# Does Gillard inspire confidence?



## noco (30 June 2010)

Following the political assination of Kevin Rudd I thought would be appropriate to replace the Rudd thread.
How can anyone be inspired by comrade Gillard when she flys to Brisbane in the Government jet to fund raise for the Labor Party. She was to have flown back to Brisbane today but thought better of it after the criticism she received from the press.
What a nerve this Prime Minister has in exceeding  her privaliges!


----------



## Calliope (30 June 2010)

She certainly inspires confidence that the Unions are now running the country. Greg Combet once famously said the the unions used to run the country and they should be again. Under Gillard they will get their wish.


----------



## Wysiwyg (30 June 2010)

Deja Vu


----------



## explod (30 June 2010)

noco said:


> Following the political assination of Kevin Rudd I thought would be appropriate to replace the Rudd thread.
> How can anyone be inspired by comrade Gillard when she flys to Brisbane in the Government jet to fund raise for the Labor Party. She was to have flown back to Brisbane today but thought better of it after the criticism she received from the press.
> What a nerve this Prime Minister has in exceeding  her privaliges!




Please tell who were the other Prime Ministers that did not do that.    

Noco is a good pen name as all of your posts seem to knocko

Must be related to that Abbot fellow, all he does is knock and to win elections you need to open the door with something constructive.   You may not like it but her history suggests she is constructive, but be pleased if you are able to correct that.


----------



## noco (30 June 2010)

explod said:


> Please tell who were the other Prime Ministers that did not do that.
> 
> Noco is a good pen name as all of your posts seem to knocko
> 
> Must be related to that Abbot fellow, all he does is knock and to win elections you need to open the door with something constructive.   You may not like it but her history suggests she is constructive, but be pleased if you are able to correct that.




Perhaps you should tell all you know to back up your statement of other Prime Ministers and what they did in exceeding their privaliges and don't forget the past  Labor Prime Ministers.

History tells us how you like to  make personal attacks on ASF members; something Joe Blow has warned you about. If you can't debate a thread without personal attacks and intimidation, then you should stay away.

Gillards history tells us how she mismanaged the BER scheme and wasted billions of tax payers money. You know the working families she so fondly talks about. 

I beleive Abbott is not that stupid to announce Coalition policies untill after Gillard annouces hers. Remember 'ME TO KEVIN' who copied many of Howards inititives before the 2007 election.


----------



## IFocus (30 June 2010)

explod said:


> Please tell who were the other Prime Ministers that did not do that.
> 
> Noco is a good pen name as all of your posts seem to knocko
> 
> Must be related to that Abbot fellow, all he does is knock and to win elections you need to open the door with something constructive.   You may not like it but her history suggests she is constructive, but be pleased if you are able to correct that.




Relax Explod just another flame thread along with all the others.


----------



## Calliope (30 June 2010)

She has to pretend to believe in an ETS to get Bob Brown on side. His preferences are going to count.


----------



## explod (30 June 2010)

> Perhaps you should tell all you know to back up your statement of other Prime Ministers and what they did in exceeding their privaliges and don't forget the past Labor Prime Ministers.




Noco,  dont' avoid the question with deflection, you made the assertion.



> History tells us how you like to make personal attacks on ASF members; something Joe Blow has warned you about. If you can't debate a thread without personal attacks and intimidation, then you should stay away.




Yes it can be tough in the ruck, but unlike some have not been rubbed out.   Mistakes are also good learning experiences ole pal.



> Gillards history tells us how she mismanaged the BER scheme and wasted billions of tax payers money. You know the working families she so fondly talks about.




It has become plain that unless it was blessed by Krudd, policy or action did not see the light of day, and is why he had to go.   It is early days for Gillard yet.



> I beleive Abbott is not that stupid to announce Coalition policies untill after Gillard annouces hers. Remember 'ME TO KEVIN' who copied many of Howards inititives before the 2007 election.




Well he started to today, particularly on education, so perhaps on your take he is stupid.   And if Labor is so bad you would think it easy to come up with superior policy.

The other day you spoke of deficits, when Keating took over from Hawke the deficit was 16 billion, when he lost the election in 95 (I think without looking it up) the deficit was 7 billion.   There had been a bad (world) recession in that period so Keating was doing a pretty fair job of getting things back on track.  And due to the economic policies in place from the Keating era, Costello had a pretty easy run.   As well the markets and business (world wide) picked up considerably till the dip around 2001, the dotcom bubble.


----------



## GumbyLearner (30 June 2010)

She certainly inspires more confidence than Bob Roberts IMO.


----------



## Calliope (30 June 2010)

explod said:


> It has become plain that unless it was blessed by Krudd, policy or action did not see the light of day, and is why he had to go.   It is early days for Gillard yet.




Rubbish, the gang of four were party to all Rudd's bad decisions, and Gillard has not backed away from the BER or roof insulation wasteful and dodgy mal-practices..

Rudd had to go, not because of his bad decisions, but because Gillard, acting on instructions from her factional masters, betrayed him. His sin was that he didn't suck up to a faction.

It is obvious that no matter how nasty Labor leaders are, you will still love them. It is surprising that you are able to switch your love from Rudd to Gillard so easily.


----------



## noco (30 June 2010)

explod said:


> Noco,  dont' avoid the question with deflection, you made the assertion.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Abbott announced his policy only on those subjects that had been neglected by Labor over the past 3 years in particular, mental health. Any new policies will most likely be announced closer to the election which no doubt is not far away.


----------



## GumbyLearner (30 June 2010)

noco said:


> Abbott announced his policy only on those subjects that had been neglected by Labor over the past 3 years in particular, mental health. Any new policies will most likely be announced closer to the election which no doubt is not far away.




And what did Howard neglect?
The greatest private household debt in the history of Australia and it's still rising noco. Only seconded by the worst unemployment and inflation when Howard was Treasurer under Fraser. As Keating would put it Howard left us with "a morabund industrial graveyard." 

Of course Howard and Costello paid off all of Labors record debt. Well done! But hung it out on every Australians hills hoist!!!!! While production and jobs were sent offshore!

Blame Gillard! LOL 

Bloody one-eyed idealogue pffftttt!


----------



## Macquack (30 June 2010)

Calliope said:


> Rubbish, the gang of four were party to all Rudd's bad decisions, and Gillard has not backed away from the BER or roof insulation wasteful and dodgy mal-practices.




Apparently, Calliope was a fly on the wall at all the gang of four meetings.

The insulation program was definitely wastefull, but "dodgy mal-practices" only relate to the private contractors installing the insulation, not the government.




Calliope said:


> Rudd had to go, not because of his bad decisions, but because Gillard, acting on instructions from her factional masters, betrayed him. His sin was that he didn't suck up to a faction.



Gillard had the numbers. What is the difference between this situation and what happened to Turnbull?


----------



## GumbyLearner (30 June 2010)

Macquack said:


> Apparently, Calliope was a fly on the wall at all the gang of four meetings.
> 
> The insulation program was definitely wastefull, but "dodgy mal-practices" only relate to the private contractors installing the insulation, not the government.
> 
> ...




Well said Macquack.

Only if Turnbull Gold-man sux banker and Rudd UN boss wannabe had the chance of a private interlude.


----------



## Calliope (30 June 2010)

Macquack said:


> Gillard had the numbers. What is the difference between this situation and what happened to Turnbull?




If you really don't know, then anything I could say will not change your political biases.



> Bloody one-eyed idealogue pffftttt!




I guess that sums up you and Macquack, Gumby


----------



## Wysiwyg (30 June 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> Blame Gillard! LOL
> 
> Bloody one-eyed idealogue pffftttt!




Apparently the Liberal Party most recently requested from a Chinese sweat shop a large order of, you guessed it, budgie smugglers. Each member of society voting for the Liberal Party this coming election will receive one free (of GST). 

On the left we have the standard budgie smugglers while on the right we have the more adventurous elephant smugglers modelled by yours truly. They come in a variety of colours including pink for the ladies.


----------



## trainspotter (30 June 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> And what did Howard neglect?
> The greatest private household debt in the history of Australia and it's still rising noco. Only seconded by the worst unemployment and inflation when Howard was Treasurer under Fraser. As Keating would put it Howard left us with "a morabund industrial graveyard."
> 
> Of course Howard and Costello paid off all of Labors record debt. Well done! But hung it out on every Australians hills hoist!!!!! While production and jobs were sent offshore!
> ...




Why stop there ? Why not blame Menzies for creating the Liberal Party? He also was PM during the Great Depression. All his fault. Don't forget the wharfie dispute either. His fault as well.


----------



## GumbyLearner (30 June 2010)

trainspotter said:


> Why stop there ? Why not blame Menzies for creating the Liberal Party? He also was PM during the Great Depression. All his fault. Don't forget the wharfie dispute either. His fault as well.




Don't go there TS.
Selling the japs the iron????? If it wasn't for Curtin you would probably be half jap and so would I. Bringing back the AIF from the middle east against the advice of Churchill & Roosevelt. The Limited Conscription Act?  

In Australia's greatest time of crisis, *Menzies made no decisions!!!*

Remember the Brisbane line proposed by Churchill.

Actually come to think of it!!! You probably wouldn't own a pearl farm!!


----------



## noco (30 June 2010)

Macquack said:


> Apparently, Calliope was a fly on the wall at all the gang of four meetings.
> 
> The insulation program was definitely wastefull, but "dodgy mal-practices" only relate to the private contractors installing the insulation, not the government.
> 
> ...




The difference my dear friend is Rudd was elected by the people as leader of the Labor Party at the time and promising the world and delivering little.. Turnbull was in opposition and leaning too far to Labor on an ETS; another big Labor tax.


----------



## GumbyLearner (30 June 2010)

noco said:


> The difference my dear friend is Rudd was elected by the people as leader of the Labor Party at the time and promising the world and delivering little.. Turnbull was in opposition and leaning too far to Labor on an ETS; another big Labor tax.




Oops sorry! Australia is not a republic!


----------



## noco (30 June 2010)

Geez ladies and gentlemen of ASF do we have to go back to Menzies.
This thread is about Gillard and what she has done or not done and whether she inspires voters.

 If you think she can do the job, please tell us how!

If you don't think she can do the job, please tell us why!

If you want to go back on history, please start another thread.


----------



## GumbyLearner (30 June 2010)

In the spirit of Keating. She will be much more straight and inspiring than 
Kevin Rudd.


----------



## trainspotter (30 June 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> Don't go there TS.
> Selling the japs the iron????? If it wasn't for Curtin you would probably be half jap and so would I. Bringing back the AIF from the middle east against the advice of Churchill & Roosevelt. The Limited Conscription Act?
> 
> In Australia's greatest time of crisis, *Menzies made no decisions!!!*
> ...




LOL ...Menzies had nothing to do with the selling of the iron ore. He was the Attorney-General and Minister of Industry at the time and was merely performing his duties to break the strike. Strikers had refused to load a cargo of pig-iron for Japan, a nation they correctly branded as an aggressor in China and predicted as an enemy of Australia. In the heat of contemporary and subsequent disparagement of Menzies it was not noted that the proposed export was a one-off and very limited contract, that Menzies went to great lengths to negotiate with the unions concerned, and that there was clear *internal union disagreement* on the issues at stake.

So you believe no decisions were made during his 17 year reign? LOLOL .. the Australian voting public must have liked him for doing nothing then !


----------



## explod (30 June 2010)

noco said:


> The difference my dear friend is Rudd was elected by the people as leader of the Labor Party at the time and promising the world and delivering little.. Turnbull was in opposition and leaning too far to Labor on an ETS; another big Labor tax.




Rudd was not elected at all, the election was lost in the main by Howard's love affair with GWB and the fight against terrorism in mostly the wrong places.  As well on the same sword fell Blair in the UK.

Rudd in fact emulated many of Howard's traits, aloof, manic for press and to stand by the man of the us of a.   Starts to wear thin when you are cutting back on food to ensure the mortgage repayments.


----------



## GumbyLearner (30 June 2010)

noco said:


> Geez ladies and gentlemen of ASF do we have to go back to Menzies.
> This thread is about Gillard and what she has done or not done and whether she inspires voters.
> 
> If you think she can do the job, please tell us how!
> ...




If you have heroes noco well laud them!

Otherwise just shut up and give the new PM a chance.

The Liberal Party of Australia has made just as many errors as the ALP.

If you want to get stuck into her, in her first week on the job. Well then I think it only fair that other posters including myself should be excepted to dig up the wrongs of previous conservative leaders of Australia to provide some balance. 

FAIR GO


----------



## trainspotter (30 June 2010)

noco said:


> Geez ladies and gentlemen of ASF do we have to go back to Menzies.
> This thread is about Gillard and what she has done or not done and whether she inspires voters.
> 
> If you think she can do the job, please tell us how!
> ...




Absolutely correct noco. Cracks me up when people reckon Howard benefitted from Keatings previous policies?? ROFL. Yeah right !!

I was delving back just a little bit further to remind the good people of ASF where it all actually started. Never mind.

Julia Gillard?? Will become the greatest PM that ever lived and God had the good fortune of shovelling guts into. WHY? Had such a great platform leftover from the Howard years. Also might have something to do with other countries FINALLY deciding to reign in their debt. Ooopsies. Macro economics is such a dirty word these days.


----------



## GumbyLearner (30 June 2010)

trainspotter said:


> LOL ...Menzies had nothing to do with the selling of the iron ore. He was the Attorney-General and Minister of Industry at the time and was merely performing his duties to break the strike. Strikers had refused to load a cargo of pig-iron for Japan, a nation they correctly branded as an aggressor in China and predicted as an enemy of Australia. In the heat of contemporary and subsequent disparagement of Menzies it was not noted that the proposed export was a one-off and very limited contract, that Menzies went to great lengths to negotiate with the unions concerned, and that there was clear *internal union disagreement* on the issues at stake.
> 
> So you believe no decisions were made during his 17 year reign? LOLOL .. the Australian voting public must have liked him for doing nothing then !




Cold war
Power without glory - Frank Hardy

Hard to lose when half the country hate each other. JMO


----------



## noco (30 June 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> In the spirit of Keating. She will be much more straight and inspiring than
> Kevin Rudd.





Lets hope the spirit of Keating is dead and buried otherwise we might become a 'BANANA REPULIC' and have a recession we had to have.


----------



## GumbyLearner (30 June 2010)

explod said:


> Rudd was not elected at all, the election was lost in the main by Howard's love affair with GWB and the fight against terrorism in mostly the wrong places.  As well on the same sword fell Blair in the UK.
> 
> Rudd in fact emulated many of Howard's traits, aloof, manic for press and to stand by the man of the us of a.   Starts to wear thin when you are cutting back on food to ensure the mortgage repayments.




That's bull**** explod.

Howard lost because people like my cousins got sick of being called after a 9am to 5pm day and being told by their employer to return to work at 7pm at the family dinner table on the threat of being dismissed. FAIR GO


----------



## drsmith (30 June 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> In the spirit of Keating. She will be much more straight and inspiring than
> Kevin Rudd.




Was this the reply ?


----------



## IFocus (30 June 2010)

trainspotter said:


> Why stop there ? Why not blame Menzies for creating the Liberal Party? He also was PM during the Great Depression. All his fault. Don't forget the wharfie dispute either. His fault as well.




Actually the very reason Abbott wont be prime minister is because he is nothing like Menzies


----------



## Calliope (30 June 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> Cold war
> Power without glory - Frank Hardy




Frank Hardy? That old Stalinist. You really are a dinosaur.


----------



## GumbyLearner (30 June 2010)

noco said:


> Lets hope the spirit of Keating is dead and buried otherwise we might become a 'BANANA REPULIC' and have a recession we had to have.




Let's hope the Liberal Party policy of allowing borrowing, borrowing, borrowing and borrowing for the average private citizen isn't pounced on by foreign or monopoly based interests.  For the good of our country and it's citizenry.

This also runs consistent why they would have Turnbull ex Gold man sux banker (biggest liars on Wall Street) as their Leader. The only reason he is not today, is because the farmers of Australia wouldn't believe in his marketable bull**** science.


----------



## GumbyLearner (30 June 2010)

Calliope said:


> Frank Hardy? That old Stalinist. You really are a dinosaur.




It's *the* main contributing factor why his tenure was so long.


----------



## trainspotter (30 June 2010)

IFocus said:


> Actually the very reason Abbott wont be prime minister is because he is nothing like Menzies




Once again IFocus I thank you for your support. Very astute observation. Abbott may win similar style to Menzies when he frightened the populace with the Petrov Affair. Similar to Howard and the Tampa Crisis. There may be a crisis/affair to take away the rain from Julia Gillards parade prior to the election. The resolution of the Mining Tax will win her votes. The choice to NOT fly in the jet to Brisbane for a Labor Party Fundraiser and focus on the Mining Tax will win her votes. Her decision NOT to move into the Lodge until voted in will win her votes. Nope ... no chance of a thundery shower from what I can see.


----------



## Julia (30 June 2010)

Macquack said:


> Apparently, Calliope was a fly on the wall at all the gang of four meetings.
> 
> The insulation program was definitely wastefull, but "dodgy mal-practices" only relate to the private contractors installing the insulation, not the government.



That's not quite right, Macquack.  The government failed to put sufficient safeguards in place or do proper checks on installers.  The programme was just made to be rorted, and that's of course what happened.
Ditto the BER with its ridiculously over priced buildings.

There was good sense behind some sort of stimulus programme, but in their haste, they failed to set all the schemes up and supervise them properly.
There's now intimidation of school principals who want to report price gouging.




Calliope said:


> Rubbish, the gang of four were party to all Rudd's bad decisions, and Gillard has not backed away from the BER or roof insulation wasteful and dodgy mal-practices..



That's true, and it's to her credit that she has acknowledged her share of blame.



> Rudd had to go, not because of his bad decisions, but because Gillard, acting on instructions from her factional masters, betrayed him. His sin was that he didn't suck up to a faction.



Probably right, but my guess is that the other deciding factor in his execution was that the government realised the miners had them over a barrel and that the tax would have to so modified as to bear only a passing resemblance to the original.  Kevin Rudd couldn't be seen to make yet another major backflip without exposing the Party to utter ridicule, thus cementing Abbott's increasing confidence, so Rudd was tossed out with the idea that Julia would come along with her smiles and charm, and her (genuine, I think) conciliatory approach and be able to persuade voters that she didn't really, truly, absolutely go along with the tax, she was just pretending, and what she really wanted was the new modified version.

Just a theory of course.



GumbyLearner said:


> In the spirit of Keating. She will be much more straight and inspiring than
> Kevin Rudd.



She may well be.   Too early to know yet.  She will at least give the impression of being straight.
I like her clear refusal to swear on the Bible, and to be candid about being an agnostic or atheist.  That's a strong point in her favour for me, after Rudd and Abbott being such godbotherers.



explod said:


> Rudd was not elected at all, the election was lost in the main by Howard's love affair with GWB and the fight against terrorism in mostly the wrong places.  As well on the same sword fell Blair in the UK.
> 
> Rudd in fact emulated many of Howard's traits, aloof, manic for press and to stand by the man of the us of a.   Starts to wear thin when you are cutting back on food to ensure the mortgage repayments.






