincide with bad.
- Australia makes up a very small part of the global economy, a great deal of inflationary pressures are external

And on top of that, who cares that he apologised/said sorry.  Australia stopped listening to him months ago.


----------



## Flying Fish (11 November 2007)

*Re: Did John Howard "apologise" for interes rate rise?*



Julia said:


> Much has been raked over amongst the various media in the last few days regarding whether John Howard's saying "I am sorry that interest rates have gone up.  I recognise the extra burden this places on families" (or words to that effect) actually constitutes an apology for said interest rate rise.
> 
> He later said that saying he was sorry that this had happened was not the same as him apologising for the rate rise.
> 
> ...




Doesn't matter who is in power rates are up regardless , so blaming it on johnny or anyone else is a waste of breath.

Wats an even bigger waste of money is all the rubbish that labour send to my letter box, and roadside plackards and even letters in my car registration.


----------



## Flying Fish (11 November 2007)

*Re: Did John Howard "apologise" for interes rate rise?*



2020hindsight said:


> Julia
> I guess I could say "I am sorry I voted for him last time"
> 
> now would that mean that I regret it ?
> ...




sounds like you are a bit bitter, or perhaps you never read between the lines lol


----------



## cuttlefish (11 November 2007)

So which is it - is his government able to keep interest rates lower or not?

When they're falling he and Costello crow about how its their policy thats kept interest rates low, but when interest rates are going up of course its nothing to do with them and they have no control over it.  He and Costello just come across as complete hypocrits.


----------



## Mrs Mackie (11 November 2007)

So saying sorry is not apologising when it comes to interest rates, but it is when it comes to how aboriginals were treated by our ancestors?  Interesting.


----------



## Flying Fish (11 November 2007)

cuttlefish said:


> So which is it - is his government able to keep interest rates lower or not?
> 
> When they're falling he and Costello crow about how its their policy thats kept interest rates low, but when interest rates are going up of course its nothing to do with them and they have no control over it.  He and Costello just come across as complete hypocrits.




It does not matter who is in power cuttlefish.

If you really want to blame someone, blame the fat **** general public who like to work for nothing


----------



## Nyden (11 November 2007)

Flying Fish said:


> It does not matter who is in power cuttlefish.
> 
> If you really want to blame someone, blame the fat **** general public who like to work for nothing




Too true, don't even get me started there! Gonna get me in a frenzy 

I don't blame Howard for the rate rises; as someone else said - The Reserve Bank is independent. 

Do you think if Labor had been in power; we'd be better off right now? I laugh at that, because we wouldn't. Heck, if Labor had been in power - it would have been Beazley! Even though the new IR laws wouldn't have been around, I'm sure he still would have found something to _"Rip up!!"_


So; I guess in conclusion - he gave us more than he needed to. He's in a lose/lose situation; Labor will spin this either way!

If he apologizes more directly; Labor will go about advertising in their commercials that Howard admits to hurting his "working families".

If he does nothing, Rudd will complain about him not owning up to his "responsibility"

& If he does give at least a partial apology; as he did - well, low & behold; folks are still complaining.



Too late, frenzy occured 


Edit:
In addition - I would just like to say; that if Rudd gets into power...let's all come back here next election time - and see how many of *his* promises he'll have kept. Let's see if our schools and health system have become world-class under his 'revolution', I'm a pessimist - and I'll believe it when I see it. It's easy for Labor to criticize, isn't it...even though, they're doing such a spectacular job on a state level


----------



## 2020hindsight (11 November 2007)

*Re: Did John Howard "apologise" for interes rate rise?*



Flying Fish said:


> sounds like you are a bit bitter, or perhaps you never read between the lines lol




FF, this is "form" for howard. (not sure about bitter - am sure that howard could do better)

(and you're right about reading between the lines  - like, if you think the words mean something - eg the recent ab apology - then - with howard at least - you have to give it the "past form" test - i.e. wait for a day or two till he completely overturns your first impression, you may conclude that his words mean very little, and that they are not genuinely meant).

SEMANTICS

1. He regrets the stolen generation but won't apologise;
2. He says that he personally didn't say that interest rates would stay at record lows - just his party advertising said that;
3. He says that he wants to clarify misunderstandings with the abs, but, oh no, he wont be the one changing; 
4. and now he's sorry that rates went up, but since he has nothing to do with it, , there can be no blame laid at his door, and no way can that even be remoting linked with an apology. (?)