GumbyLearner said:


> That's bull**** explod.
> 
> Howard lost because people like my cousins got sick of being called after a 9am to 5pm day and being told by their employer to return to work at 7pm at the family dinner table on the threat of being dismissed. FAIR GO



I think you're both right.  The Howard government was tired, or at least perceived as such, and Work Choices really finished them off.  It was the last straw for the people who had been so dismayed about Howard's enthusiasm to involve us in wars that were none of our business.


----------



## trainspotter (30 June 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> Let's hope the Liberal Party policy of allowing borrowing, borrowing, borrowing and borrowing for the average private citizen isn't pounced on by foreign or monopoly based interests.  For the good of our country and it's citizenry.




LOLOL ........ Ummmmm that is the Labor policy? Spend up BIG on the National credit card then let the Libs pay it off .... AGAIN.


----------



## Macquack (30 June 2010)

trainspotter said:


> So you believe no decisions were made during his 17 year reign? LOLOL .. *the Australian voting public must have liked him for doing nothing then* !




Interesting point there Trainspotter. 

After listening (reading) a barrage of labor bashing comments over the past two years, I have come to the conclusion that the best course of action for a government is to do f*** all. If the Labor government did 'f*** all', all the professional whingers on ASF would be happy and have nothing to whinge about (except for maybe a recession).

John Howard was in power for a very long time using this same policy of doing 'f*** all' (except bring in the regressive GST).


----------



## GumbyLearner (30 June 2010)

trainspotter said:


> LOLOL ........ Ummmmm that is the Labor policy? Spend up BIG on the National credit card then let the Libs pay it off .... AGAIN.




Always loved that smirk. 
*Peter Costello* nice one!!! What a doyen of economics!!!! 

Our esteemed former Treasurer, Peter Costello, sold off two-thirds (or 167 tonnes) of our nation’s entire gold reserves in 1997 and pocketed about US$2.4 billion in the process, with gold at the time trading between $US332 and $US416 per ounce. The trouble is that decision has now cost Australia in the vicinity of $6 billion, with the gold price now trading in the region of US$950 per ounce.

Not only that, but Australia was the world’s third-largest gold producer at the time and for the Australian government to sell out its gold holdings, particularly in that climate, sent entirely the wrong message to the rest of the world. In the European Union most governments hold more than 50% of their reserves in gold, while in the US it was as high as 76% during 2008. The US holds 8000 tons of gold in Fort Knox (although the last official audit was in the early 1960s) and has not sold a single bar.

http://www.fatprophets.com.au/Membe...d022af15c&product=Australasian Mining&pt=paid

Now it's roughly $1240 US dollars an ounce.

I think I'll just add a few more one eyes to the debate.


----------



## Joe Blow (30 June 2010)

I know that we're not as strict as some other forums when it comes to the issue of the occasional four letter word but I think some people are going a bit overboard in this thread.

There's really no need for such obscene language and I would really appreciate it if those using crude language could make an effort to present their views in a slightly less offensive way.


----------



## trainspotter (30 June 2010)

Macquack said:


> Interesting point there Trainspotter.
> 
> After listening (reading) a barrage of labor bashing comments over the past two years, I have come to the conclusion that the best course of action for a government is to do f*** all. If the Labor government did 'f*** all', all the professional whingers on ASF would be happy and have nothing to whinge about (except for maybe a recession).
> 
> John Howard was in power for a very long time using this same policy of doing 'f*** all' (except bring in the regressive GST).




Which is why Julia Gillard will be so very clever in the role of PM. She has the ability to appear that she is doing something when in fact she is not. Think the BER .... took all the credit ... when it turned into a fiasco did the old Pontius Pilate and called an inquiry and now she is squeaky clean. You can't be sacked because we don't know what it is you actually do here theory.


----------



## GumbyLearner (30 June 2010)

trainspotter said:


> Which is why Julia Gillard will be so very clever in the role of PM.




Yes I agree TS. But as long as her goal is not to thump the poor. I will rock up and vote for her. Unlike Howard!


----------



## trainspotter (30 June 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> Always loved that smirk.
> *Peter Costello* nice one!!! What a doyen of economics!!!!
> 
> Our esteemed former Treasurer, Peter Costello, sold off two-thirds (or 167 tonnes) of our nation’s entire gold reserves in 1997 and pocketed about US$2.4 billion in the process, with gold at the time trading between $US332 and $US416 per ounce. The trouble is that decision has now cost Australia in the vicinity of $6 billion, with the gold price now trading in the region of US$950 per ounce.
> ...




PMSL !! So selling the gold deposit for the going rate in 1997 to pay off debt was the wrong thing to do? If you did the math on the account deficit at the time you would realise that Peter Costello would have SAVED the country in excess of 6 billion in INTEREST COMPONENT alone. Whoopy Doo !

Geeeeeee ...... if only I hadn't have sold those 3 house in 1999 for $123,000 each that are now worth in excess of $350,000 each 11 years later. GOSH I am a dimwit. No wait ... I used that money to buy other property and retire debt thus easing my cashflow situation and reducing my interest component. Financially irresponsible I am ! I will take myself outside and self flagellate until I am worthy of being able to have a crystal ball on commodoties so I can peer into the future to see if I should sell or not. ROFL.


----------



## springhill (30 June 2010)

trainspotter said:


> PMSL !! So selling the gold deposit for the going rate in 1997 to pay off debt was the wrong thing to do? If you did the math on the account deficit at the time you would realise that Peter Costello would have SAVED the country in excess of 6 billion in INTEREST COMPONENT alone. Whoopy Doo !
> 
> Geeeeeee ...... if only I hadn't have sold those 3 house in 1999 for $123,000 each that are now worth in excess of $350,000 each 11 years later. GOSH I am a dimwit. No wait ... I used that money to buy other property and retire debt thus easing my cashflow situation and reducing my interest component. Financially irresponsible I am ! I will take myself outside and self flagellate until I am worthy of being able to have a crystal ball on commodoties so I can peer into the future to see if I should sell or not. ROFL.




Spot on trainspotter, why not bring up the example of people who bought FMG shares at, say 10c, sold out at 20c for a 100% profit. Yet down the track FMG flew to circa $13.
Hindsight is always 20/20.


----------



## GumbyLearner (30 June 2010)

trainspotter said:


> PMSL !! So selling the gold deposit for the going rate in 1997 to pay off debt was the wrong thing to do? If you did the math on the account deficit at the time you would realise that Peter Costello would have SAVED the country in excess of 6 billion in INTEREST COMPONENT alone. Whoopy Doo !
> 
> Geeeeeee ...... if only I hadn't have sold those 3 house in 1999 for $123,000 each that are now worth in excess of $350,000 each 11 years later. GOSH I am a dimwit. No wait ... I used that money to buy other property and retire debt thus easing my cashflow situation and reducing my interest component. Financially irresponsible I am ! I will take myself outside and self flagellate until I am worthy of being able to have a crystal ball on commodoties so I can peer into the future to see if I should sell or not. ROFL.




You are making a correlation between the gold price and your own property holdings. You should be given 40 cents to call someone who cares. The gold was the Australian peoples money and Costello sold it no matter how much you want to sugarcoat his reasoning or how much he was offered for it. Maybe he should have read more in his undergrad. What a dumb decision!


----------



## springhill (30 June 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> You are making a correlation between the gold price and your own property holdings. You should be given 40 cents to call someone who cares. The gold was the Australian peoples money and Costello sold it no matter how much you want to sugarcoat his reasoning or how much he was offered for it. Maybe he should have read more in his undergrad. What a dumb decision!




Gumby, it's damn easy to take a potshot at Costello 13 years after the fact, but yet if you travel just a few more years back in time, i'd be interested to hear your thoughts on the Labour Govt sell off of the Commonwealth Bank. What do you think that would be worth to the Australian people now?
Take a look at the Labour state privatisation and disassembly of Western Power by Eric Ripper, which was supposed to provide cheaper power. Holy cr@p man, the state of the 4 inefficient sections it has been split into, would curdle your blood.


----------



## GumbyLearner (30 June 2010)

springhill said:


> Gumby, it's damn easy to take a potshot at Costello 13 years after the fact, but yet if you travel just a few more years back in time, i'd be interested to hear your thoughts on the Labour Govt sell off of the Commonwealth Bank. What do you think that would be worth to the Australian people now?




What the hell are you talking about I thought that was Liberal Party policy all a long?


----------



## springhill (30 June 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> What the hell are you talking about I thought that was Liberal Party policy all a long?




Afraid not! Labour started the rot.

http://www.richardalston.dcita.gov.au/Article/0,,0_4-2_4008-4_109751,00.html

'The Sunday Telegraph article also makes totally clear that Labor rushed the Commonwealth Bank sale through Cabinet in a desperate attempt to prop up its own budgetary problems. According to Labor powerbroker, Senator Robert Ray: 
"the sell-off was pushed through by then-Treasurer Paul Keating purely to pump money into a beleaguered budget." (Sunday Telegraph, 14/07/02)'


----------



## GumbyLearner (30 June 2010)

springhill said:


> Afraid not! Labour started the rot.
> 
> http://www.richardalston.dcita.gov.au/Article/0,,0_4-2_4008-4_109751,00.html
> 
> ...





OH I thought you meant the gold reserves that all Australian taxpayers invested in!

The Commonwealth Bank. Still making profits? Even after the GFC!!!! 

Shock horror!

Thankyou Mr. Keating for not following the UK Tory or US Republican path of deregulating our financial system so it could be hammered by outsiders!! And BANKS FAILING!! You know like KAPUT! I mean finished. Anyway 

Hats off Paul Keating!

Next one  idealogues!


----------



## springhill (30 June 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> OH I thought you meant the gold reserves that all Australian taxpayers invested in!
> 
> The Commonwealth Bank. Still making profits? Even after the GFC!!!!
> 
> ...




Yep and instead of paying dividends to the Govt and having control, it goes elsewhere.


----------



## GumbyLearner (30 June 2010)

Four pillars dude! Was that Liberal Party Policy???? 

Go on take the credit, I dare ya!

That's what I love about ASF! The banker cowards who love the cream but can't give credit where it's due.

Keep reading!  

If Paul Keating hadn't enforced the four pillars rule, than we wouldn't have a job.


----------



## trainspotter (1 July 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> Four pillars dude! Was that Liberal Party Policy????
> 
> Go on take the credit, I dare ya!
> 
> ...




Ummmm ... you have a very different sense of reality Gumby.

And now for some facts:-

Between 1983 and 1985 Treasurer Paul Keating deregulated the system by (a) floating the Australian dollar in December 1983; (b) granting 40 new foreign exchange licences in June 1984; and (c) granting 16 banking licences to 16 foreign banks in February 1985. 

This accelerated lending competition further. Banks competed with by reducing the security they required and lowering their rates. Crazy loans were made to corporate cowboys. 

After the cowboys collapsed the banks were left counting their losses, which ran to tens of billions. A new wave of managers took over and the banks rebalanced their balance sheets by charging stiff rates to their good customers to make good the losses on their bad customers. Australia's four big banks today have been burned by the 1980s and learned the lessons. How long they remember the lessons is another question.


----------



## JTLP (1 July 2010)

trainspotter said:


> PMSL !! So selling the gold deposit for the going rate in 1997 to pay off debt was the wrong thing to do? If you did the math on the account deficit at the time you would realise that Peter Costello would have SAVED the country in excess of 6 billion in INTEREST COMPONENT alone. Whoopy Doo !
> 
> Geeeeeee ...... if only I hadn't have sold those 3 house in 1999 for $123,000 each that are now worth in excess of $350,000 each 11 years later. GOSH I am a dimwit. No wait ... I used that money to buy other property and retire debt thus easing my cashflow situation and reducing my interest component. Financially irresponsible I am ! I will take myself outside and self flagellate until I am worthy of being able to have a crystal ball on commodoties so I can peer into the future to see if I should sell or not. ROFL.




Agreed. Gumby, hindsight is a wonderful thing. Don't you get tired of defending a party that has been very costly and made quite evident mistakes? You just fire back with retorts rather than cop it on the chin. 

Must be a saints supporter...one eyed and delusional...


----------



## GumbyLearner (1 July 2010)

trainspotter said:


> Ummmm ... you have a very different sense of reality Gumby.
> 
> And now for some facts:-
> 
> ...




Oh really *SOURCE*!


----------



## trainspotter (1 July 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> You are making a correlation between the gold price and your own property holdings. You should be given 40 cents to call someone who cares. The gold was the Australian peoples money and Costello sold it no matter how much you want to sugarcoat his reasoning or how much he was offered for it. Maybe he should have read more in his undergrad. What a dumb decision!




And look how well those countries that stockpiled the GOLD instead of retiring debt are doing now Gumby. Do some research. LMFAO The debt was the Australian Peoples money that Keating rang up on the giant credit card.

Yeppers he sold it. What a dumb thing to do ! LOLOLOL .. are you for real?


----------



## trainspotter (1 July 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> Oh really *SOURCE*!




You are too funny Gumby ... It is from the book "Australia's banking history" by Trevor Sykes. You know him Gumby ?? The senior writer for the Australian Financial Review. PMSL ... what the hell would he know??


----------



## springhill (1 July 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> Four pillars dude! Was that Liberal Party Policy????
> 
> Go on take the credit, I dare ya!
> 
> ...




First of all you are wrong, Keating introduced the SIX pillar system (four banks, two insurers), not four. It was Costello that insisted the four pillar system remain (four banks), after the 2 insurers were taken over. So, yes, will take credit for that


----------



## GumbyLearner (1 July 2010)

JTLP said:


> Agreed. Gumby, hindsight is a wonderful thing. Don't you get tired of defending a party that has been very costly and made quite evident mistakes? You just fire back with retorts rather than cop it on the chin.
> 
> Must be a saints supporter...one eyed and delusional...




Well of course that's what the bank guarantee is. 
Shame it doesn't apply to mum and dad businesses!!!!

I'm trying to overcome my delusion but I keep thinking about the indoor management rule of the corporations law? You know the part that says lenders should be put on inquiry when they transact with borrowers????

please can anyone on ASF with a heart help me?  

I love law!


----------



## GumbyLearner (1 July 2010)

springhill said:


> First of all you are wrong, Keating introduced the SIX pillar system (four banks, two insurers), not four. It was Costello that insisted the four pillar system remain (four banks), after the 2 insurers were taken over. So, yes, will take credit for that




Oh really they weren't allowed to merge??? 

Tell me more I'm open ears but not balance sheets.


----------



## springhill (1 July 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> Oh really they weren't allowed to merge???
> 
> Tell me more I'm open ears but not balance sheets.




Correct, under the Costello policy the big four were NOT allowed to merge.


----------



## GumbyLearner (1 July 2010)

springhill said:


> Correct, under the Costello policy the big four were NOT allowed to merge.




Well done Peter! What a doyen!

Here's what gold is doing

http://www.kitco.com/

Go the 4 big banks in OZ. You might have failed without that doyen Costello.


----------



## springhill (1 July 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> Well done Peter! What a doyen!
> 
> Here's what gold is doing
> 
> ...




Just out of curiousity GL what were you investing in 13 years ago?


----------



## GumbyLearner (1 July 2010)

springhill said:


> Correct, under the Costello policy the big four were NOT allowed to merge.




*SOURCE*


----------



## springhill (1 July 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> *SOURCE*




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_pillars_policy

In 1997, leading business figure Stan Wallis' financial system inquiry (the Wallis report) recommended that the pillars be dismantled, to leave the banks subject to the same merger competition tests as other businesses. In response, then Coalition Treasurer Peter Costello's removed the pillar status of the two insurers (National Mutual had by that time already been acquired by France's AXA), however the ban on mergers of the remaining four banks was retained


----------



## GumbyLearner (1 July 2010)

Of course there was no ban on mergers prior to Costello.

Love the sampling and selective source. Wiki

Time for some more Bob Roberts


----------



## springhill (1 July 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> Of course there was no ban on mergers prior to Costello.
> 
> Love the sampling and selective source. Wiki
> 
> Time for some more Bob Roberts





Hey, if you're not happy with the source, i suggest you take the initiative and amend the 'false' info on Wiki, after all it is a publicly amendable site. Go hard GL


----------



## GumbyLearner (1 July 2010)

Better than Rudd/Gillard & better than Howard/Costello/Turnbull or Abbott

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3


Where's the Costello interview? Please can any ASFers please post Costello's current thoughts.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (1 July 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> Well of course that's what the bank guarantee is.
> Shame it doesn't apply to mum and dad businesses!



It is not the role of government to save you. You have to save yourself. It is socialism when governments provide guarantees to stop businesses failing.


----------



## GumbyLearner (1 July 2010)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> It is not the role of government to save you. You have to save yourself. It is socialism when governments provide guarantees to stop businesses failing.




Great point Snake. I agree!


----------



## springhill (1 July 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> Better than Rudd/Gillard & better than Howard/Costello/Turnbull or Abbott
> 
> Part 1
> 
> ...





The recession we had to have?


----------



## GumbyLearner (1 July 2010)

springhill said:


> The recession we had to have?




The Menzies we should have had!


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (1 July 2010)

springhill said:


> The recession we had to have?



Actually, part 1 provides an interesting perspective on the world. Mr Keating does have sense regardless of his mistakes.


----------



## frankie_boy (1 July 2010)

Sorry but every time i see this woman i see "Kath and Kim"

Look at me people... Look at meeee.. look at meee...


----------



## frankie_boy (1 July 2010)

BBC News: Australia has its first female PM.

"I predict their economy will crash... Into the back of another economy."


----------



## springhill (1 July 2010)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Actually, part 1 provides an interesting perspective on the world. Mr Keating does have sense regardless of his mistakes.




Easy to have sense, Snake, 13 years after the fact. Hell, if i could reflect on the last 13 years of my life and be interviewed on it, i'd be changing my tune too. Maybe Keating was before his time?????


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (1 July 2010)

springhill said:


> Easy to have sense, Snake, 13 years after the fact. Hell, if i could reflect on the last 13 years of my life and be interviewed on it, i'd be changing my tune too. Maybe Keating was before his time?????



Springhill,
I was talking about his sense with respect to his comments in part 1 of the interview - particularly the comments on nations in debt.


----------



## wayneL (1 July 2010)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> It is not the role of government to save you. You have to save yourself. It is socialism when governments provide guarantees to stop businesses failing.



Only big business. Small business is the enemy of socialism.


----------



## nulla nulla (1 July 2010)

frankie_boy said:


> BBC News: Australia has its first female PM.
> 
> "I predict their economy will crash... Into the back of another economy."




Or have a "blowout" and have to wait for some bloke to come along and change it.


----------



## JimBob (1 July 2010)

If she announces some changes in policy direction in the near future including reaching an agreement with the miners over the mining tax, then she will inspire more confidence that her predecessor and her opponent in my opinion.

They have had some good policy ideas in the last term but they seem to rush too quickly with implementing them without giving them proper thought or considering possible consequences.  Just my take.


----------



## Calliope (1 July 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> please can anyone on ASF with a heart help me?




I don't think anyone can help you. You are too mired in the past to contribute anything to a discussion about Gillard. You really are a political dinosaur. 

If you care to have a look at the title of this thread, you will find it is about the here and now.


----------



## Logique (1 July 2010)

Inspire confidence, surely you jest.
And if the ALP is re-elected - go short.


----------



## DB008 (1 July 2010)

PM Gillard under fire over VIP flight

http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/latest/7491221/pm-gillard-under-fire-over-vip-flight/


----------



## Calliope (1 July 2010)

JimBob said:


> If she announces some changes in policy direction in the near future including reaching an agreement with the miners over the mining tax, then she will inspire more confidence that her predecessor and her opponent in my opinion.




Her big challenge is to do this without without that dreaded word "backdown" raising its ugly head.


----------



## GumbyLearner (1 July 2010)

She will definitely inspire confidence in me if she puts interest rates much higher than the current level like Keating had the guts to when Treasurer.

At least then people will be encouraged to save and these ridiculous levels of lending started by Costello will be curbed.


----------



## springhill (1 July 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> She will definitely inspire confidence in me if she puts interest rates much higher than the current level like Keating had the guts to when Treasurer.
> 
> At least then people will be encouraged to save and these ridiculous levels of lending started by Costello will be curbed.




I didn't know Keating was ever the governor of the Reserve Bank? Huh here i was thinking it was Bernie Fraser at the time.
Treasurers cannot raise or lower interest rates GL. You know that.


----------



## GumbyLearner (1 July 2010)

springhill said:


> I didn't know Keating was ever the governor of the Reserve Bank? Huh here i was thinking it was Bernie Fraser at the time.
> Treasurers cannot raise or lower interest rates GL. You know that.




Yes my bad. Your right I should rephrase my post. I hope RBA policy sets higher interest rates under her and Mr.Swan's government.


----------



## noco (1 July 2010)

This thread was implimented less than 24 hours ago and it is good to see so many posts in such a short time.
Unfortuneatly we have had 47 posts out of 86 which are totally unrelated to the original thread.
It is starting to remind me how Rudd,Gillard,Swan,Tanner and all the other Labor Ministers answer questions in Parliament at Question Time. Avoid having to answer the questions with diversions to take your mind off the real issue.
The thread is titled : DOES GILLARD INSPIRE CONFIDENCE?

Lets either get back to the subject, stay away or start another thread to suit your diversified posts.


----------



## explod (1 July 2010)

springhill said:


> I didn't know Keating was ever the governor of the Reserve Bank? Huh here i was thinking it was Bernie Fraser at the time.
> Treasurers cannot raise or lower interest rates GL. You know that.




Correct but most of the recent treasurers have inferred that they do.  Just like the overall economy, it is the world scene that dictates the real situation.

Gillard I believe may well be above that type of approach, we shall see.


----------



## explod (1 July 2010)

noco said:


> This thread was implimented less than 24 hours ago and it is good to see so many posts in such a short time.
> Unfortuneatly we have had 47 posts out of 86 which are totally unrelated to the original thread.
> It is starting to remind me how Rudd,Gillard,Swan,Tanner and all the other Labor Ministers answer questions in Parliament at Question Time. Avoid having to answer the questions with diversions to take your mind off the real issue.
> The thread is titled : DOES GILLARD INSPIRE CONFIDENCE?
> ...




Getting a bit beaten around there noco, the history of previous heads of state is very relevant as a yard stick for measurement in my view.


----------



## trainspotter (1 July 2010)

Gumby ... so far every bone you have thrown out to the masses has been repudiated with facts and clarity backed up with links and quotes. It seems to me your view is one of an opinion on hearsay rather than a measured approach based on knowledge backed up with research.

1) Costello selling the gold deposit to pay off debt. (retrospective genius)
2) Keating your hero deregulating the banking industry only to cause finance chaos.
3) Blaming Costello for lending money to the great unwashed masses?
4) Unqualified statements in regards to the BIG 4 and mergers ?

These are but to name a few of the doozies you have let rip without any factual basis into ASF and polluting this thread.

I believe Julia Gillard will make a great PM due to global circumstances and she will also run rings around Abbott in the intelligentia department. I notice she has had a massive makeover in her appearance. More makeup and a softer hairstyle as well makes her very appealing to the media so therefore the public. All about style .... little on substance for the proletariat.

I think I am :horse: when it comes to explaining the political reality to some.


----------



## noco (1 July 2010)

explod said:


> Getting a bit beaten around there noco, the history of previous heads of state is very relevant as a yard stick for measurement in my view.




Measurement of what? Can't see how it has any relation to Ms.Gillard what so ever.
Not at all explod, if you want to go back in history, then start your own thread on political history. I'm sure you will get some joy out of the 'beatups' that will transpire.


----------



## Julia (1 July 2010)

noco said:


> This thread was implimented less than 24 hours ago and it is good to see so many posts in such a short time.
> Unfortuneatly we have had 47 posts out of 86 which are totally unrelated to the original thread.
> It is starting to remind me how Rudd,Gillard,Swan,Tanner and all the other Labor Ministers answer questions in Parliament at Question Time. Avoid having to answer the questions with diversions to take your mind off the real issue.
> The thread is titled : DOES GILLARD INSPIRE CONFIDENCE?
> ...



I second that.  Maybe start a "let's have a squabble" thread, instead of filling this one with an endless quarrel.


----------



## Calliope (1 July 2010)

explod said:


> Getting a bit beaten around there noco, the history of previous heads of state is very relevant as a yard stick for measurement in my view.




Rubbish. Gillard has only been there a week. What are you measuring? Stick to the thread, or start one on the history of PMs.


----------



## overhang (1 July 2010)

The question should be are you willing to give Gillard the opportunity to inspire confidence?
I believe its far to premature to answer your question but I like the fact her fundamentals aren't based on cherry picking passages from the bible.
I just hope she gives us the chance to answer your question but it appears she will strike while the irons hot, which means policies will determine this election?


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (1 July 2010)

trainspotter said:


> I believe Julia Gillard will make a great PM due to global circumstances and she will also run rings around Abbott in the intelligentia department. I notice she has had a massive makeover in her appearance. More makeup and a softer hairstyle as well makes her very appealing to the media so therefore the public. All about style .... little on substance for the proletariat.



Abbott is far more intelligent than JG. 
She said to him 'Game on' and he says that is flippant as it isn't a game, it's about managing the country. (in his interview with Alan Jones)


----------



## trainspotter (1 July 2010)

Only casting an observation after watching the two go at each other on the Today Show with Karl & Lisa. I observed Julia Gillard dismantle Abbott on every topic and pushed his buttons that caused him to implode and begin the "Aaaah aaaah aaaah" routine. She came out on top by virtue of not losing her cool. 

Abbott may be brilliant on paper but fails to come across through the television as compassionate. In fact quite the opposite. Just my opinion of course. 

http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=7PE_vr0t3FA ..... GOSH the comedy just doesn't stop.


----------



## Knobby22 (1 July 2010)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Abbott is far more intelligent than JG.
> She said to him 'Game on' and he says that is flippant as it isn't a game, it's about managing the country. (in his interview with Alan Jones)




What's wrong with being flippant.

I think she is very clever, probably more than Abbott.
Look how quickly she rose to the top. She has changed horse midstream at the right time and knows how to outwit her opponents. 

A good example of quick thinking in Parliament:

JULIE BISHOP: Given that the Prime Minister has confirmed today that the same ministers will be conducting the same negotiations with the mining industry, for the same $12 billion outcome as before today's unprecedented political assassination of the former prime minister, what ...

(Jeering)

SPEAKER: Order!

JULIE BISHOP: ...what policy change has occurred? Or is the change, what many suspect a new face but still same old Labor, same old tax?

JULIA GILLARD: I thank the same old Deputy Leader of the Opposition for her question.

(Laughter)

JULIA GILLARD: And wish her well as she serves her third leader.

(Laughter)


----------



## noco (1 July 2010)

Julia Gillard might just be doing Tony Abbott a favour.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/pol...e-electable/story-e6frgd0x-1225886430542#page


----------



## wayneL (1 July 2010)

Knobby22 said:


> What's wrong with being flippant.
> 
> I think she is very clever, probably more than Abbott.
> Look how quickly she rose to the top. She has changed horse midstream at the right time and knows how to outwit her opponents.
> ...



A fair question that deserves an answer. It might have been entertaining for the comrades, but people that want an answer to the question will lose respect for her with such nonsense.

That's taken her down several notches for me.


----------



## Mofra (1 July 2010)

wayneL said:


> A fair question that deserves an answer. It might have been entertaining for the comrades, but people that want an answer to the question will lose respect for her with such nonsense.



Looks like the mining tax impasse is all but clear for a start - given Rudd nailed his credibility to the issue (and his ETS backflip), he was in a far less politically friendly position to make concessions than the way Julia has. 

The talk of the Lib/National parties being more concerned with facing Julia in the polls than there were with Ruddy speaks volumes. Julia has a genuine chance of solidifying support for Labour, with a voting public that could no longer connect with Rudd (or had any idea what he stood for these days).


----------



## wayneL (1 July 2010)

Mofra said:


> Looks like the mining tax impasse is all but clear for a start - given Rudd nailed his credibility to the issue (and his ETS backflip), he was in a far less politically friendly position to make concessions than the way Julia has.
> 
> The talk of the Lib/National parties being more concerned with facing Julia in the polls than there were with Ruddy speaks volumes. Julia has a genuine chance of solidifying support for Labour, with a voting public that could no longer connect with Rudd (or had any idea what he stood for these days).




Sure, it is the appeal of the Aussie Ockerina and her rhetoric is first rate. 

It depends on how quickly Aussies see through this and look at raw ideology/policy, to know whether this is what Australia wants, ergo, socialism.


----------



## drsmith (1 July 2010)

wayneL said:


> A fair question that deserves an answer. It might have been entertaining for the comrades, but people that want an answer to the question will lose respect for her with such nonsense.
> 
> That's taken her down several notches for me.



An unfortuante trend is that politicians increasingly see respect and getting re-elected as two different things.


----------



## moXJO (1 July 2010)

Mofra said:


> Looks like the mining tax impasse is all but clear for a start - given Rudd nailed his credibility to the issue (and his ETS backflip), he was in a far less politically friendly position to make concessions than the way Julia has.
> 
> The talk of the Lib/National parties being more concerned with facing Julia in the polls than there were with Ruddy speaks volumes. Julia has a genuine chance of solidifying support for Labour, with a voting public that could no longer connect with Rudd (or had any idea what he stood for these days).




And there is already talk of cutting the super increase and lowering of tax rates.


----------



## drsmith (1 July 2010)

moXJO said:


> And there is already talk of cutting the super increase and lowering of tax rates.



I suspect a mini budget of sorts will be released prior to the election.


----------



## moXJO (1 July 2010)

drsmith said:


> I suspect a mini budget of sorts will be released prior to the election.




I wonder if abbott is factoring in the rspt into his policies at all?


----------



## trainspotter (1 July 2010)

*Rudd vs Gillard #2*

IT'S FAIR to say the Revolutionary Socialist Party doesn't have a huge presence in Canberra. 

But the party has taken the strategic step of putting up Kevin Rudd's nephew to run against new prime minister Julia Gillard in her safe Labor seat of Lalor.

Van Thanh Rudd, 37, hasn't seen his uncle the former prime minister since he stepped into the top job in November 2007, but says there has been some telephone contact during Kevin Rudd's "busy" reign.

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/features/fed...rd/story-fn5a6dkp-1225886812406#ixzz0sPwBNGov

*WARNING* The lunatics are on the grass *WARNING*


----------



## wayneL (1 July 2010)

drsmith said:


> An unfortuante trend is that politicians increasingly see respect and getting re-elected as two different things.




The blight on democracy.


----------



## JTLP (1 July 2010)

Posted in Depression thread:

http://www.news.com.au/features/fed...al-health-pledge/story-fn5tar6a-1225886457823

Did anybody see this story?

Good on Tony and finally some substance for an election. I like the idea of scrapping that stupid medicare after hours thing and the GP Superclinics...what the hell! 

Gillard does not inspire confidence in me when she sweeps such pressing issues under the carpet (just to keep it relevant).


----------



## drsmith (1 July 2010)

wayneL said:


> The blight on democracy.



Indeed. A modern form of Rome burning while Nero fiddles.

Sadly, the Public Service is going down the same path.


----------



## Apollo (2 July 2010)

noco said:


> Following the political assination of Kevin Rudd I thought would be appropriate to replace the Rudd thread.
> How can anyone be inspired by comrade Gillard when she flys to Brisbane in the Government jet to fund raise for the Labor Party. She was to have flown back to Brisbane today but thought better of it after the criticism she received from the press.
> What a nerve this Prime Minister has in exceeding  her privaliges!




This is my first post in here so be kind.
Been trying to find a forum on the super tax. In there a forum
on aussie stock forum only talking about this blasted super tax ?

She'll go the same way as Krudd did.

She's to vain to be PM.
Her face looks as though she's had a face lift and her hair looks as though its been dyed even more than usual.

Perhaps Swan will be the next leader.

I can see the ad campaign now, Bill Shorten pulling the strings with a puppet in Gillard below.

Polls are starting to turn against her now. Only took a week for this to happen. Usually new leaders have a good period for a few months.

Too much damage has been done.

Gillard should have dropped the blasted tax alltogether, but no she's pushing ahead with it.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (2 July 2010)

Apollo said:


> She's to vain to be PM.
> Her face looks as though she's had a face lift and her hair looks as though its been dyed even more than usual.
> 
> Perhaps Swan will be the next leader.
> ...



I don't think we need to comment on physical features as they are not relevant to the debate. Though, ideology should be looked at because it affects people.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (2 July 2010)

Knobby22 said:


> What's wrong with being flippant.
> 
> I think she is very clever, probably more than Abbott.
> Look how quickly she rose to the top. She has changed horse midstream at the right time and knows how to outwit her opponents.
> ...



But did the question get answered without equivocation?

A leader that is flippant will not last long.  It's ok, sadly, for voters to be flippant but they have no right to whinge if they are so.


----------



## nulla nulla (2 July 2010)

Personaly I am more concerned with the perception/reality that the numbers men of the labour party control the party absolutely and with complete disregard for the misinformed populace that vote for the members of parliament.

The numbers men control candidate nominations/selection at grass roots level;
The numbers men control the candidates elevated to ministries for the various portfolios; and (as has been proven within the last month)
The numbers men remove/replace anyone not doing their bidding.

The reality is, the maiden speaches the elected members of the labour party give when they get to parliament mean nothing. All their sprouting about, elected by the people for the people is just hollow retoric. All their sprouking while seeking election means nothing. The reality is they are there at the whim of then numbers men and if they put a foot wrong they are gone.


----------



## Calliope (2 July 2010)

Ms Gillard said this morning that the nation owes a debt of gratitude to Wayne Swan and Martin Ferguson for pulling off an agreement with the big miners on the big tax. 

*Wayne Swan?* He was strongly behind this *non-negotiable * tax which he so hurriedly put together with Rudd, Gillard and Tanner after the budget.

Now the clown is claiming that the backdown is a great victory for tax reform and we can "move forward."

Martin Ferguson is the only one with any credibility.


----------



## noco (2 July 2010)

Apollo said:


> This is my first post in here so be kind.
> Been trying to find a forum on the super tax. In there a forum
> on aussie stock forum only talking about this blasted super tax ?
> 
> ...




Appollo, firstly the super profits tax is now dead. It has been renamed the 'resource rent tax' which in effect is the same thing (very clever Julia Gillard) with a different name.

But I must admit she has shown some sanity in her negotiations with the miners, albeit  at a cost in revenue of some $1.5billion. 

She was perhaps in the invidious position being the new leader to be able to back down from the original concept put up by Rudd without losing face. If Rudd had relented, it would have shown him up as a weak leader.

Julia Gillard has once again made Rudd the scapegoat to make herself look as a hero in the face of the public. Very clever indeed.


----------



## Knobby22 (2 July 2010)

wayneL said:


> Sure, it is the appeal of the Aussie Ockerina and her rhetoric is first rate.
> 
> It depends on how quickly Aussies see through this and look at raw ideology/policy, to know whether this is what Australia wants, ergo, socialism.




Australians want the middle ground and Australians want government for the people, not the rich or special interest groups.
Not the hard right that has failed the USA, not the hard left that has failed parts of Europe.
And we have been good at obtaining it from our politicians. Once a party moves too far in one direction, we dump them.


----------



## Mofra (2 July 2010)

drsmith said:


> An unfortuante trend is that politicians increasingly see respect and getting re-elected as two different things.



Was it Alan Greenspan (who has worked with every US President since Nixon) who once mentioned that anyone who is prepared to do what it takes to get elected isn't fit to run for office?


----------



## trainspotter (2 July 2010)

noco said:


> Appollo, firstly the super profits tax is now dead. It has been renamed the 'resource rent tax' which in effect is the same thing (very clever Julia Gillard) with a different name.
> 
> But I must admit she has shown some sanity in her negotiations with the miners, albeit  at a cost in revenue of some $1.5billion.
> 
> ...




Post of the month right here IMO. Love the word "invidious" when it is used correctly.


----------



## Calliope (2 July 2010)

Mofra said:


> Was it Alan Greenspan (who has worked with every US President since Nixon) who once mentioned that anyone who is prepared to do what it takes to get elected isn't fit to run for office?




One thing is sure. We elect politicians on party lines when usually the only thing we know about them is what their publicity machines tell us. We end up with a parliament of party hacks, who have minimal impact on running the country..


----------



## wayneL (2 July 2010)

Knobby22 said:


> Australians want the middle ground and Australians want government for the people, not the rich or special interest groups.
> Not the hard right that has failed the USA, not the hard left that has failed parts of Europe.
> And we have been good at obtaining it from our politicians. Once a party moves too far in one direction, we dump them.




Australians want their palms greased (even as their being screwed elswhere), hence middle class welfare and election pork barrelling. Is that government for the people.

BTW. Left and right are somewhat redundant terms. I have been accused of left AND right wing extremism, often over the same issues.

Was Bush right wing? In many ways no. What actually failed was neither left nor right, it was the attempt to interfere with economic cycles via stimulus... a perverted brand of Keynesianism.


----------



## Calliope (2 July 2010)

wayneL said:


> BTW. Left and right are somewhat redundant terms. I have been accused of left AND right wing extremism, often over the same issues.




Yes. Better terms would be Big and Small government. Big government wants to control all aspects of our lives. Small government is a more hands-off approach.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (2 July 2010)

Knobby22 said:


> Australians want the middle ground and Australians want government for the people, not the rich or special interest groups.
> Not the hard right that has failed the USA, not the hard left that has failed parts of Europe.
> And we have been good at obtaining it from our politicians. Once a party moves too far in one direction, we dump them.



They have gone from Nationalist socialism to Marxist socialism, to bigger government.


----------



## drsmith (2 July 2010)

Calliope said:


> Now the clown is claiming that the backdown is a great victory for tax reform and we can "move forward."