The English language has many oportunities to twist things.  
Diplomats do it all the time.  For instance when an aggressive developer wants to rip the heart out of an old suburb , they say they make a "Submission" to the council.   - as if there's anything "submissive" about it !

As for trying to differentiate himself from his party (the 2003 TV ads about rates staying at record lows) - how ridiculous was his defence, and how much more credible if he had just pleaded a stuffup.   Trouble then of course, those ads were pivotal to the 2003 coalition campaign. :2 twocents

PS I'll post a postscript to this on the Election thread.


----------



## megla (11 November 2007)

Mrs Mackie said:


> So saying sorry is not apologising when it comes to interest rates, but it is when it comes to how aboriginals were treated by our ancestors?  Interesting.




here, here!

Actually, I think his apology(?) is akin to that of a criminal who is sorry for their actions - but *only *when they get caught out!


----------



## 2020hindsight (11 November 2007)

............


----------



## 2020hindsight (11 November 2007)

great comparison megla. 

or as they said on Insiders - 
"I'm sorry I ran over your dog"
"I'm sorry someone else ran over your dog"

so ? who was at the wheel ?

... (was anyone??)

or was the economy just being buffetted by the fickle winds of international trends - 
trying unsuccessfully to dodge  the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune  etcetc


----------



## Julia (11 November 2007)

Mrs Mackie said:


> So saying sorry is not apologising when it comes to interest rates, but it is when it comes to how aboriginals were treated by our ancestors?  Interesting.




To be fair to John Howard, I think what he has said re the aboriginal problem is that he is sorry it happened, that he regrets it has happened, but he has consistently refused to offer an apology on the basis that to do so would be for himself personally and the current generation of Australians to accept the blame for what happened.  I agree with him and so, I suspect, do the majority of Australians.

2020, your analogy about running over the dog is somewhat imperfect; you could be driving along in a completely responsible fashion and if a dog suddenly darted out (chasing, e.g. Prospector's shaved cat), not giving you time to stop, you would of course be sorry you had run over the dreaded dog but you should not feel a need to apologise for doing so in that it was not your fault.  Of course you would say "I am sorry I ran over your dog - there was no way I could have stopped in time."


----------



## noirua (11 November 2007)

It seems that lots of John Howards have apologised, though I expect you mean John Winston Howard, beloved Prime Minister of Australia:  http://parris.josh.com.au/humour/xeno/howard.htm


----------



## 2020hindsight (11 November 2007)

Julia said:


> 2020, well obviously you regret your vote but you are not apologising to anyone for it, so I suppose you are agreeing with ...John Howard regarding the difference between saying sorry and apologising.




er - nope (in context I was not apologising, in context he was - or should have been - he was at the wheel after all )



Julia said:


> 1. analogy about running over the dog is somewhat imperfect; you could be driving along in a completely responsible fashion and if a dog suddenly darted out (chasing, e.g. Prospector's shaved cat), not giving you time to stop, you would of course be sorry you had run over the dreaded dog but you should not feel a need to apologise for doing so in that it was not your fault.
> 2. Of course you would say *"I am sorry I ran over your dog -* (plus rider) *there was no way I could have stopped in time*."




1. I disagree that the comparison is imperfect Julia , because Johnny was "at the wheel" and furthermore
2. the example I gave didn't add the "rider" about the inability to stop. (and even if it did, it still qualifies as an apology surely)

Incidentally only an insensitive moron would argue 
3. that he could add riders / mitigating circumstances (coudn't stop in time) the following day, and
4. that by his saying "sorry" followed by mitigating circumstances (ok so far)   

meant that you *weren't even apologising *!!
c'mon!  

His plea should be "Guilty with mitigating circumstances" - and of course, with adequate mitigating circumstances, the charge could be dismissed by the judges ( in this case the electorate). 

here's a poem on the subject.   
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=222285&highlight=semantics#post222285


----------



## Julia (11 November 2007)

Oh God, I give up, 2020.  I'm sure you get what I am meaning and are simply extending the argument for fun.  I withdraw.


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 November 2007)

2020hindsight said:


> or as they said on Insiders -
> "I'm sorry I ran over your dog"
> "I'm sorry someone else ran over your dog"



ok Julia - I understand what you are saying
do you understand what I am saying?
that to say ...
"I'm sorry I ran over your dog"... 
without any rider ...
is an apology yes?