That clears up their definition of tax reform. Just increase taxes and don't worry about any additional complexities introduced.


----------



## Knobby22 (2 July 2010)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> They have gone from Nationalist socialism to Marxist socialism, to bigger government.




We want government to pretoect us if things go wrong.
We want unemplyment benefits, medicare, a scheme to help the homeless. You are just using emotive terms.

Small government is a slogan that sounds good but all the USA small governments are going broke, at all levels. 

With regard to Bush, he took the controls off the banks and ran down the regulation agencies so they could not perform and pumped up business.  He did it the loud congratualtions of the right wing press. He was wrong and we do not want to go down that path. We should go the middle way and we do, successfully.


----------



## drsmith (2 July 2010)

We want government that considers policy from a broad perspective.


----------



## wayneL (2 July 2010)

We want government to pretoect us if things go wrong, but we have a government that tries to micromanage us and criminalize us over a multitude of invented crimes.

We want unemplyment benefits, medicare, a scheme to help the homeless, but we have a government that institutionalises bludgeing and bribes the middle classes with... middle class welfare. We have breed an entitlement culture far beyond a "safety net". 



> Small government is a slogan that sounds good but all the USA small governments are going broke, at all levels.



 Nonsense. Small governments do not go broke. The USA actually is big government bro.



Knobby22 said:


> With regard to Bush, he took the controls off the banks and ran down the regulation agencies so they could not perform and pumped up business.  He did it the loud congratualtions of the right wing press. He was wrong and we do not want to go down that path. We should go the middle way and we do, successfully.




Let's face it. The "right wing press" is... Murdoch. But once again, what is meant by "right wing"? The Murdoch press is all about bellicose jingoism and the antithesis of what America purportedly stands for.

As above, right and left are redundant terms. 

But if we want to stick to the old fashioned left-right spectrum, pumping up business via a credit bubble is actually a left wing tactic viz, Keynesianism. A truly right wing laissez faire small government would have allowed the economy to cycle naturally to recession in 2001-2002, short circuiting the damaging bubble that still has yet to go through the delerium tremens stage of withdrawal, the first sign of which are starting to appear as the stimulus drug starts to dry up.

Small government (and there haven't been small governments anywhere in the west for decades) will become a necessity in the future. It obvious, but ideologues are... well, ideologues. Only through collapse will socialists realize their folly... as if there wasn't an excellent example already.


----------



## Bushman (2 July 2010)

wayneL said:


> Nonsense. Small governments do not go broke. The USA actually is big government bro.




I think he is talking about Municipal Boards that loaded up on CDOs and indebted states like California when he says 'smaller governments'?


----------



## wayneL (2 July 2010)

Bushman said:


> I think he is talking about Municipal Boards that loaded up on CDOs and indebted states like California when he says 'smaller governments'?




He doesn't understand that small government is a relative term then.


----------



## Knobby22 (2 July 2010)

Good arguments and I agree with a lot of it.

I agree with you on the middle class welfare point which we seemed to have got trapped in it lately. I particuarly hate the so called homeowner grants that distort the market.

I disagree that the Muroch press doesn't represent the right but maybe it more a subsection of the right, they should be called the "dumb right" led by Sarah Palin and the "vested interest" right, probably led by Murdoch himself.

Government in the USA is small compared to Australia if you exclude the "war/defence" section. That each stage of government collects taxes is galling though.


----------



## noco (2 July 2010)

Julia and Swanie have claimed a great vcitory in thier negotiations with the miners.
I'd prefer to call it a BACK FLIP on the policy she, Rudd, Tanner and Swanie all agreed there would be no negotiations.

KRuddy was well and truly made the scape goat and he (Rudd) says, "I have a long memory".

Look out Julia if you win the next election and give Kevie a ministerial position. He will be after 'blood'.


----------



## Julia (2 July 2010)

Yep, I was much amused at Swan saying today that these negotiations could never have happened under Rudd.  Not just Rudd, dear Swannie, it was just as much you who time after time insisted that the government would not be swayed, that you had the figures right, yada, yada, yada.

Now that Kev has gone, do they really think they can expect the public to believe it was all Kev's fault, and that both Swannie and Julia went along with it reluctantly because Kev wouldn't listen to anyone and he was the boss?
I don't think so.

I felt a sense of what might be to come listening to Ms Gillard this evening saying "all it took was a different, more consultative approach, to get a good outcome for everyone".
Translation:  the miners had us backed into a corner and we had to do a mighty backdown to avoid them restarting their advertising and renewing their attack.
Looks as though she might be going to be just as hubristic as Kev once she really hits her stride.

Perhaps I'm being unreasonable, but I see their continuing spin as simply insulting to the electorate who on the whole are more intelligent than the government appear to imagine.


----------



## BBand (2 July 2010)

Can't wait for Kevs memoirs being published


----------



## noirua (3 July 2010)

BBand said:


> Can't wait for Kevs memoirs being published




Memoirs are to be published in late 2010 in Mandarin - price 99 yuan. There are no copies to be published in English as former P.M. has got the hump over the whole lot of goings on.
The final aggravation was the presentation to him on handing over to the new P.M., yes, a box of embroidered handkerchiefs, 'love from Julia'. No No No it wasn't the embroidering that did it, it was the short note, 'with gratitude from BHP, Rio and Xstrata'.


----------



## Quincy (3 July 2010)

Does Gillard inspire confidence?

I think the "eyes" have it.


----------



## Calliope (3 July 2010)

That old communist, Phillip Adams has no confidence in Gillard. He has resigned from the Labor Party, over her political assassination of poor Kevin. Adams thought Rudd was a nice bloke, but then his judgment of character have always been lousy.

*Why I quit the Labor Party
*


> For 35 years the ALP has protested the Kerr coup – ululating over the vice-regal regime change that deposed Whitlam.
> 
> The Dismissal? Factional thugs now dismiss leaders at their whim. In cowardly conspiracies. First, a rapid succession of NSW premiers. Now a Labor prime minister.
> 
> For once, and only once, I’ll agree with Tony Abbott. Removing a PM from office is a job that properly belongs to the electorate. It’s what elections are for. Now the faceless men are back in the saddle and I’ve had enough. For over a month my membership renewal has been languishing on my desk. Paying to remain in the NSW branch seemed problematic. The assassination of Rudd makes a final decision all too easy. After 50 years of membership, through thick and thin – mainly thin – I’m resigning




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...-the-labor-party/story-e6frg8h6-1225886243738


Good one Quincy, but I'm afraid they are not Gillard's eyes. If a pooch had Gillard's slitty eyes you would give it a wide berth.


----------



## Julia (3 July 2010)

That's interesting.  
Amazingly, Phillip Adams has quite a following, so the government may be a little unhappy at his public disavowal of The Party.

I expect, however, that his view will be mirrored in a chunk of the electorate.


----------



## noco (3 July 2010)

Boy oh boy, Julia is sure rushing to clean the slate before the election.

First the back flip on the super resources tax and now a band aid solution on the asylum seekers. Will she negotiate with Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Vietnan or Indonesia?
Will she tow the boats back to Indonesia like Rudd said he would 2007?
How will she remove the bad taste of the BER debacle which she herself created?
How will she stop more houses being burnt down from the home insulation debacle?
Will she be able to stop borrowing $95,000,000 per day?
She sure is going to be a busy girl between now and the election.
But Ms Gillard, no matter what you do, like the one (Kevin Rudd) you political assinated, most of us have long memories.
You might be able to run but you can't hide.


----------



## nulla nulla (3 July 2010)

Calliope said:


> That old communist, Phillip Adams has no confidence in Gillard. He has resigned from the Labor Party, over her political assassination of poor Kevin. Adams thought Rudd was a nice bloke, but then his judgment of character have always been lousy.
> 
> *Why I quit the Labor Party
> *
> ...




Or give it the greyhound remedy, a piece of lead behind the left ear.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (4 July 2010)

Julia Gillard is the best conservative PM since Kevin Rudd.

She was a socialist when she was young, she is no fool, and now in middle age recognises her folly.

I believe she will ensure that Australia continues to function as it has since federation, with the exception of the Whitlam and Keating cacophonous interludes, as a safe environment in which to live and a good place in which to do business. 

Peace through the night and food through the day are the 2 essentials for the populace, so they will be kept happy.

Julia will provide this.

So would Tony Abbott, but Julia has trumped him.

gg


----------



## noco (4 July 2010)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Julia Gillard is the best conservative PM since Kevin Rudd.
> 
> She was a socialist when she was young, she is no fool, and now in middle age recognises her folly.
> 
> ...




Yes GG, she has out smarted Rudd, Swan and Abbott.

She has politically assassinated(spelt it right this time) Rudd with cool precision timing. It was alawys going to happen.

She has humiliated Swan, firstly by promoting him to Deputy Leader so she can lead him like a pomeranian and secondly to cut him off at the ankles with his no negotiations on the 40% RSPT. Swan must now feel  like an absolute fool.

She has  pinned Abbott's ears back with her negotiations with the miners in accepting a negotiated deal on tax albeit renamed the RRT. Why would Abbott want to recind such an arrangement when the miners, who may  not be all that happy, are nevertheless contented with the deal which turns out to be a win-win for both sides? Abbott should have gone along with the arrangements and accepted the fact the miners were willing to pay.

If Gillard goes along with the Coalitions policy on asylum seekers, it will be a win-win for both she and Abbott. A Courier Mail poll indicates 80% of voters favour the Coalition policy. So if Gillard does adopts the Coalition policy albeit under a different banner, she will say she has listened to the people of Austarlia. So both will have a win.

I can't help be inspired by Gillard. She is cool, crafty and spontaneous and knows how to push people's buttons. She certainly wants to stay in power at all costs and at the rate she is going that may well happen.

I still would not vote for her because of her record on the handling of the BER scheme but she may well  prove me wrong, but history shows Labor are big spenders and high taxers.


----------



## Julia (4 July 2010)

noco said:


> I can't help be inspired by Gillard. She is cool, crafty and spontaneous and knows how to push people's buttons. She certainly wants to stay in power at all costs and at the rate she is going that may well happen.



That's a generous admission, noco, given your dedication to the other side.
I'm feeling similarly.  So far, she's doing exceptionally well.



> I still would not vote for her because of her record on the handling of the BER scheme but she may well  prove me wrong, but history shows Labor are big spenders and high taxers.



Agree absolutely about the BER.  But I'm just waiting for her to begin throwing Tony Abbott's "big bad tax" phrase back at him with respect to his ridiculously generous maternity leave scheme.  It beats me how he can bleat on about Labor's big bad tax when he's going to deliver a hit right across the business community.  I think the average (non-pregnant) voter isn't going to be too impressed with their tax dollars funding six months' leave for a woman on $150,000 p.a.

It will be interesting to see what Ms Gillard comes up with re asylum seekers.
I think she's smart enough to find something which will appease the very disparate points of view.


----------



## noco (4 July 2010)

I think the average (non-pregnant) voter isn't going to be too impressed with their tax dollars funding six months' leave for a woman on $150,000 p.a.

Julia, when one looks at the possibility of a career woman on $150,000 pa., becoming prenant, I believe it would be fairly remote.
At that rate of remuneration, she would have to be in a highly  professional position and most likely single or has had kids which are now off her hands.  One would have to doubt there would be too many in that situation. I would be interested to know what the stats are.


----------



## gav (4 July 2010)

It's hardly the point though Noco.  If you choose to have kids, that's fine.  But it shouldn't be up to the rest of us to pay for it.  Perhaps this is Abbot's attempt to lure female and 'working family' votes.


----------



## lockhart (4 July 2010)

Noco,
When are people like you going to learn some respect?
Regardless of whether Prime Minister Gillard inspires confidence or not,
(and that can only be answered by the next election)
she is still the Prime Minister and deserves the respect that comes with the office.
This thread has developed into a "them and us" debate which has very little to do with buying and selling shares.
I personally think that The Prime Minister will be re-elected because the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Abbott, spends too much time knocking anything and everything that comes from the government. Many people fear greatly that he is a reincarnation of ex Prime Minister Howard who, if you remember, was soundly rejected at the last election.
If however, Mr Abbott should succeed, then I shall afford him the respect he will deserve by becoming the Prime Minister.
So cheer up, you may get your way but all the "knocking" against the present incumbent will not have the slighest influence on the end result.


----------



## noco (4 July 2010)

[


gav said:


> It's hardly the point though Noco.  If you choose to have kids, that's fine.  But it shouldn't be up to the rest of us to pay for it.  Perhaps this is Abbot's attempt to lure female and 'working family' votes.




Gav, I believe the Abbott scheme would paid for by a temporary  levy on business and not the tax payer.
The Labor scheme I believe will be paid for by the tax payer.
I stand corrected if I'm wrong.


----------



## explod (4 July 2010)

noco said:


> [
> 
> 
> Gav, I believe the Abbott scheme would paid for by a temporary  levy on business and not the tax payer.
> ...




Whether we like it or not Gillard is inspiring many people I meet down here on the Mount Martha strip so think she will be home.   The other issue is that Green support is growing a great deal due to fear that the other parties are not addressing many issues.  Abbott and the Liberals are being marginalised in my opinion.


----------



## Calliope (4 July 2010)

explod said:


> Whether we like it or not Gillard is inspiring many people I meet down here on the Mount Martha strip so think she will be home.




She will never reach the level of popularity Rudd reached because she has no money left to give away. The miners' wealth she wants to redistribute to "working Australians" won't kick in for a year or two.


----------



## noco (4 July 2010)

lockhart said:


> Noco,
> When are people like you going to learn some respect?
> Regardless of whether Prime Minister Gillard inspires confidence or not,
> (and that can only be answered by the next election)
> ...




lockhart, I can't recall where I have shown disrespect for Ms Gillard, in fact if you go back you will see I have mentioned how she has inspired me.

The respect you mention is a bit hypocritical when you listen to Ms. Gillard refer to Tony Abbot as 'loney Tony' or the 'mad monk' and Joe Hockey as 'sloppy joe'. 

You mentioned about Abbott knocking everything and anything. If you were check out Hansard, I believe some 80% of bills were passed by the Coalition. The media never publish the the things that have been passed. As you know it is the Senate's job to scrutinize such bills and just as well they do.

I don't see where buying and selling shares comes into this debate and I don't recall any mention in previous posts. ASF does cover the share market and general chat where it is applicable.

I will agree with you, Howards rejection was of his own making similar to Kevin Rudd's demise. Voters thought he had been Prime Minister for too long and it was time for a change. A change which may or may not have been in the been in the best interest of all Australians. The difference of course as you are aware, Howard was voted out by the people, where as Rudd was disposed of by the union factions.

May I remind you the thread is about  'DOES GILLARD INSPIRE CONFIDENCE'?

It is up to you if you would like to qoute where  Ms. Gillard has inspired you and let other ASF members have their opinion whether you think they are right or wrong.


----------



## moXJO (4 July 2010)

lockhart said:


> Noco,
> When are people like you going to learn some respect?
> Regardless of whether Prime Minister Gillard inspires confidence or not,
> (and that can only be answered by the next election)
> she is still the Prime Minister and deserves the respect that comes with the office.



ROFL 

NOW that is funny. I hope you don't like Koolaid.




explod said:


> Whether we like it or not Gillard is inspiring many people I meet down here on the Mount Martha strip so think she will be home.   The other issue is that Green support is growing a great deal due to fear that the other parties are not addressing many issues.  Abbott and the Liberals are being marginalised in my opinion.




 Yup so far Gillard has been doing well. Whether she is listening to the public because of ulterior motives or not I could really care less, so long as she is listening. I'm not a big fan of some of Abbotts policies and am leaning towards Gillard.


----------



## Calliope (4 July 2010)

Amanda Lampe, Gillard's Chief of Staff. I wonder if Tim Mathieson cuts her hair. Gillard calls her the Lampinator.


----------



## sails (4 July 2010)

If it were a popularity contest, yes, Julia would most likely get my vote.

But as it's about running our country, I'm not so sure.  Her track record with BER and 2.5 years as deputy of the unbelievable spending spree doesn't inspire me at all.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (4 July 2010)

sails said:


> If it were a popularity contest, yes, Julia would most likely get my vote.
> 
> But as it's about running our country, I'm not so sure.  Her track record with BER and 2.5 years as deputy of the unbelievable spending spree doesn't inspire me at all.




you can't fight it sails.

She's got the vibe. Its in the constitution. It don't matter how many millions she's wasted. Its the vibe. 

gg


----------



## sails (4 July 2010)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> you can't fight it sails.
> 
> She's got the vibe. Its in the constitution. It don't matter how many millions she's wasted. Its the vibe.
> 
> gg




Oh, but I can express an opinion...

So you don't care what damage she might do to the economy, GG?

Swan is next in line for the top job - now that is really scary...


----------



## JTLP (4 July 2010)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> you can't fight it sails.
> 
> She's got the vibe. Its in the constitution. It don't matter how many millions she's wasted. Its the vibe.
> 
> gg




Thanks Dennis Denuto! I :heart: your posts GG...I never know if they are being facetious or straight faced...well played old chap.

Julia definitely has Tony against the ropes. He needs a massive point coming into the election to get himself over the line.


----------



## wayneL (4 July 2010)

lockhart said:


> Noco,
> When are people like you going to learn some respect?
> Regardless of whether Prime Minister Gillard inspires confidence or not,
> (and that can only be answered by the next election)
> she is still the Prime Minister and deserves the respect that comes with the office.




PFFFT

In fact, double PFFFFFT.

Regardless of the office, in a liberal democracy respect must be earned, it is not automatic... and it can be easily lost.


----------



## Happy (4 July 2010)

wayneL said:


> PFFFT
> 
> In fact, double PFFFFFT.
> 
> Regardless of the office, in a liberal democracy respect must be earned, it is not automatic... and it can be easily lost.





Reminds me another comment that:  we democratically elect dictators !


----------



## Julia (4 July 2010)

noco said:


> [
> Gav, I believe the Abbott scheme would paid for by a temporary  levy on business and not the tax payer.
> The Labor scheme I believe will be paid for by the tax payer.
> I stand corrected if I'm wrong.



You are correct, noco, except that as far as I know there's no thought of the levy being temporary.  As I recall the policy announcement, it was to be funded by a 2% levy on business owners.  This will be even harder on them now that they won't be getting the 2% cut as a result of the mining deal.



explod said:


> Whether we like it or not Gillard is inspiring many people I meet down here on the Mount Martha strip so think she will be home.   The other issue is that Green support is growing a great deal due to fear that the other parties are not addressing many issues.  Abbott and the Liberals are being marginalised in my opinion.



I agree.  Tony Abbott does have in his favour, so far, his proposed mental health funding.  I have heard several people say this will be a vote changer for them.




sails said:


> If it were a popularity contest, yes, Julia would most likely get my vote.
> 
> But as it's about running our country, I'm not so sure.  Her track record with BER and 2.5 years as deputy of the unbelievable spending spree doesn't inspire me at all.






Garpal Gumnut said:


> you can't fight it sails.
> 
> She's got the vibe. Its in the constitution. It don't matter how many millions she's wasted. Its the vibe.
> 
> gg



I agree with both of you.  Her paw prints are all over all the failed policies, not just the BER, but as gg points out she is on a total charm offensive and it's working really well.  Moreover, she does seem to have genuine people and conciliatory skills which is very refreshing after Rudd.




sails said:


> Swan is next in line for the top job - now that is really scary...



Sure is.  I truly can't think of anyone worse.


----------



## Julia (4 July 2010)

lockhart said:


> Noco,
> When are people like you going to learn some respect?
> Regardless of whether Prime Minister Gillard inspires confidence or not,
> (and that can only be answered by the next election)
> she is still the Prime Minister and deserves the respect that comes with the office.



What?   Noco has not been disrespectful.  This is a discussion about whether Ms Gillard inspires confidence.  If any of us feel less than inspired by her, then of course we are going to say this.
There is no law that (at least so far)  says we may not utter a word of criticism against any politician.


No such thing as "respect that comes with the office" imo.   Any human being gets the level of respect they earn, politicians and Prime Ministers included.



> This thread has developed into a "them and us" debate which has very little to do with buying and selling shares.



Um, it's not supposed to, for heaven's sake.  It's a thread in the "General Chat" forum.

I


----------



## noco (4 July 2010)

Julia said:


> You are correct, noco, except that as far as I know there's no thought of the levy being temporary.  As I recall the policy announcement, it was to be funded by a 2% levy on business owners.  This will be even harder on them now that they won't be getting the 2% cut as a result of the mining deal.
> .




Julia, I believe the levey of 2% was temporary untill the budget gets back into surplus.


----------



## trainspotter (4 July 2010)

Stultus est sicut stultus facit.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (5 July 2010)

trainspotter said:


> Stultus est sicut stultus facit.



For us dunces who are not Latin inclined could you translate that and what it is about? Thanks with love.


----------



## bellenuit (5 July 2010)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> For us dunces who are not Latin inclined could you translate that and what it is about? Thanks with love.




Stultus est sicut stultus facit = 

Stupid is as stupid does.

You don't need to be Latin inclined with Google at your disposal


----------



## drfuzzy (5 July 2010)

Calliope said:


> She has to pretend to believe in an ETS to get Bob Brown on side. His preferences are going to count.




Julia convinced Big Kev to drop his ETS scheme, but does that mean she is against global warming action?  

I expect she'll win the election and but I can't for the life of me figure out exactly what her view on global warming is.  The voters seem more concerned with the mining tax and the boat people....


----------



## Calliope (5 July 2010)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> you can't fight it sails.
> 
> She's got the vibe. Its in the constitution. It don't matter how many millions she's wasted. Its the vibe.
> gg




You remind me of a dog I owned when I was a kid. He gave his loyalty to anybody who fed him.


----------



## noco (5 July 2010)

It would appear our new Prime Minister is very vulnerable indeed and may still have a battle on her hands to retain power. 



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...t-new-management/story-e6frg6zo-1225887763530


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (5 July 2010)

Calliope said:


> You remind me of a dog I owned when I was a kid. He gave his loyalty to anybody who fed him.




He was a good dog from memory, Calliope, why did you call him Machiavelli?

gg


----------



## sails (5 July 2010)

noco said:


> It would appear our new Prime Minister is very vulnerable indeed and may still have a battle on her hands to retain power.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...t-new-management/story-e6frg6zo-1225887763530




This excerpt from the above article sums it up very nicely, IMO of course - lol

"A tackle shop owner in the seaside town of Eden on the NSW south coast summed this up when he told the Liberal candidate, David Gazard: 
'*Mate, same smelly feet. Just a different pair of socks*.'"


----------



## Calliope (5 July 2010)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> He was a good dog from memory, Calliope, why did you call him Machiavelli?
> 
> gg




Because he manipulated me and everyone else he came across with his charm.  

Do you know what gg? I woke up the other day and decided that it doesn't matter much what the colour of the government is. I have adopted Dr Pangloss's philosophy in reverse;

*Everything happens for the worst under the worst of all possible governments.*


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (5 July 2010)

Calliope said:


> Because he manipulated me and everyone else he came across with his charm.
> 
> Do you know what gg? I woke up the other day and decided that it doesn't matter much what the colour of the government is. I have adopted Dr Pangloss's philosophy in reverse;
> 
> *Everything happens for the worst under the worst of all possible governments.*




Too right comrade, too right. 
Anarchism will out in the end.

gg


----------



## trainspotter (5 July 2010)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> For us dunces who are not Latin inclined could you translate that and what it is about? Thanks with love.




Bit harsh there Snake old chap to be labelling the proletariat "dunces" don't you think? The Latin was in response to the lockhart post about respecting the PM purely due to obtaining office. No problems with that but in the way the faceless men assassinated the incumbent I was reminded of another famous bit of Latin "et tu Brute?" ... It was beautiful to watch and very clinical they way the excised Kevin Rudd from the top job. Now I know it is a long bow to compare Caesar to Rudd but if the shoe fits?

Gillard is making all the right emotive noises to retain power. Mining Tax - dealt with in hers and the medias eyes. Next stop .... Boat People. Her handlers have a very savvy grasp of the mood of the nation and are releasing the manna from heaven in the right dosage for the unrepresented swill to stomach.


----------



## noco (5 July 2010)

Andrew Bolt asked the question has Julia Gillard left her past behind?

Or maybe it is still clinging to her like a leech!


http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...s_gillard_truly_left_her_radical_past_behind/


----------



## trainspotter (5 July 2010)

Fair suck of the sauce bottle noco. What I did in 1983 when I was a young radical should not be used against me now that I am older and wiser. Not that I am a PM or anything in the public spotlight with a history similar to Julias that is. Remember she is a LABOR PM and must have a history in Socialism and or Unionism to be counted as one of the bretheren. I think Andrew Bolt is a journalist of some specific leanings that do not agree with the Labor idealogy somehow. 

GOSH ...... can't believe I just defended a Labor PM !  She is allegedly tackling the Asylum Seekers debacle by threatiening to send the Afghanis and Sri Lankans back to whence they came. Surely this must be seen as a good thing and far from the "early" political leanings she showed?


----------



## noco (5 July 2010)

trainspotter said:


> Fair suck of the sauce bottle noco. What I did in 1983 when I was a young radical should not be used against me now that I am older and wiser. Not that I am a PM or anything in the public spotlight with a history similar to Julias that is. Remember she is a LABOR PM and must have a history in Socialism and or Unionism to be counted as one of the bretheren. I think Andrew Bolt is a journalist of some specific leanings that do not agree with the Labor idealogy somehow.
> 
> GOSH ...... can't believe I just defended a Labor PM !  She is allegedly tackling the Asylum Seekers debacle by threatiening to send the Afghanis and Sri Lankans back to whence they came. Surely this must be seen as a good thing and far from the "early" political leanings she showed?




Trainspotter, what you and I did as young fellows was most likely not related to politics. Ms. Gillard is desperately trying to distance herself from the socialist left because she knows she will have a better chance in the middle. Don't lets kid ourselves Ms. Gillard is very crafty and will undoubtedly swing back to the left to appease the radical unions if she gets into power. You cannot change the spots on a leopard.

I think she is looking after her own back side. She is politically motived to wipe the slate claen before the election. She is making out she is a pollie of action and is aware of public opinion on asylum seekers.

Her deal with the miners is reported already to be in trouble whereby her loss of $1.6 billion in the budget is more likely to be $4billion. 

I have met similar women in business like her over the years and some would lie and connive just get what they wanted.


----------



## Julia (5 July 2010)

noco said:


> Trainspotter, what you and I did as young fellows was most likely not related to politics. Ms. Gillard is desperately trying to distance herself from the socialist left because she knows she will have a better chance in the middle. Don't lets kid ourselves Ms. Gillard is very crafty and will undoubtedly swing back to the left to appease the radical unions if she gets into power. You cannot change the spots on a leopard.



I'm not sure that's necessarily true, noco.  Most of us went through that radical stage, where we could only think in extremes.  Age generally mellows us and allows us to see the world a little more objectively.
No reason why Ms Gillard should be any different from the rest of us.


Or alternatively, she may have concluded that now she's PM, she has a responsibility to take a more middle-of-the-road position in order to provide what the electorate at large is looking for.  Nothing wrong with that if she sticks to whatever she promises.



> I think she is looking after her own back side. She is politically motived to wipe the slate claen before the election. She is making out she is a pollie of action and is aware of public opinion on asylum seekers.



Sure, and you wouldn't expect her to do otherwise.  I think the general public is smarter than you might imagine.



> Her deal with the miners is reported already to be in trouble whereby her loss of $1.6 billion in the budget is more likely to be $4billion.



That sounds a bit more like it.  Pretty hard to see how, with all the concessions made, the government could only be down 1.5 billion.


----------



## Calliope (5 July 2010)

Julia said:


> Or alternatively, she may have concluded that now she's PM, she has a responsibility to take a more middle-of-the-road position in order to provide what the electorate at large is looking for.
> I think the general public is smarter than you might imagine.




She is as cunning as a sewer rat. I would say the general public is more gullible than ASF members, and there are signs on this thread that her spin is working.


----------



## drsmith (5 July 2010)

It's a challenge for any individual to change long held ideological beliefs.

Group ideology is much more difficult again.


----------



## hmmm (5 July 2010)

drsmith said:


> It's a challenge for any individual to change long held ideological beliefs.
> 
> Group ideology is much more difficult again.




It seems like politicians do it all the time with out hastle


----------



## Huitzii (5 July 2010)

Ms Gillard is as flash as a rat with a gold tooth 
She is one very sly dog, at this stage I have no doubt in my mind that she will win the next election before she even calls an election
Julia is way too cunning for Tony ...that's my free tip
But beware of the gutter rat, it will come out and maul you when your asleep


----------



## Logique (6 July 2010)

noco said:


> Andrew Bolt asked the question has Julia Gillard left her past behind? Or maybe it is still clinging to her like a leech!



Rudd thought he was the smartest guy in the room, but any lawyer can tell you, they are actually the smartest. Fertile profession for intellectual vanity. The powers that be will one day turn on her, as they turned on Rudd, and we'll see how well that self-satisfied smirk sticks.
I'd be happier with Gillard if she would go out and work in a road gang for a year, or run a small business, anything to be more connected to real life. It might strip away some of that ideological purity, which few doubt will reappear after the election. Shudder.


----------



## noco (6 July 2010)

Calliope said:


> She is as cunning as a sewer rat. I would say the general public is more gullible than ASF members, and there are signs on this thread that her spin is working.




She is good at dangling the carrot in front of the donkeys. She has an ulterior motive without a shadow of a doubt. She looks good in a lot of people's eyes but only if one could read what is in the back of her mind. I can't help being suspicious with this new Prime Minister of ours. Time will tell if I'm right or wrong.

I'd like to know more about this 'MY SUPER'. What's in it for the Government? Why are they starting to do a hard sell? Do they intend making use of that super while it is limbo?


----------



## Calliope (6 July 2010)

noco said:


> She is good at dangling the carrot in front of the donkeys. She has an ulterior motive without a shadow of a doubt. She looks good in a lot of people's eyes but only if one could read what is in the back of her mind. I can't help being suspicious with this new Prime Minister of ours. Time will tell if I'm right or wrong.




Gillards's whole life experience has been service to the extreme left in its battle against the hated employers. At the top of her list of achievements is her demolition of "work choices", the good along with the bad.

Does anyone really think that now she has the power she is going to do a u-turn and become business friendly? Why should she? Her goal is to restore the unions to the power they once had, and they will hold her to it.

Of course she will put on a big act of being all things to all people...until after she is re-elected.

Then watch out!


----------



## trainspotter (6 July 2010)

My sincere apologies to my fellow ASFers for my radical statements in regards to supporting a Labor PM. I have since subjugated these extreme thought patterns after watching Q&A last night. Tony Burke Minister for Sustainable Population restored my antipathy for the Labor rats. 

Julia Rudd or is it Kevin Gillard is now running the country?


----------



## wayneL (6 July 2010)

trainspotter said:


> My sincere apologies to my fellow ASFers for my radical statements in regards to supporting a Labor PM. I have since subjugated these extreme thought patterns after watching Q&A last night. Tony Burke Minister for Sustainable Population restored my antipathy for the Labor rats.
> 
> Julia Rudd or is it Kevin Gillard is now running the country?




Phewww!

I thought you were a victim of Stockholm Syndrome for a while there.


----------



## Calliope (6 July 2010)

Gillard's big problem is what to do with Rudd when and if she is elected. It occurred to me that his great talents as an apologist shouldn't be wasted. This guy said "sorry" to the Indigenous People, to the Homeless People to, to the Forgotten People to the Stolen Generation and so on. 

He rounded off his "sorry" career by being most sorry for himself in his farewell oration.

The problem is that he never followed up on these apologies. None of the recipients are any better off.

Gillarrd could rectify this by making Rudd the *Minister for Sustainable Apologies*


----------



## trainspotter (6 July 2010)

wayneL said:


> Phewww!
> 
> I thought you were a victim of Stockholm Syndrome for a while there.




I don't know what happened there ??? For a moment I was off on a red tangent and actually had a miniscule amount of empathy for the teachings of the Trotskyist Movement. (a version of Reformism and Lenininsm for the uninitiated) Thought I would save the Google rummage for the proletariat.

Anyways ...... back on track now.


----------



## dutchie (6 July 2010)

Calliope said:


> Gillarrd could rectify this by making Rudd the *Minister for Sustainable Apologies*




Classic!


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (6 July 2010)

*Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*



> Originally Posted by trainspotter
> My sincere apologies to my fellow ASFers for my radical statements in regards to supporting a Labor PM. I have since subjugated these extreme thought patterns after watching Q&A last night. Tony Burke Minister for Sustainable Population restored my antipathy for the Labor rats.
> 
> Julia Rudd or is it Kevin Gillard is now running the country?
> ...




Hey, trainspotter and wayneL, I think I am a victim of Stockholm Syndrome. Being caught up in a confined space with the Labor caucus murdering poor ole Kev07, the godbothering little bastard, all the speeches, mobile phones, Vietnamese restaurants, Bill Shorten, swords, knuckledusters, NSW right Wing, numchukas, prayers, tears, blood and guts, traumatised me.

For a while until your two brave posts I have felt trapped, in awe of her power, terrified to ask to go to the dunny.

I am now in counselling and planning a class action against the ALP for the trauma caused.

Tony has the balls to get through this temporary setback. Julia Gillard is an unreformed left wing union luvvie, and will be exposed as such over the coming weeks.  

gg


----------



## disarray (6 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*

she's quite a smooth operator, becoming much more polished on tv. the stylist has given her a good makeover but uses too much eyeliner.

policy wise her first few stances were to claim athiesm, say no to a big australia, settle a potentially damaging tax issue and tighten up asylum seeker laws. this settled fears of "not religious nutbugs like the liberal party", will pause the slavish devotion to growth economics, soothe ruffled mining feathers while still extracting some cash, and score points on asylum seekers. i'm quite happy to give her a vote if she keeps on being sensible and i'm a conservative.

party machinations on the other hand are just embarassing and it speaks volumes to the ill character of the system and the people in power.


----------



## noco (6 July 2010)

Is Julia Gillard for real? Does she think she can pull the wool over our eyes that easily by using East Timor to process offshore asylum seekers? 
It is nothing more than a mirror of the Howard Pacific solution which she refused to accept in 2007, 2008, 2009 and even as late as 2010.
I can't believe this Prime Minister of ours has the hide to now say this is the solution. For a start, East Timor does not have the facilities and it would take months to establish with a huge injection of Australian tax payers money. Why does she not be honest and say we now intend to use the Coalition's policy?
What will be her next hare brain scheme to sway voters before the election?



http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...iermail/comments/gillards_boat_people_speech/


----------



## trainspotter (6 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*

I believe GG we are caught up in her duplcity and like the good Machiavellain she is, she has seduced us to the dark triad way of life. I concur that her Lefty leanings will be exposed eventually but alas it will be all too late to save the House of Tony. The people have spoken and their voice is gaining a crescendo that will elevate her to the highest office. Similar to Medusa it is hard to look away and not be wrapt in the charms of the Gillard juggernaut.

Rat cunning at work IMO


----------



## trainspotter (6 July 2010)

It would appear noco she has the ability to react and meld her way to the psyche of the nation without recourse. Once again the media are caught up in the sway of groundswell that will see Julia Gillard rise above the baying of the hounds. I am reminded of Alice Cooper in this situation.

"Welcome to my nightmare
I think you're gonna like it
I think you're gonna feel... you belong
A nocturnal vacation
Unnecessary sedation
You want to feel at home 'cause you belong"


----------



## Julia (6 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*

I'm not sure it's actually a case of Stockholm Syndrome, gg, but she is certainly gathering some followers who are surprised to find themselves being impressed.
Trainspotter has been an interesting example.

I confess to being somewhat unsure myself about whether she is believable.
I'm finding myself comparing her and Tony Abbott:  Gillard comes across as very calm and assured, whilst Abbott has been quite thrown off his stride by her ascension.  He had Kevin Rudd's persona worked out and had found a valid way to attack him.   He seems to be floundering and looking very nervous in the wake of Ms Gillard.

There's a big difference between Ms Gillard's "calm and assured" and Kevin Rudd's arrogance.  She is clearly going out of her way to let all the varied groups of voters know that she hears them and understands their feelings.
It's all very emotive stuff, but I reckon it will be working well on many.

Going back to Pauline Hanson (perish the thought), the upswell of support for her came when voters heard someone expressing their own fears (justified or not, doesn't matter) about 'foreigners' overrunning Australia.

Ms Gillard is appealing to that same sector in assuring them they are not being racist etc for being concerned about boat people.

She probably thinks at least half of what she's saying is utter rubbish, but she has carefully considered the results of the polls which suggest 80% of Australians are worried about 'boat people' and is phrasing her rhetoric accordingly.


----------



## trainspotter (6 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*

Julia Gillard is certainly playing the "middle of the bat" to the punters. She is addressing everything the carpers have been bleating about. RSPT has been renamed MRRT and the lowered tax threshold has induced the big naughty mining companies to become compliant. Boat people are now to be housed on East Timor which in itself is not a solution as there is no infrastructure there but is being SEEN by the voting public to address the issue. She herself claimed that this is not a "Pacific Solution" but is to be used as a stop gap to inhibit a "piling up of unauthorised arrivals to Australia". 

Cannot see the difference myself now that I have taken off the rose coloured glasses.

Her ability to not promote incendiary language has taken the media by storm. The media thusly has placed her firmly in the box seat and the odds have sortened at Centrebet. How I wish this madness would end.