(and hence, if Howard claims to be at the economic wheel, then he was also apologising when he said "I'm sorry rates went up")


----------



## glenn_r (12 November 2007)

Did Keating, Hawke or Whitlam apologise for their double digit interest rates?

More importantly will Rudd apologise for his double digit interest rates, when his union mates stuff up the economy?


----------



## cuttlefish (12 November 2007)

I don't think Keating's ever shied away from the 'recession we had to have' comment - i.e. he took responsibility for it and the situation. He did however do it in a way that was perceived as arrogant by the electorate, who were suffering through the situation, and they sent the message through to him loudly and clearly when election time came around.  This possibly explains why Howard is taking a more tactful approach in dealing with the current situation.


----------



## Julia (12 November 2007)

2020hindsight said:


> ok Julia - I understand what you are saying
> do you understand what I am saying?
> that to say ...
> "I'm sorry I ran over your dog"...
> ...




Re the dog:  No, because it depends on the circumstances.  If you ran over the dog in a scenario as I described earlier, i.e. the dog ran out and you were unable to stop, then of course you would be terribly sorry that you ran over the dog but would not be apologising in the sense of being to blame for the dog's death.


If, however, you had plenty of time to see the dog which was simply sitting in the middle of the road and you made no attempt to divert your course to avoid running over it, then, yes you would be apologising for killing the dog in the true sense that you were accepting blame.
(But if we were being literal here, I doubt if you were the sort of person to deliberately run over a dog, you'd be too much into apologies either.)

OK, can we please leave it now?

And no, I do not agree that if John Howard said he was sorry that rates had gone up he was therefore apologising for rates having gone up.  I have already said this.  I'm not going to say it even one more time!


----------



## noirua (12 November 2007)

Hi Julia, Has 2020 run over someones dog at killed it. If so, the kindest thing to do is to buy the person another dog and pay for one of those doggie memorials. Or perhaps I misread your post and it was either yourself or John Howard who ran over it.


----------



## cuttlefish (12 November 2007)

the dog should have been in a fenced yard or on a lead anyway shouldn't it?


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 November 2007)

ok 
I still think its an apology - and I wouldn't like your chances of convincing an independent arbitrator that it wasn't  -  - I mean I think 99% of people would agree with me ( no rider remember). ... 

but conversely.... ( and this is important because it possibly reveals a Freudian slip by Howard) ..

*IF he were NOT at the economic wheel * - then "I'm sorry the rates went up" would NOT be an apology - it would compare with   "I'm sorry someone ELSE ran over the dog". 

He claims it wasn't an apology 
therefore he admits he is not at the economic wheel that drives these things.


----------



## nioka (12 November 2007)

This is getting a bit confusing. When did John Howard run over a dog. If he did was he sorry. Did he try to run over the dog or did he just not try to not run over the dog. Was it a big dog or a little dog. Was it one of the dogs I'm holding or is it one I sold. Was it listed on the asx. If not then how come it got run over in the first place. Did it deserve to get run over anyway. Was it a non core dog. Was it a union member or a terrorist dog. Do we want the dog replaced?. All I want is Howard replaced before the country goes to the dogs and gets run over.


----------



## cuttlefish (12 November 2007)

Maybe it was one of Peter Reiths dogs (the ones from the waterfront disputes).  He'd be a bit sore about running over one of those if he wants to keep going with workplace reforms.


----------



## skint (12 November 2007)

glenn_r said:


> Did Keating, Hawke or Whitlam apologise for their double digit interest rates?
> 
> More importantly will Rudd apologise for his double digit interest rates, when his union mates stuff up the economy?




For a start, interest rates where higher under Howard as treasurer than they were under Whitlam. What did the Libs do to improve our international competitiveness 1974-83? Absolutely didley-squat.
Lets look at the unions role in curbing inflation and by extension, reducing rates.
1) WAGES - When Hawke came to power, it was on the back of the last big wages explosion in 1983, courtesy of Howard. Howard was completely unable to work with unions and got nowhere. Hawke was able to reach a consensus with the unions to implement a wage freeze for a year or so in the 1st wages accord. Subsequent accords abolished pattern bargaining (Howard couldn't) and also tied wage increases to productivity increases (Howard couldn't). In short, the current constraints on wages breakouts and also productivity promoting policy were implemented under a Labour government with cooperation of the unions. That is, the the unions were integral to achieving what Howard couldn't.
2) INFLATION - in the mid nineties Bill Kelty (ACTU leader), Jenny George and Martin Ferguson (both union leaders) met with Keating and proposed an inflation target of 2-3%. Keating agreed, as did the Reserve Bank, which adopted the policy. At the time Australia was pretty much the only country to have such a target, but of course now many do. Keating recently produced the minutes of that meeting and Fraser also recently agreed that the unions were crucial to containing inflation at the time. Again labour and the unions were able to achieve the big economic changes that Howard didn''t and couldn't. He has been reaping the benefits of these changes for the last decade, an era of global economic boom.   
3) FLOATING OF THE DOLLAR - you'd be hard pressed to find an economist who thinks the floating of the dollar hasn't increased our econmic competitiveness enormously. Once again, the question arises as to why Howard didn't conceive of this pretty basic truism. It was Labour that took the initiative.

These were the really big macroeconomic changes that has allowed Australia to benefit as much as it has from the biggest post war global economic boom. What are the big reforms that have occurred under Howard in 11 years? Except for lowering the wages of the lowest paid, I can't think of any. He just keeps bangin' on about how good he is at managing the economy, while at the same time spending like a drunken sailor This ata time when the  Reserve is continually warning how much we need to curb expenditure in the current climate. 
Howard's a good economic manager? - TURN IT UP!


----------



## Julia (12 November 2007)

Nioka and Cuttlefish, thanks for causing me to laugh so much that my own dog came up to see what was going on!

You are entitled to be confused.  I'm not sure whether it's my fault or 2020's. I accept half the blame for all the dogs that are now lying dead on the road.
But then again, as you suggest, Cuttlefish, damn dogs should have been in a fenced yard in the first place.  So neither I, 2020, or John Howard would have to apologise for killing any dogs.  Or take responsibility for erecting doggie memorials on the side of the road.  In fact, we could get the dog's owner to apologise for his dog causing the problem.  
Could I backtrack and replace the dog with a possum, do you think?
Dogs are wonderful and I'd hate them to be hurt, but possums are a whole different question.


----------



## nioka (12 November 2007)

Julia said:


> Could I backtrack and replace the dog with a possum, do you think?
> Dogs are wonderful and I'd hate them to be hurt, but possums are a whole different question.




Definitely not. I don't expect anyone, even John Howard, to apologise for running over a possum. I know what they do when they run wild. As a New Zealander I suggest you know how big a pest they can be.


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 November 2007)

Julia said:


> Nioka and Cuttlefish, thanks for causing me to laugh so much that my own dog came up to see what was going on!
> 
> You are entitled to be confused.  I'm not sure whether it's my fault or 2020's. I accept half the blame for all the dogs that are now lying dead on the road.
> 
> ...



Lol - must aagree

and I accept 50% of the blame but (da dah)  I'm sorry
.... not a single percent more. 

PS The reference to possums Julia - sorry but your Kiwi prejudice towards one of our Aussie icons is showing 
Mind you I had possum in a restaurant in Devonport a year or so back - not bad at that .


----------



## Duckman#72 (12 November 2007)

2020hindsight said:


> 1. I disagree that the comparison is imperfect Julia , because Johnny was "at the wheel"




If I can jump in here.....I think whether or not you believe John Howard was  apologising or not depends upon your personal view of Howard and his Governments ability to directly control interest rates. 

My belief and level of understanding is that while the Government's policies can influence the direction of the economy and therefore play a secondary role in moving interest rates, it cannot directly control interest rates. Mr Howard has no ownership of the apology because technically he didn't directly cause it to happen.

The dog story isn't really right 2020 because you are suggesting that Howard was completely responsible for the interest rate rise (ie behind the wheel). For a simple story like a dog and a car that's fine. It is not so clear when it comes to the economy.

If I can suggest another analogy where the Economy is a small child and the Carer is Howard and the Government. 

The carer might tell the child's mother..... "I'll make sure nothing happens to him". Now the carer makes sure the child eats vegetables and fruit 3 times a day, makes sure he wears a singlet to bed, makes sure he has 8-10 hours sleep a night, walks the child to and from school every day. The carer can do everything that a responsible carer should do but if doesn't mean the child won't catch the german measles from Prep or falls off the slippery dip and breaks his arm. In which case ...yes the carer is sorry it "happened" but......did not personally cause the illness or sickness.....and I might add has done everything a reasonable person would do to stop any harm from arising to the child. In fact another Carer in charge may not have done as well.         