We will see if Vincent Price has got it right: - 

_And here, my prize, the Black Widow. Isn't she lovely?.. and so deadly. Her kiss is fifteen times as poisonous as that of the rattlesnake. You see her venom is highly neurotoxic, which is to say that it attacks the central nervous system causing intense pain, profuse sweating, difficulty in breathing, loss of consciousness, violent convulsions and, finally.. death. You know what I think I love the most about her is her inborn need to dominate, possess._


----------



## Calliope (6 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*



Julia said:


> She probably thinks at least half of what she's saying is utter rubbish, but she has carefully considered the results of the polls which suggest 80% of Australians are worried about 'boat people' and is phrasing her rhetoric accordingly.




It's called spin. Rudd needed a team of spin doctors to achieve what comes naturally to Gillard. 

The East Timor solution is a good example. It will never get off the ground. But that doesn't matter. She only has to pretend to be having meaningful discussions with Ramos-Horta until the election to keep the illusion alive that she has a solution.


----------



## nulla nulla (7 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*

How can people compare saint Julia to the evil dark lords. How can people cast cruel aspersions at her saintly behaviour. Never a drink or foul word has passed her lips. With the demeanor of a nun and a life devoted to serving others.
God have mercy on your souls (and after the election if she gets back in, you better watch out for that steel ruler she has hidden under her habit).


----------



## Logique (7 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*



trainspotter said:


> Similar to Medusa it is hard to look away and not be wrapt in the charms of the Gillard juggernaut.



Great line Traino. Another image that comes to me is when Elaine on Seinfeld says...'Fake, fake, fake'.


----------



## Mofra (7 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*



trainspotter said:


> She herself claimed that this is not a "Pacific Solution" but is to be used as a stop gap to inhibit a "piling up of unauthorised arrivals to Australia".
> 
> Cannot see the difference myself now that I have taken off the rose coloured glasses.



But that's the beauty of the scheme - East Timar is a signatory to the UNHCR scheme (Nauru is not), will be set-up as a "regional" centre (Nauru was Australia going it alone), and the Australian public psyche has positive connotations with East Timor due to our strong role in the Interfet mission just a few years ago. The subtle differences are enough to appease the left, we're still "sending brown people offshore" enough to appease the right, and Gillard gets to spruik a major policy difference between herself & her predecessor. 

Whatever your stance on Gillard, you can't deny her political savvy.


----------



## Surly (7 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*



Mofra said:


> But that's the beauty of the scheme - East Timar is a signatory to the UNHCR scheme (Nauru is not), will be set-up as a "regional" centre (Nauru was Australia going it alone), and the Australian public psyche has positive connotations with East Timor due to our strong role in the Interfet mission just a few years ago. The subtle differences are enough to appease the left, we're still "sending brown people offshore" enough to appease the right, and Gillard gets to spruik a major policy difference between herself & her predecessor.
> 
> Whatever your stance on Gillard, you can't deny her political savvy.




With all the same heads sitting beside her and behind her nodding and mumbling "here here" just as they, and Ms Gillard, did with the previous puppet only weeks ago espousing vehemently the opposite.

Thank you George Orwell for enlightening me to the workings of politics with your childrens farm animal stories.

cheers
Surly


----------



## Mofra (7 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*



Surly said:


> Thank you George Orwell for enlightening me to the workings of politics with your childrens farm animal stories.



I'll take Animal Farm over 1984, but in either case the derision of the altruistic nature of politicians & power-brokers is rightfully illustrated.


----------



## wayneL (7 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*



trainspotter said:


> Similar to Medusa



What a wonderful analogy. ROTFL 



> Rat cunning at work IMO




Indeed


----------



## Bushman (7 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*



Julia said:


> Ms Gillard is appealing to that same sector in assuring them they are not being racist etc for being concerned about boat people.




Appeasing John Howard's battlers again. Sigh.


----------



## sails (7 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*



Surly said:


> With all the same heads sitting beside her and behind her nodding and mumbling "here here" just as they, and Ms Gillard, did with the previous puppet only weeks ago espousing vehemently the opposite...





Hear, hear! Surly... 
And here is a video of the recent budget should anyone need to refresh their memory how much Ms Gillard nodded in approval most of the way through... http://media.nationaltimes.com.au/o...ayne-swans-budget-speech-in-full-1440577.html


----------



## Calliope (7 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*

Julian Burnside likes to exaggerate for effect, but he reckons the Pacific Solution cost one million bucks for ever migrant processed.

Let's say we can do the Timor solution at, say, a 50% discount.

The answer to the whole mess is obvious. Give each boat person half a million bucks and a plane ride home, where they could buy all the protection they wanted, or opt to go to greener pastures.


----------



## noco (7 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*



Calliope said:


> It's called spin. Rudd needed a team of spin doctors to achieve what comes naturally to Gillard.
> 
> The East Timor solution is a good example. It will never get off the ground. But that doesn't matter. She only has to pretend to be having meaningful discussions with Ramos-Horta until the election to keep the illusion alive that she has a solution.




Calliope, Julia Gillard is becoming a 'ME TOO' similar to Rudd and has virtually accepted the Coalitions's policy under the disguise of a different banner, which others have made commented that it will never get off the ground.

This is why I keep harping on Abbott not releasing his policeis untill election time although in this instance it has been long a standing Howard policy adopted by Abbott.

Our new Prime Minister is desperate to gain middle ground to regain power, but watch out if she gets relected, as Peter Garrett once stated,"Labor will change everything once they get into power".

Don't shoot untill you see the whites of their eyes. 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...bbott-were-right/story-e6frg6zo-1225888708722


----------



## A.Cashin (7 July 2010)

To put it plainly,

Democracy is being allowed to vote for the candidate you dislike least


----------



## trainspotter (7 July 2010)

John Faulkner is to retire after the election. Rats leaving a sinking ship me thinks. Lindsay Tanner the first to go. Hmmmmm ... watch this space.


----------



## noco (7 July 2010)

trainspotter said:


> John Faulkner is to retire after the election. Rats leaving a sinking ship me thinks. Lindsay Tanner the first to go. Hmmmmm ... watch this space.




John Faulkner is only retiring from the front bench. He intends remaining on the back bench after Gillard persuaded him to stay.


----------



## pilots (7 July 2010)

noco said:


> John Faulkner is only retiring from the front bench. He intends remaining on the back bench after Gillard persuaded him to stay.




I think you will find he is only going to stay for a year, the term rats leaving the ship is so true.


----------



## noco (7 July 2010)

pilots said:


> I think you will find he is only going to stay for a year, the term rats leaving the ship is so true.




Yes, you could be right about Faulkner staying one year to make Gillard look good.
I think we have only seen the tip of the iceberg and more will follow.


----------



## noco (7 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*

This articale from Andrew Bolt really does show Gillard is no different to Rudd, except Gillard is a smoother operator. It is the same manure, the same wheel barrow but a different pusher as commented by another journalist.

http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...uriermail/comments/column_gillards_great_con/


----------



## Julia (7 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*

Yes, noco, it seems your suggestion that Tony Abbott has been sensible in withholding his policies so they are not copied has indeed been vindicated.

A bit like Trainspotter, I think I was starting to be a bit sucked in with Ms Gillard's smoothness, but the Pacific Solution That Is Not the Pacific Solution has sure woken me up.

Quite aside from any principles involved, if the East Timor project were to happen (and it looks pretty doubtful) she would be wasting more of the taxpayers' money.
There is the centre already built at Nauru which she is happy to see lie empty while she builds another at East Timor.


----------



## Julia (7 July 2010)

John Faulkner's leaving will be a loss to the parliament imo.   The people with any integrity are escaping.


----------



## sails (7 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*



noco said:


> This articale from Andrew Bolt really does show Gillard is no different to Rudd, except Gillard is a smoother operator. It is the same manure, the same wheel barrow but a different pusher as commented by another journalist.
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...uriermail/comments/column_gillards_great_con/




Thanks for the article, Noco.  The excerpt below from this article clearly shows that Gillard is still in spending spree mode.  Taxpayers have already paid for one detention centre - but she wants to build a new one... 



> Rather than use again the detention centre at Nauru, *which we’ve already built, Gillard will spend a fortune on a new one in East Timor,* provided its Government ever agrees to a plan it’s not yet seen in detail. And in the months until then, *the boats will keep coming*, with 83 this year already.




And this one confirms my belief that nothing has changed with the change of PM: 


> “My Government is not interested in pursuing a new Pacific Solution,” she said without blushing. *We’re not doing what you see us doing*.



(Bold is mine)
This makes Rudd look like the kindergarten of spin.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (7 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*



Julia said:


> Yes, noco, it seems your suggestion that Tony Abbott has been sensible in withholding his policies so they are not copied has indeed been vindicated.
> 
> A bit like Trainspotter, I think I was starting to be a bit sucked in with Ms Gillard's smoothness, but the Pacific Solution That Is Not the Pacific Solution has sure woken me up.
> 
> ...




Agree, she is a sad little reconstructed faction warrior, playing the left and the right simultaneously.

E.Timor won't happen. And Nauru is available.

More money to be wasted by Gillard.

gg


----------



## dutchie (7 July 2010)

Gillard has made a big diplomatic mistake by asking East Timors' Head of State, who has no power to decide anything, about her plan instead of the Prime Minister of that country.


----------



## trainspotter (7 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*



Julia said:


> Yes, noco, it seems your suggestion that Tony Abbott has been sensible in withholding his policies so they are not copied has indeed been vindicated.
> 
> A bit like Trainspotter, I think I was starting to be a bit sucked in with Ms Gillard's smoothness, but the Pacific Solution That Is Not the Pacific Solution has sure woken me up.
> 
> ...




No more Mr Nice Guy for me on this red headed She Devil calling herself the Pied Piper of the Nation. The rankness of the policy that she has clearly stolen from the Libs and force fed to the media as her own is vomitous. To take on the same principles and then require the destination to be geographically different by a few hours is OBTUSE in the extreme. 

Maybe Timor should ask for Australia to get back some of the oil WE are mining in the Timor sea with less than 12% going back to the sovereign state.

NO MORE of this duplicity and the blurring of the lines for the sake of winning Govt. We are in control of voting who we want to represent US. Do not be fooled by this David Copperfield act of smokes and mirrors. Do not be duped by the sleight of hand. Do not be conned by the media to think this She Devil is doing the right thing for the country.

This is still the only woman from the GANG OF FOUR that led us into this mess and she is now screaming like a banshee that she is the Messiah ???

I THINK NOT !!! Vote with your brains and not what we are being led to believe that Labor has somehow taken on the responsible role of Guvmnt.

I implore you.


----------



## GumbyLearner (7 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*



Mofra said:


> But that's the beauty of the scheme - East Timar is a signatory to the UNHCR scheme (Nauru is not), will be set-up as a "regional" centre (Nauru was Australia going it alone), and the Australian public psyche has positive connotations with East Timor due to our strong role in the Interfet mission just a few years ago. The subtle differences are enough to appease the left, we're still "sending brown people offshore" enough to appease the right, and Gillard gets to spruik a major policy difference between herself & her predecessor.
> 
> Whatever your stance on Gillard, you can't deny her political savvy.




I'm not that sure it is that politically savvy. It maybe an easier solution than an ALP branch-stacking exercise south of Brisbane. 

*East Timor asylum plan a legal minefield * 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...-legal-minefield/story-e6frg6nf-1225888713531

EAST Timor MP Jose Teixeira was thoroughly perplexed yesterday by Julia Gillard's announcement of plans for an asylum-seeker processing centre.

"It would be a legal minefield, to say the least, with the amendments that would be required to the Immigration Act to make it happen," said Mr Teixeira, who was resources and energy minister in the former Fretilin government and now sits on the parliamentary foreign affairs committee.

"Fretilin disagrees with Timor Leste being set up as a processing centre for asylum-seekers bound for Australia," he said. "It is unfair to burden emerging countries like ours with such an issue.

"We take our international commitments seriously, and believe to go down this path would not be a good way to comply with our international obligations and our constitutional guarantees for those seeking asylum."

and furthermore....

An outraged opposition politician was heard to say shortly after Ms Gillard's statement: "So they don't want the LNG (liquefied natural gas) to be processed here, but they do want us to process asylum-seekers," referring to the ongoing disputes over access to East Timor's undersea wealth.


----------



## trainspotter (7 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*



GumbyLearner said:


> I'm not that sure it is that politically savvy. It maybe an easier solution than an ALP branch-stacking exercise south of Brisbane.
> 
> *East Timor asylum plan a legal minefield *
> 
> ...





This is one time Gumby that if you were in the same room as me I would actually give you a bit of man loving. Post of the month right here !


----------



## trainspotter (7 July 2010)

Anyone noticed how quiet the Insulation debacle has gone after Greg Combet took over from Peter Garrett? Where is the media focus?

"In a 40-minute disclosure to parliament, Mr Combet admitted some of the warnings of fires and fraud given to the Department of Environment had *proved correct.*

Mr Combet, cleaning up the political mess left after Peter Garrett was stripped of responsibility for the scheme following its suspension, cited fraud concerns about one insulation installer who did $9.6 million of work under the program and attracted 100 complaints about fraud and quality issues."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/pol...il-clean-up-bill/story-e6frgczf-1225839337844 for some hard hitting evidence.

Or what about the other fiasco ... the BER after Julia Gizzard did the Pontius Pilate?
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-...bbott-government/story-fn56ulhe-1225888993339

Who is in control of this legacy of debt to us all as taxpayers?? HUH?

Health is non reformist other than TV adverts telling us how wonderful they are doing? Swept under the carpet perhaps?


----------



## GumbyLearner (7 July 2010)

trainspotter said:


> Anyone noticed how quiet the Insulation debacle has gone after Greg Combet took over from Peter Garrett? Where is the media focus?
> 
> "In a 40-minute disclosure to parliament, Mr Combet admitted some of the warnings of fires and fraud given to the Department of Environment had *proved correct.*
> 
> ...




Most of these devious rush to the top Canberra types have no idea about business or hard work. Nor care about the lives of workers,families or the bereaved left behind. Definitely a whitewash Trainspotter by the looks of things. Glad I'm not 20 years younger looking for work and none the wiser as to the dangers of such a poorly administered "green-friendly" impression making backdoor pocket-lining circus.


----------



## GumbyLearner (8 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*



trainspotter said:


> This is one time Gumby that if you were in the same room as me I would actually give you a bit of man loving. Post of the month right here !




Cheers TS.

I thought it a kick-**** post myself.

Otherwise i wouldn't have talked about it or raised it as a topic. Got to love those ballot stuffing non-representative men/women! 

And Jose Teixeira was never a member of the Queensland Labor Party?   

You have got to love the smoothness in this BS!!!!!!!!!


----------



## GumbyLearner (8 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*

Tracks from Stockholm






Live


----------



## noco (8 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*

Gillard won't use Naru already establihed facilties because it is the Coalition's original policy. But it is  my belief she would dearly love to go there. If she did
she would be lowering her dignitary to go back to the Pacific solution but instead would rather waste more tax payers money to set up in East Timor. Don't worry about cost, so long as it gets her back into parliament and power.
I think our Prime Minister is starting to dig a very big hole for herself that she won't be able to climb out of.


----------



## explod (8 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*

We seem to have drifted form the Stockholm syndrome somewhat folks.

But on asylum seekers, processing should be done within our own borders up front, they are either genuine or they ar not, Gillard made that statement a few days ago herself.

Proved genuine they stay, not then back to thier own country irregardless.

And within our own administratiuon you would think it not only more efficient but would reduce chances of error or outside political collusion etc.

Gillard looks very nice, gives me a warm and cosy feeling like one of my school teachers use to, so look out.


----------



## Calliope (8 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*

It is not surprising thaf Gillard has enchanted most of the media and temporarily a few vascillating ASF members.  She has soothed peoples worries on the mining tax and the boats problem, by actually doing nothing but backing down.

What she has achieved is the *perception* that she is a fixer, with some well executed spin. She will similarly "fix" carbon pollution, and everybody will be happy...left, right and centre.

Poor old Abbott is way out of his depth. His minders should take him by the scruff of the neck and make him cut out the "but, but, buts" and the "well - look - ahs and umms."

He had an easy interview with Madonna King on AM this morning but again he behaved like a rabbit caught in the headlights. I know he can't divert awkward questions like Gillard does, with a squinty-eyed girlish chuckle, but he could loosen up, for god's sake, and stop trying to look and sound so earnest.


----------



## Mofra (8 July 2010)

trainspotter said:


> John Faulkner is to retire after the election. Rats leaving a sinking ship me thinks. Lindsay Tanner the first to go. Hmmmmm ... watch this space.



They were the last of the Kevin 07 zealots. Faulkner would have been demoted post-election IMO.


----------



## Calliope (8 July 2010)

Mofra said:


> They were the last of the Kevin 07 zealots. Faulkner would have been demoted post-election IMO.




Both Tanner and Faulkner have denied that their departure has anything to do with Rudd's political assassination. But that's normal practice, to deny the obvious.

I hope Gillard doesn't reward Senator Conroy, who was one of the instigators, with a promotion. He has reached his level of incompetence now.


----------



## Logique (8 July 2010)

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...n-x2026-how-about-gillard-20100707-100k2.html
*Children won't be left to drown … how about Gillard?* MIRANDA DEVINE  July 8, 2010.   
Quote:
"How stupid does Julia Gillard think "redneck central'' is? She can't honestly believe voters in marginal electorates will fall for her election-eve volte-face on asylum seekers, unveiled in a speech this week to the Lowy Institute......

...Now all the usual suspects who pummelled the Howard government are lining up to support Gillard. Malcolm Fraser called in to Melbourne ABC radio yesterday to praise Gillard: "I think the Prime Minister needs to be given credit for her speech", and saying her policy was "quite different" to the opposition's policy that "takes people and drags them off to Nauru".

And there is Burnside, who said in February, "The idea of reopening Nauru as a place of detention is unnecessary, absurdly expensive and morally bankrupt.'' He slagged off Abbott as a "utilitarian", who would be shunned by priests at St Patrick's seminary and had a "pretended devotion to Christianity".

Oh, but now, he's impressed with Gillard's "Dili solution"". Unquote

The Nauru facility, however sad and oppressive, is already built. But a bucket of money, and (even more) diplomatic friction would need to be thrown at East Timor to duplicate the processing over there.


----------



## Julia (8 July 2010)

Finally, Tony Jones on Lateline last night actually demonstrated some objectivity and persisted with the hard questions in an interview with Ms Gillard about her proposed Timor solution.  It's worth watching for anyone who hasn't seen it.
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/

Ms Gillard was clearly struggling and the smile was very forced.

She has really stuffed up with this.  Not only is it perfectly obviously nearly identical to the Pacific Solution where we have already paid for the provision of appropriate facilities now lying empty, she has failed to observe protocol in her failure to direct her first overtures to Timor's Prime Minister, who is no doubt now feeling a bit miffed about this.  (How would Ms Gillard be feeling if another nation, wanting to establish a similar program in Australia, directed their first enquiry to Governor-General, Quentin Bryce?

Timor has an unemployment rate of around 40%.  They are going to be less than thrilled about the influx.

The other relevant factor is that most of the asylum seekers are Muslim.
Not sure how well this will sit with the predominantly Catholic Timorese, especially if they are to circulate freely in the community.