Whether or not you want John Howard to apologise depends on whether you think he was directly responsible for rate rises. Simple.

Duckman


----------



## chops_a_must (12 November 2007)

Duckman#72 said:


> Whether or not you want John Howard to apologise depends on whether you think he was directly responsible for rate rises. Simple.
> 
> Duckman




The stick in the mud is that in the past he did take ownership over interest rates. That's totally separate to anyone's view of him.


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 November 2007)

Duckman#72 said:


> If I can jump in here.....I think whether or not you believe John Howard was  apologising or not depends upon your personal view of Howard and his Governments ability to directly control interest rates.
> 
> My belief and level of understanding is that while the Government's policies can influence the direction of the economy and therefore play a secondary role in moving interest rates, it cannot directly control interest rates. Mr Howard has no ownership of the apology because technically he didn't directly cause it to happen.
> 
> ...




but duckman - my opinion is that anything that takes that long to explain has gotta be pedantic (as well as semantic)  - 

why didn't he just say "these are the six interest hikes you had to have" and get on with it   -

maybe stop pretending he's in control, the financial messiah - accept the ruling that he's a "very naughty boy" lol (as jonojpsg said,  I suspect quoting Monty Python in Life of Brian(?))
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=222459&highlight=messiah#post222459


----------



## cuttlefish (12 November 2007)

glad you enjoyed the humour Julia - hope we didn't scare your dog!


----------



## Julia (12 November 2007)

cuttlefish said:


> glad you enjoyed the humour Julia - hope we didn't scare your dog!




No, Cuttlefish, she's fine.  She's just glad she's not a possum, destined to be run over with no regrets all round.  It's good to be a little silly sometimes.
Thanks.


----------



## Julia (12 November 2007)

nioka said:


> Definitely not. I don't expect anyone, even John Howard, to apologise for running over a possum. I know what they do when they run wild. As a New Zealander I suggest you know how big a pest they can be.



Yep, Nioka.  I dislike them almost as much as I dislike mosquitoes, hence my suggestion of placing them on the road for 2020 or John Howard to run over.
Wouldn't even need a roadside memorial then.


----------



## Flying Fish (5 December 2007)

Will Rudd apologise now that he had opened a can of worms.


----------



## noco (5 December 2007)

For God sake, can't you  fanatics let sleeping dogs lie. Let John Howard and all his predecessors R.I.P.
Watch the next three years when KRUDD and his union bashers flex their muscles.
Kevin 07 started in heaven, Kevin 08 thought he was great, Kevin 09 now in decline, Kevin 010 never again!
:horse::horse:


----------



## ithatheekret (5 December 2007)

Flying Fish said:


> Will Rudd apologise now that he had opened a can of worms.





That's a tough question ..... no fair ......


We haven't seen him jog around the lake yet , yet alone attempt to drive .

That was one of J.H.s problems , he could jog , but couldn't drive !


----------



## Flying Fish (5 December 2007)

ithatheekret said:


> That's a tough question ..... no fair ......
> 
> 
> We haven't seen him jog around the lake yet , yet alone attempt to drive .
> ...




think it was comical it was a rate hike before election rather than after


----------



## AndrewM123 (5 December 2007)

ithatheekret said:


> That's a tough question ..... no fair ......
> 
> 
> We haven't seen him jog around the lake yet , yet alone attempt to drive .
> ...




And sure as sh** , couldn't bowl.


----------



## Scuba (5 December 2007)

noco said:


> For God sake, can't you  fanatics let sleeping dogs lie. Let John Howard and all his predecessors R.I.P.
> Watch the next three years when KRUDD and his union bashers flex their muscles.
> Kevin 07 started in heaven, Kevin 08 thought he was great, Kevin 09 now in decline, Kevin 010 never again!
> :horse::horse:




Fanatics?  Not like a tirade against the new...
Sleeping dogs lie, oh well, you got the dog part right lol... Rest in peace? What, like the enquiry into AWB, or children overboard, Santo Santoro, WMDs, could go on...
His union bashers? Uh, hello, didn't Rudd choose his cabinet? Let sleeping dogs lie pal, oh the union ties advertisement that got the numbers wrong... Or maybe the guys in Western Sydney that tried suggesting it was Labour that wanted to pardon the Bali five and build more mosques in Sydney... YOU people make me sick with your self righteousness...


----------



## ithatheekret (5 December 2007)

Flying Fish said:


> think it was comical it was a rate hike before election rather than after




Actually for someone who was around for all the rate promises in the 70's even the parliamentary lunches for the nurses was not missed , and he promised the heavens would open there ......... Yes I think it is a joke ... a very sad joke .

Sorry means nothing to say , words are cheap , Rudd will spare no expense there , what get's me is why J.H.and B.N. don't get it . Afterall that's what politicians are known for ..... cheap words .

If you bought a house under his ( J.H.) regime I just hope you fixed your rate , and don't expect Kev to come to the rescue . All he can do is stuff things up within the Treasury and the Reserve will have to come to the rescue if he does . That in short means you , me and everyone else will have come to the rescue .

Can Kev stop the tumble other than by posturing ? No , he has to spend on infrastructure J.H. renigged on , I don't know why we pay rego , we drive on goat tracks . Ships are lined up to Tahiti trying to berth here , sold ore piles are mounting and look to be challenging Everest .

Actions speak louder than words and all we've seen Kev do is pick his earwax and pick a frontbench . Yaaaaawn . 

Kyoto .... more words ...........outdated words designed to make money out of carbon . What they need is an agenda and real targets that are not negated by office buildings , when coal looks to be the essential fuel for production for the next couple of decades at least . No matter how loud we scream .


Andrew  .......... and he get's someone to carry his bat , probably work for the dole recipients .


----------



## noco (5 December 2007)

Scuba said:


> Fanatics?  Not like a tirade against the new...
> Sleeping dogs lie, oh well, you got the dog part right lol... Rest in peace? What, like the enquiry into AWB, or children overboard, Santo Santoro, WMDs, could go on...
> His union bashers? Uh, hello, didn't Rudd choose his cabinet? Let sleeping dogs lie pal, oh the union ties advertisement that got the numbers wrong... Or maybe the guys in Western Sydney that tried suggesting it was Labour that wanted to pardon the Bali five and build more mosques in Sydney... YOU people make me sick with your self righteousness...




Whats up Scuba, did i ruffle your feathers or have you got your nickers in a knot? You blokes are like parrots! All you know and have been indoctrinated with is " AWB, kids over board  etc,etc. Get over it Scuba! The rude awkening is coming.


----------



## BradK (5 December 2007)

Noco,

Here comes my second warning from the mods... 

You are an ignorant, conservative, brainwashed, pompous *#*$ %*$wit 

See you on PM Mr Joe Blow. 

Brad


----------



## Scuba (5 December 2007)

noco said:


> Whats up Scuba, did i ruffle your feathers or have you got your nickers in a knot? You blokes are like parrots! All you know and have been indoctrinated with is " AWB, kids over board  etc,etc. Get over it Scuba! The rude awkening is coming.




You didn't ruffle my feathers, just the regurgitated crap you typed. I prefer freebagging. Glass houses and stones noco, try looking at and listening to yourself or is that too hard? I am over politicians, and have been for most of my life. As for the rude awakening, I'll pay attention to that which the science offers, not a load of scare mongerer's random sound bites.
Bring it on...


----------



## noco (5 December 2007)

Scuba said:


> You didn't ruffle my feathers, just the regurgitated crap you typed. I prefer freebagging. Glass houses and stones noco, try looking at and listening to yourself or is that too hard? I am over politicians, and have been for most of my life. As for the rude awakening, I'll pay attention to that which the science offers, not a load of scare mongerer's random sound bites.
> Bring it on...




Ha!Scuba, open your eyes and have a look at the lies and corruption going on in the state Labor Governments in Queensland,NSW, Victoria and Western Australia. Those who try to see through a key hole with both eyes generally go cross eyed.


----------



## Scuba (6 December 2007)

Like I said...


Scuba said:


> ... I am over politicians, and have been for most of my life...






noco said:


> Ha!Scuba, open your eyes and have a look at the lies and corruption going on in the state Labor Governments in Queensland,NSW, Victoria and Western Australia. Those who try to see through a key hole with both eyes generally go cross eyed.




In my buisiness my eyes and ears all work thankyou. AWB was all over the news for months, like Jo Bjelke and the White shoe brigade.
No argument from me on the existence of corruption, how sad it has become endemic...

Having left the topic so comprehensively and tangentally...


----------