----------



## drsmith (8 July 2010)

Meanwhile, under the radar

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/pol...en-start-program/story-e6frgczf-1225889424311


----------



## noco (8 July 2010)

Julia said:


> Finally, Tony Jones on Lateline last night actually demonstrated some objectivity and persisted with the hard questions in an interview with Ms Gillard about her proposed Timor solution.  It's worth watching for anyone who hasn't seen it.
> http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/
> 
> Ms Gillard was clearly struggling and the smile was very forced.
> ...




Hmmmm, a rattled amateur describes her well. She certainly will not look at the Nauru facility, because this would lower her dignity to agree with the oppositions policy. She has not got too many other alternatives as she could not answer Tony Jones question on other countries in the area.

Thanks for that Julia. I only saw the last half.


----------



## Calliope (8 July 2010)

Julia Gillard;

"What I'm seeking to achieve through an open conversation with regional partners is a regional change in how we deal with* irregular people movement."*

Apparently a cure for *irritable bowel syndrome* is on Gillard's "to do" list before the election.

This really is a "move forward."


----------



## trainspotter (8 July 2010)

Calliope said:


> Julia Gillard;
> 
> "What I'm seeking to achieve through an open conversation with regional partners is a regional change in how we deal with* irregular people movement."*
> 
> ...




LOLOL "irritable bowel syndrome" ... mine is just downright ANGRY ! 

The concillatory words currently being used by our first female PM is stupefying the nation into a trance. All she needs now is a flute and we can all dance to her merry tune.


----------



## Calliope (8 July 2010)

trainspotter said:


> LOLOL "irritable bowel syndrome" ... mine is just downright ANGRY !
> 
> The concillatory words currently being used by our first female PM is stupefying the nation into a trance. All she needs now is a flute and we can all dance to her merry tune.




No. Ms Smartypants has blown it. Now after negative reactions from East Timor leaders, she claims she did not nominate a Timor solution.  Unfortunately she has no idea on any alternative. In fact she has no solution. She may have to defer the election for a while.

The girlish charm is not working, and the self-satisfied smirk is fast disappearing.


----------



## ZincDust (8 July 2010)

If we think for a minute about all this, the Labour Party has a huge win by simply being THE party that got a female into the PM position. Rudd knew all along that this would happen and was well prepared for it. Conspiracy theory you betcha Crocodile tears from the Billy Graham look alike were all just that. He's off to do what he always wanted to do..not be PM.
Now they will play the heart strings of isn't it wonderful to FINALLY have a woman in power.........the gullible electorate will fall for it..... voters will flock to the Gillard candle flame like moths.
As for the Libs all they can hope for is that the Aussie Boy syndrome kicks in an toughy Mr A complete with re-styled budgie smugglers appeals to the Ocker culture.
Ah OZ politics great one day perfect the next


----------



## explod (8 July 2010)

Calliope said:


> No. Ms Smartypants has blown it. Now after negative reactions from East Timor leaders, she claims she did not nominate a Timor solution.  Unfortunately she has no idea on any alternative. In fact she has no solution. She may have to defer the election for a while.
> 
> The girlish charm is not working, and the self-satisfied smirk is fast disappearing.




On the contrary, tonights SBS news indicates that the East Timor Prime Minister and President are warming to the idea.   Of course dollars will be behind that.

I think Gillard will be multi facited on policy and will continue to move with overall vibes, quick on the uptake and prepared to listen.


----------



## drsmith (8 July 2010)

Calliope said:


> No. Ms Smartypants has blown it. Now after negative reactions from East Timor leaders, she claims she did not nominate a Timor solution.  Unfortunately she has no idea on any alternative. In fact she has no solution. She may have to defer the election for a while.
> 
> The girlish charm is not working, and the self-satisfied smirk is fast disappearing.



Dear oh dear!

It suited her to go with the flow on East Timor last night.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2010/s2947634.htm


----------



## sails (8 July 2010)

explod said:


> On the contrary, tonights SBS news indicates that the East Timor Prime Minister and President are warming to the idea.   *Of course dollars will be behind that*.....




Oh dear, she must be throwing taxpayer's money at them. 
What's wrong with the already funded Nauru?
So you are OK with millions/billions more of Oz dollars being thrown out the door, Explod?  

Gotta be repaid somehow...sometime...


----------



## trainspotter (8 July 2010)

*sniff sniff* ... what's that in the air? Smells like electioneering to me. 

Is SBS independent? They seem to have more of a Left Bias at the moment after watching how they hosed down the East Timor backflip.

Once again no detail as to how many refugees or where they are to be housed or who is responsible. I though the East Timorese oppposition leader summed it up best when he said "We can't look after ourselves ... How are we going to look after the refugees?" GASP  is that common sense or what ?


----------



## explod (8 July 2010)

sails said:


> Oh dear, she must be throwing taxpayer's money at them.
> What's wrong with the already funded Nauru?
> So you are OK with millions/billions more of Oz dollars being thrown out the door, Explod?
> 
> Gotta be repaid somehow...sometime...




Not OK with it at all,   but,   she is the Boss now.   Having said that, we may not be at finalised policy yet.   If you have stated that you are looking for everyones input (as she stated at the start of this argument) it says that you will alter policy on the run to follow the opinion polls. 

Yep, straight out electioneering i'd agree, have confidence in her on that.


----------



## nunthewiser (8 July 2010)

what choice we got?

1. a nut chewing nazi moll 
2.a god preaching chewed up nazi nut


at least gillard doing a cupla things of late thats an attempt at fixing **** ups.

vote 1 for gillard.


----------



## mexican (8 July 2010)

Don't know what all the fuss is about.
All pollies lie, just ask Tony!


----------



## noco (8 July 2010)

explod said:


> On the contrary, tonights SBS news indicates that the East Timor Prime Minister and President are warming to the idea.   Of course dollars will be behind that.
> 
> I think Gillard will be multi facited on policy and will continue to move with overall vibes, quick on the uptake and prepared to listen.




The East Timorese have been very diplomatic in not rejecting Gillards proposal outright.
IMHO the answer will be 'thanks, but no thanks'. East Timor has too many problems of their own to be involved with asylum seekers. I would be very surprised if it gets off the ground.


----------



## noco (8 July 2010)

nunthewiser said:


> what choice we got?
> 
> 1. a nut chewing nazi moll
> 2.a god preaching chewed up nazi nut
> ...




Yes she is attempting to fix the 'stuff ups' she was originally a party to.
She never mentions the Home Insulation stuff up or the BER stuff up which she created.
IMHO it is all smoke and mirrors to make way for the election.


----------



## Julia (8 July 2010)

drsmith said:


> Meanwhile, under the radar
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/pol...en-start-program/story-e6frgczf-1225889424311



I'm finding it hard to see how Green Assessment of your Home Mark II differs from the Mark I version.  They should just scrap the whole idea imo.



trainspotter said:


> LOLOL "irritable bowel syndrome" ... mine is just downright ANGRY !
> 
> The concillatory words currently being used by our first female PM is stupefying the nation into a trance. All she needs now is a flute and we can all dance to her merry tune.



She is also further bastardizing the English language:  in the Lateline interview she more than once said that she has "tasked" the appropriate personnel to.....".  I hate this.




ZincDust said:


> If we think for a minute about all this, the Labour Party has a huge win by simply being THE party that got a female into the PM position.



I disagree.  I think the fact that she's female will play far less than the method of her ascension.  And it only catches Australia up with much of the rest of the world who have had female heads of government some time ago.



> Rudd knew all along that this would happen and was well prepared for it. Conspiracy theory you betcha Crocodile tears from the Billy Graham look alike were all just that. He's off to do what he always wanted to do..not be PM.



Sorry, disagree again.  I do not think Rudd even saw this coming.  He was devastated.  Yes, he eventually wanted to sit on that seat at the UN but he did not want the humiliation of being tossed out of the Prime Ministership.



explod said:


> On the contrary, tonights SBS news indicates that the East Timor Prime Minister and President are warming to the idea.   Of course dollars will be behind that.



Um, that might be a bit of an overstatement, Explod.  They have just said they are prepared to have some dialogue about it.  As with the RSPT, the dialogue should have been held before she came out and made an announcement that suggested it was a fait accompli.  Why don't they learn from their mistakes?


----------



## Julia (8 July 2010)

The following comment from a reader of one of the articles on the Gillard Timor Solution seems to sum up their situation:



> The Oracle Posted at 9:54 AM Today
> I live in the heart of Dili in East Timor. Let me tell you that most of the expatriate population here think this suggestion is nothing short of ridiculous. This country is trying hard to solve its own problems, and does not have the capacity or the infrastructure to solve Australia's, a fact that would have been very obvious to the Prime Minister had she ever set foot on the place. Tap water is undrinkable, sanitation has considerable upside, blackouts are a feature of daily life, Dengue fever is rife, and many roads have dangerous uncovered manholes. I do not believe there is any support at all in the local community for this prematurely announced proposal. I think that the people of Timor Leste are entitle to feel offended by the manner in which it was announced.


----------



## noco (8 July 2010)

The events of the past two days on asylum seekers is an absolute debacle and will not inspire voters who thought she was OK a week ago.

That's our Prime Minister who wants to govern Australia.

The honeymoon is over!!


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (9 July 2010)

sails said:


> What's wrong with the already funded Nauru?



It would highlight the John Howard government's success.


----------



## Logique (9 July 2010)

I have faith in the East Timorese leadership. 

They know Australia well, they are nobody's fools. They see quite plainly what the ALP are up to. They will engage in this dance of consultation, offer and counter-offer, all the way to the election.  

And like the big miners before them, will play it for the dollars, and insurance against the return of the ALP.  But (and especially if the ALP's offer isn't generous) hoping like hell that the Coalition wins.


----------



## Calliope (9 July 2010)

explod said:


> Not OK with it at all,   but,   she is the Boss now.   Having said that, we may not be at finalised policy yet.   If you have stated that you are looking for everyones input (as she stated at the start of this argument) it says that you will alter policy on the run to follow the opinion polls.
> 
> Yep, straight out electioneering i'd agree, have confidence in her on that.




I think you are on the wrong thread. You are very much a victim of the Stockholm Syndrome.


----------



## dutchie (9 July 2010)

noco said:


> The events of the past two days on asylum seekers is an absolute debacle and will not inspire voters who thought she was OK a week ago.
> 
> That's our Prime Minister who wants to govern Australia.
> 
> The honeymoon is over!!




Rudd was a dud and Gillard is a dullard.


----------



## explod (9 July 2010)

Calliope said:


> I think you are on the wrong thread. You are very much a victim of the Stockholm Syndrome.




Someome has to ballance the absolute right wing bias around here.  On the Syndrome, as a member of the Greens my observations are purely cosmetic within the bounds of this thread.

What's obvious is the continued marginalisation of the far right wing and of course the rise of the green vote will drive further nails into that in my view.  So the vehemence and angst against Gillard is understandable.

And call me far left if you like, but unlike the so called communist side, our sin is that we like the trees to be left to grow.


----------



## Calliope (9 July 2010)

explod said:


> Someome has to ballance the absolute right wing bias around here.  On the Syndrome, as a member of the Greens my observations are purely cosmetic within the bounds of this thread.




Cosmetic is right, but trying to make Gillard look good is just like putting lipstick on a pig.


----------



## explod (9 July 2010)

Calliope said:


> Cosmetic is right, but trying to make Gillard look good is just like putting lipstick on a pig.




Yeh, good point, but Howard, Rudd et al. never ever looked too crash hot either.   But an ole codger like me reckons Gillard's okay.   

And apart from the nasty connotation here, what has looks got to do with politics.   My Grandma inspired confidence but she did not look that crash hot.


----------



## Knobby22 (9 July 2010)

explod said:


> Yeh, good point, but Howard, Rudd et al. never ever looked too crash hot either.   But an ole codger like me reckons Gillard's okay.
> 
> And apart from the nasty connotation here, what has looks got to do with politics.   My Grandma inspired confidence but she did not look that crash hot.




Maybe Calliope has the hots for a certain man in budgy smugglers.


----------



## Calliope (9 July 2010)

Knobby22 said:


> Maybe Calliope has the hots for a certain man in budgy smugglers.




And maybe you have a sick mind.


----------



## trainspotter (9 July 2010)

PM Julia Gillard was going really well for awhile there until the push to "solve" the problems that are causing the polls to swing the Liberal Way were hastened. Policy on the run style. She announced she had spoken with the East Timorese President Jose Ramos-Horta about this matter. She then denies that East Timor was her final destination after the media catch on that the PM Xanana Gusmao had not been consulted. 

This launches the media into a frenzy of calling this a copycat Ruddism on backflips on policy etc etc. SHEEEEEEEESH ! Tough crowd I gotta be telling you. There still seems to be this media idealogy of placing our politicians on a pedestal too high for the layman to touch. They are also too quick to sink the boots in when a rip in the fabric occurs.

I am uninspired by the Labor ideal of borrowing money and placing the Nation in debt to it's eyeballs whoever the leader is. Maybe that is just me being a business man and looking at it from a very simplistic point of view.


----------



## Knobby22 (9 July 2010)

True

I couldn't believe how the ABC kept saying there is massive opposition to the idea in East Timor because there is already high unemployment.
Of course East Timor would love us to set it up there.

Cooks, clerks, guards etc. would be required; helping the unemployment situation; all paid for by us Aussies.

Also lots of public servants visiting and critics of the govenrment visiting to find fault. They would all be contributing money to the economy.


----------



## Calliope (9 July 2010)

Now we know. The ETS (East Timor Solution) was just one of Julia's visions to control irregular people movements, (illegal immigrants) while going forward.

This is a classic in obfuscation;

Michael Smith's interview with Gillard on Brisbane Radio 4BC yesterday.



> GILLARD: I did outline a vision, and the vision was for a regional processing centre, and that is important because it completely undercuts the people-smuggling market.
> 
> Smith: So where will it be?
> 
> ...




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...of-the-timor-sea/story-e6frg6zo-1225889573536


----------



## sails (9 July 2010)

trainspotter said:


> ...I am uninspired by the Labor ideal of borrowing money and placing the Nation in debt to it's eyeballs whoever the leader is. Maybe that is just me being a business man and looking at it from a very simplistic point of view.




I agree with this, TS.  I would be just as concerned if it were the Libs that were so very willing to place our nation in debt to it's eyeballs.  It's nothing personal about a leader...

I think it comes down to party policy rather than the leaders who happen to be there at the time.  Party policy remains despite leadership changes.


----------



## sails (9 July 2010)

explod said:


> Someome has to ballance the absolute right wing bias around here. ...




If right means looking after our country's finances and
left means rapidly increasing national debt ultimately leading to increased future taxes that will hurt "working families",
why would anyone want left?


----------



## bellenuit (9 July 2010)

Knobby22 said:


> True
> 
> I couldn't believe how the ABC kept saying there is massive opposition to the idea in East Timor because there is already high unemployment.
> Of course East Timor would love us to set it up there.
> ...




One of the issues I heard raised is that because East Timor has no social services of any kind, there is huge potential for resentment by the local population if they see the refugees being taken care of but not there own.


----------



## Wysiwyg (9 July 2010)

Calliope said:


> Michael Smith's interview with Gillard on Brisbane Radio 4BC yesterday.




Big tough ex-cop being big and tough on the ladies hey. Interviewer is an arrogant and typical holier-than-thou jerk.


----------



## nunthewiser (9 July 2010)

Wysiwyg said:


> Interviewer is an arrogant and typical holier-than-thou jerk.




Tony Abbott?


----------



## Julia (9 July 2010)

bellenuit said:


> One of the issues I heard raised is that because East Timor has no social services of any kind, there is huge potential for resentment by the local population if they see the refugees being taken care of but not there own.



Yes, even if they see the asylum seekers being housed in new modern buildings that will exacerbate the local people's unhappiness with their own poor housing.

I heard on Radio National today that she says she is also considering using Papua New Guinea.

Maybe the government can build smart new detention centres in every country in the vicinity.  Or maybe buy a cruise ship from P & O.  Some of these supaliners will accommodate many thousands of people.


----------



## Wysiwyg (9 July 2010)

nunthewiser said:


> Tony Abbott?




Never heard of him/her.


----------



## trainspotter (9 July 2010)

Julia said:


> Or maybe buy a cruise ship from P & O.  Some of these supaliners will accommodate many thousands of people.




Not actually a bad idea? A floating processing/detention centre outisde of the International Waters of Australia. Slightly off track here but how is it that they can sneak passed our Intel so easily? Coastwatch, Customs, Navy are all represented in the vicinity but the "irregular people movements" can drive up onto our beaches or simply use a mobile phone to call 000 to come and get them?

On this basis alone I would be concerned for our security. How come no Royal Investigation as to how easy it is to breach our fair country?


----------



## Calliope (9 July 2010)

trainspotter said:


> Not actually a bad idea? A floating processing/detention centre outisde of the International Waters of Australia. Slightly off track here but how is it that they can sneak passed our Intel so easily? Coastwatch, Customs, Navy are all represented in the vicinity but the "irregular people movements" can drive up onto our beaches or simply use a mobile phone to call 000 to come and get them?
> 
> On this basis alone I would be concerned for our security. How come no Royal Investigation as to how easy it is to breach our fair country?




I thought you knew.  Our Border Protection Service is not there to protect borders. They are there to provide an escort and protection service for the boat people. Occasionally some are missed. They get demerits for poor hospitality when this happens.


----------



## sinner (9 July 2010)

trainspotter said:


> I am uninspired by the Labor ideal of borrowing money and placing the Nation in debt to it's eyeballs whoever the leader is. Maybe that is just me being a business man and looking at it from a very simplistic point of view.




Government debt is certainly on an uptick, but under 20% of GDP I feel is manageable/healthy level of debt - especially as Government income from tax decreases at a faster and faster rate. At 10% of GDP it works out to roughly 1% of GDP in yearly repayments (I think) and goes up geometrically from there.

The government is certainly not in "eyeball" territory, not even close. Australian citizens have done a much better job of getting into eyeball debt than the Government they accuse of such:


----------



## trainspotter (9 July 2010)

sinner said:


> Government debt is certainly on an uptick, but under 20% of GDP I feel is manageable/healthy level of debt - especially as Government income from tax decreases at a faster and faster rate. At 10% of GDP it works out to roughly 1% of GDP in yearly repayments (I think) and goes up geometrically from there.
> 
> The government is certainly not in "eyeball" territory, not even close. Australian citizens have done a much better job of getting into eyeball debt than the Government they accuse of such:




Yes sinner it certanly is on an uptick alright ! I am not sure if I can agree with a "healthy level of debt" statement looking back as to where we have come from. YES the economic stimulus was necessary to assist somewhat in the GFC but not to the point of saddling us to the point where the pit pony cannot work anymore. 

The problem with this kind of debt as you so rightly point out is not at "eyeball levels" just yet but it will not be long at this rate. The power of compound interest should not be underestimated.


----------



## sinner (10 July 2010)

trainspotter said:


> Yes sinner it certanly is on an uptick alright ! I am not sure if I can agree with a "healthy level of debt" statement looking back as to where we have come from. YES the economic stimulus was necessary to assist somewhat in the GFC but not to the point of saddling us to the point where the pit pony cannot work anymore.
> 
> The problem with this kind of debt as you so rightly point out is not at "eyeball levels" just yet but it will not be long at this rate. The power of compound interest should not be underestimated.




It is a nice chart but without context there are issues with interpretation. A much better annotation would have been "mining boom begins" and "GFC sets in". The increase in debt is not a political issue, the Liberals quoted a very similar number for their own stimulus package. Please see the charts titled "GDP growth rates" and "Contributions to GDP growth":
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/5206.0

You will see Government debt increase as shown in your chart has successfully contributed to GDP growth as an offset to the private sector productivity and import profits (which constitute the national income) that were taken down quite hard in 2008. 

It is interesting that you frame it as saddling the pit pony, but from my understanding of the 2010-2011 budget there are some tax breaks coming:
* Increase in tax free threshhold by $5000 (to $16000) next FY
* Lower tax on savings (up to $1000/PFY interest)
* Rolling company tax cuts from 2012-2015 for both large (2% over 2 years) and small business (1% over 1 year)


----------



## trainspotter (10 July 2010)

Perhaps we should have this conversation in another thread sinner. This one is about Julia Gillard and our confidence or lack thereof.

Do you want to start a new topic titled "Economic Political Solutions" or "Who is better at handling the econmomy" ? What about "GDP % of household debt"

I will gladly tete a tete in the appropriate format. We can discuss the "macro economics" (Those naughty words again) of the nation there.


----------



## condog (10 July 2010)

Its still the same monkeys pulling the economic puppet strings behind gillard then K rudd. 

Doesnt really inspire any confidence, even though K rudd fell on his RSPT sword, Gillard only manipulated a bad policy enough to get it through.

Her and her monkeys have shown all week, another policy rushed through another blunder. 

That graph by trainspotting says it all. 


No one denies the GFC needed an unprecedented and unusual response, but a shool halls we dont need at four times normal price, doesnt really sit well with me and the electorate. Labour cannot be trusted with our golden years of economic propspity, they have done more damge in one term then can be undone in 5-6 terms of sacrifcie.

Tony is not my first choice of leader, but his hair chest is better then the other monkeys on offer.


----------



## Calliope (11 July 2010)

Those of us who fear a double dip recession should think twice before re-electing a Labor government. As economic managers they are complete amateurs. Their biggest boast is the they got us through the GFC. But that was by indulging in huge wasteful spending programs with Howard's legacy.

If people are struggling now, they should be very afraid for the future;

*Strapped Families Feeling Financial Pain*



> Most voters believe economy still volatile
> Half think Howard is better than Gillard
> Steep decline in spending in marginals
> FAMILIES are hurting more now than at the height of the global financial crisis, revealing they are drastically cutting back on spending because of fears about debt, savings and the Gillard Government's economic management.
> ...





Read more: http://www.news.com.au/money/money-...in/story-e6frfmd9-1225890276039#ixzz0tLiCj03k


----------



## trainspotter (11 July 2010)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qub4lWT6GNk --- You HAVE to watch this ! Very clever.

Without a doubt some of the best "why we vote" propoganda I have seen.


----------



## SusanW (12 July 2010)

Which bits wasn't Gillard involved with? 
And add to the list below, that she was supposed to clean up foreign student education.....but it has been killed on her watch. 


Mark of F ++++++++
· Save the whales – FAIL++++++
· Fuelwatch, $21M – FAIL+++
· Kids Laptops – FAIL+++
· National Broadband Network ($4b-$7B-$43B): To cost about $20,000 a  connection – FAIL+++++++
Mining Super Profit Tax – Share Market and Superannuation values crash –  FAIL +++++++++++++
· Grocery Watch/Choice – dumped $13 million vow – FAIL++
· Federal takeover of hospitals by mid 2009 if no improvement. – EPIC  FAIL+++
· Hospital Reform – just take the money from the States – FAIL+
· Schools Stimulus Infrastructure Program (BEBR - Builders Early  Retirement Fund) – FAIL+++
· Bribe to Free To Air TV Stations – FAIL++
· Refugees: how many boats so far? – FAIL+++++++++
· Refugees suspension backflip – FAIL++++
· 2020 Summit - 1000 B&B; minds, $2+m = 9 usable ideas - EPIC  FAIL+++++++
· Batts in , Batts out – SUPER DUPER 2 BILLION DOLLARS MEGA FAIL++++++
· Kill off Insulation Industry – FAIL+
· Upcoming Huge Budget Deficit – FAIL++++++
· Mining Tax – FAIL++++++++++
· Childcare Centre Building program scrapped – FAIL++
· Carbon emissions reduction - LPG conversion subsidies phased out –  FAIL++
· Carbon emissions reduction (2): household solar rebate axed 9/6 –  FAIL++
· ETS - Greatest Moral Challenge of our Time – FAIL+
· Return Schapelle Corby to Australia – FAIL+++
· Fight inflation genie – Oops GFC – FAIL++++
· Taxes up (gas, diesel,transport, alcopops) – inflationary – FAIL+++++
· Arresting Iranian leaders: stunt – FAIL+
· Bank guarantee - over 200,000 accounts frozen from September 2008. –  FAIL+++
· Cash Splash 1 –borrowed – FAIL
· Cash Splash 2: borrowed $42B – FAIL
· Work Choices/fair work: awards backflips – tourism/food industry  dispensation but farmers will be out of work. –
FAIL+++
· Defence: cut expenditure & build weaponry? – FAIL
· Homeland Security Department – “non-core promise” broken Nov 28, 2007 –  FAIL
· The buck stops with me – so where are you? – FAIL+++++++++++
· Tough Decisions – Ahh never – FAIL+++++++++++++
· Securing Murray/Darling water – FAIL+++++
· IVF: cuts. – FAIL++
· Medicare/private health: rebate same/lie – FAIL+++
· Dental scheme: gone 22.Cataract surgery: costs doubled – FAIL++++++
· Superannuation: government needs it more than us. – FAIL
· Home Savers Grant: fizzer, lack of people saving – FAIL
· First Home Owners grant: lifted, inflating house prices – FAIL
· GP super clinics - $275M. – FAIL++++
· Non-compulsory university union fees: voted down – FAIL
· Worker share options – blunder – FAIL
· Ruddbank – FAIL
· Reduce consultancies by $112 million = increase to $800 million (6354  consultancies) – FAIL
· Govt will pay small business invoices on time = takes a lot longer –  FAIL
· No nuclear Waste Dump NT – election promise – broken June 2008 – FAIL
· $15 million to rural research & development corporations –  election promise – broken May 2008. – FAIL
· A - E reporting on childcare standards & universal pre-school for 4  year olds – election promise – broken June
2009 – FAIL
· ALP Uranium Policy/stance – in tatters. Garrett approves uranium mine.  – FAIL
· Diplomacy – Japan – biggest customer – FAIL+++
India – Uranium contract – FAIL .
· USA – conversations (real/imaginary) released to media. – FAIL
· China, May 2009 – “difficult to deal with” Australia led Asia Pacific  Body – thud. – FAIL
· Boost funding for aboriginal Legal Aid – lie – actuality = cuts to  funding in first budget. – FAIL
· Scale back Intervention – ignored review recommendations. – FAIL
· Homes /renovations for indigenous – not one shovel lifted to date –  FAIL++++
· Digital TV –Conroy, 2008, slash $22m from costs of changeover,  original estimate $16m now to cost $66m –
FAIL
· Cheaper Better Childcare – Govt regulations will see Childcare costs  going up by about $1500pa on July 1,
2010 – FAIL++++++++++
· Internet Filter – FAIL
· Funding Equivalent Hospital Beds – Sorry Kev, can’t sleep in those  equivalent Beds – FAIL++++++
Etc
Etc


----------



## Logique (12 July 2010)

Calliope said:


> If people are struggling now, they should be very afraid for the future;*Strapped Families Feeling Financial Pain*
> Read more: http://www.news.com.au/money/money-...in/story-e6frfmd9-1225890276039#ixzz0tLiCj03k



It gets worse mate:
i) spiralling electricity and gas prices pursuant to re-introduction of ETS/Carbon tax by ALP, backed by Green preferences

ii) Cancellation of private health insurance rebate by ALP with Green preferences,

- the ALP through socialist ideology, the Greens through ideology plus eco-religious fervour.

ALP party-in-a-bubble hacks think everyone has a parliamentary pension with which to pay the gas bill. The Greens as the party of the rich, can afford private health cover, solar panels and higher utilities charges. Their preaching about public health means for you and I - they'll be off to the private hospital for their gall stones thanks very much.


----------



## Macquack (12 July 2010)

SusanW said:


> Which bits wasn't Gillard involved with?
> And add to the list below, that she was supposed to clean up foreign student education.....but it has been killed on her watch.
> 
> 
> ...




You are a hard task mistress, Mrs W. 

Glad I was not in your class with your guaranteed 100% fail rate.

In response, I would like to give you a A+ for being a professional whinger.


----------



## pilots (12 July 2010)

*Re: Does Gallard inspire confidence?*



Macquack said:


> You are a hard task mistress, Mrs W.
> 
> Glad I was not in your class with your guaranteed 100% fail rate.
> 
> In response, I would like to give you a A+ for being a professional whinger.



A professional winger Mrs W may be, but she is telling the whole truth, don't for get we have to pay back what the Dudd has handed out.


----------



## Julia (12 July 2010)

Ms Gillard is looking a little foolish following the East Timor parliament unanimously rejecting Australia's request/suggestion to house would be asylum seekers there.

They join Papua New Guinea's similar decision.

Another example of the rush to make announcements before doing the background work.

Where will they try next? What other countries are possibilities for Ms Gillard to try?

Might be quite funny if all other countries reject the plan and Nauru is all that's left.


----------



## ggkfc (12 July 2010)

we should put them to work  cheap labour!


----------



## Nasser (13 July 2010)

Julia Gilliard’s first interview………..

 TV: “Congratulations Prime Minister. Before we start, as we stand here on Thursday afternoon, do you accept that tomorrow will be Friday?”

 PM: “We have always supported the standard structure of the calendar and acknowledge that the public expect a regular system that provides the rhythm necessary for everyday planning and life structures. We feel very strongly about this.”

 TV: “So you do agree that tomorrow is Friday?”

 PM: “It isn’t important whether it is Friday or Monday. What is important is that unexpected changes don’t interfere with the normal expectations of the public - and this government has a solid record in supporting those expectations.”

 TV: “But as today is Thursday, surely you can confirm that tomorrow is Friday?”

 PM: “Everything is relative and whether the next day is Wednesday or Sunday is dependent on where you stand at the time. We have never challenged the current system and have the full support of the unions on this. Most intelligent people agree that changes are not required.”

 TV: “Well then, what day is tomorrow?”

 PM: “Tomorrow is the next day in our plan to further develop our marvelous country in many areas. We plan to continue providing better health care, reduced debt, reduced unemployment, controlled immigration and to be a world leader in controlling global warming.”

 TV: “Returning to the question, can you not confirm that Friday is tomorrow?”

 PM: “Friday is always around. It has been around many times before and will be around again many more times. Which is why we need - as a responsible government - to plan and organise for the future. Not just for tomorrow, but for our children and their children.

 TV: “Prime Minister, the viewers are waiting for your answer on what day you think tomorrow is?”

 PM: “We are dealing with bigger issues here. The Friday, Saturday, Sunday thing is not important or relevant to the scheme of things. They need to understand the critical issues and focus on the matters of concern, such as the condition of our nation and how we can continue to develop it so that all may reap the benefit.”

 TV: “I’m sorry, we seem to have lost the point here again. Are you saying that it isn’t Friday tomorrow?”

 PM: “The reality is that it is not important what day it is. What is important is how we handle the situation - and my government is handling it with solid policies evolved from the mandate the people gave us.”

 TV: “But we just want to know if you agree that it will be Friday tomorrow?”

 PM: “Let’s remain focused here. It is the nation that is important and we stand fast and rock steady in our dedication to the job in hand. In closing, let me say this one more time – we are fully committed to the task and have commissioned a report that willnable us to develop the plans for the future. Thank you.”

 TV: “Prime Minister?????????????...”


----------



## Calliope (14 July 2010)

"*I'm not ashamed to say I regard Bob Hawke as my role model*," said Prime Minister Julia Gillard.

God help us.

Gillard's role model is an adulterous, fornicating, reckless, boastful booze hound.


----------



## SusanW (14 July 2010)

Macquack said:


> In response, I would like to give you a A+ for being a professional whinger.




Thanks for the compliment, but I fear you are too generous. 

Professional whinging is what Left wing nuts like David Marr and Ramona Koval do when paid by the ABC to bleat about boat people overboard, Nauru, Christmas Island, xenophobic Australians, and heartless conservative politicians who aren't prepared to sting the electorate for providing boat people with $80pp/night motel accommodation, personal trainers, trips to Gold Coast theme parks, mobile phones, computers, and internet access. 

Funny how Marr and Koval are silent when Indian students are being ripped off by dodgey colleges and bashed in Melbourne on the watch of the highly shocked and indignated minister for education, employment, and work place relations who is determined to get to the bottom of it, yours truly Julia.


----------



## Julia (14 July 2010)

Ross Gittins asks some pretty reasonable questions regarding the apparent rush to the election:

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...fore-you-force-us-to-vote-20100713-109ch.html


----------



## noco (14 July 2010)

Julia said:


> Ross Gittins asks some pretty reasonable questions regarding the apparent rush to the election:
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...fore-you-force-us-to-vote-20100713-109ch.html




Great article Julia. Gives one plenty to think about before the next election.


----------



## Calliope (15 July 2010)

SusanW said:


> Thanks for the compliment, but I fear you are too generous.




Good posts SusanW. When you get attacked by the likes of Macquack, you are obviously getting through.


----------



## Logique (15 July 2010)

Thanks, Julia. A perceptive article by Gittins for the most part, but I think he is a bit pollyanna about the national debt, forgetting the relentless growth under the ALP spend-athon.  







> Both sides will express their determination to get the budget into surplus as soon as possible and eliminate our (tiny) public debt post haste, while accusing the other of profligacy.



My local radio station crossed breathlessly yesterday to a Gillard press conference. The announcement was...drum roll...the ALP intends to subsidize school uniforms. 

Here again we see their great vision for the nation. Moving Forward Together. In our subsidized school uniforms.


----------



## drsmith (15 July 2010)

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/pol...-with-kevin-rudd/story-e6frgczf-1225892187371

Someone else obviously had a different view to the contents of that discussion going to the grave. 

The question is who and why ?


----------



## Calliope (15 July 2010)

drsmith said:


> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/pol...-with-kevin-rudd/story-e6frgczf-1225892187371
> 
> Someone else obviously had a different view to the contents of that discussion going to the grave.
> 
> The question is who and why ?




Laurie Oaks almost wiped the self-satisfied smirk off Gillard's face. For a while she stumbled going forward. Oakes is finding it hard to come to terms with Rudd's betrayal. If he is not careful he could get a visit in the small hours of the morning.


----------



## Julia (15 July 2010)

Logique said:


> Thanks, Julia. A perceptive article by Gittins for the most part, but I think he is a bit pollyanna about the national debt, forgetting the relentless growth under the ALP spend-athon.



I agree about the debt, especially since even with several interest rate rises they haven't withdrawn what remains of the stimulus.



> My local radio station crossed breathlessly yesterday to a Gillard press conference. The announcement was...drum roll...the ALP intends to subsidize school uniforms.



Wow, yes, I'm still breathless about this.



> Here again we see their great vision for the nation. Moving Forward Together. In our subsidized school uniforms.



Prediction:  we will be extremely tired of hearing the phrase "Moving Forward Together" long before the election campaign is over.




drsmith said:


> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/pol...-with-kevin-rudd/story-e6frgczf-1225892187371
> 
> Someone else obviously had a different view to the contents of that discussion going to the grave.
> 
> The question is who and why ?



My guess is that this is the first step in Kevin's Revenge.   The only other person in that discussion was John Faulkner and I don't believe he would be leaking anything.

Laurie Oakes would not have brought it up had he not had the direct information from someone who could be quite clear about what did happen.
Oakes is no one's fool.  
Interesting, too, that he's at least showing some objectivity about the government.




Calliope said:


> Laurie Oaks almost wiped the self-satisfied smirk off Gillard's face. For a while she stumbled going forward. Oakes is finding it hard to come to terms with Rudd's betrayal. If he is not careful he could get a visit in the small hours of the morning.



I heard the radio version of the episode.  Ms Gillard sounded decidedly unsure of herself momentarily.
Her self righteous protestation that she would never betray the confidence of what took place that night sounds all very fine.  If it transpired as Mr Oakes has suggested, then she is hardly likely to land herself in it by agreeing that it was so.  Much easier to hide under the cloak of maintaining confidentiality.

It's an ominous sign of the mischief Kev may well make if he becomes a Minister in the new Gillard government.


----------



## kgee (16 July 2010)

It all seem's so shakespareian. K.Rudd playing Mr nice guy....
"Julia I'll give you the leadership... lets just see how things poll"
julia
"Yes darling I think thats for the best"
she confers with brutus...the senate says "take the power now"
oh our heroine is on a pecipitace (bad spaelling)

I'm sure we give these people too much credence the cliche's are absurb
Napolean was a midget meglomaniac...but at least he liked science
A ranga female ...God knows what she has to prove
but it will be profound


yeah yeah I know Germany has a female ranga priminster/president...but they have a sado masochistic bent that goes back ages...
All I'm saying is we all picked on Ranga's at school....dont let them get all karma on us


----------



## Calliope (16 July 2010)

Red is Gillard's  favorite colour. There will always be blood on her hands. In the not too distant future some of the blood on the floor may be hers. One thing is for certain. Rudd will get his revenge. He is a man who never forgets or forgives.

The Labor power brokers are busily plotting how they can neutralise him.


----------



## explod (16 July 2010)

The sour grapes and exagerated rubbish on this thread amazes me.

Rudd lost the confidence of the people, the parliament, the government and the ALP; he was a dead duck.

Why would Gillard wait and be nice if the end result was going to be the same anyway.  Rudd, pusy footy "lets wait for the Polls".  Struth lets get real.

Costello hung out for years on an indicated promise from Howard and look where that got him.  I betcha a heap of you spouting now wished that he had had the numbers and the gumption to topple lil ole Johnny some reasonalbe time before that last Federal election.

And if we go back in history there have been many such spills of leadership.  Thats just political life, its the real big stuff, not for whimps.

Gillard just happened to be in the right place at the right time and now she is batting.   No doubt she will be bowled or caught at some time in the future but those are the facts and we need to get over the trivialities and move on.

I have very confidence due to the support she seems to have that she will bat for sometime and who knows may even get a few runs for the team. 

But by hook, crook, foul or good means she will also get bowled out one day too.


----------



## trainspotter (16 July 2010)

I think it was the precision and the expeditiousness that the encumbent PM was toppled that startled the proletariat. The animosity between Deputy and Leaders has been well documented in previous takeover bids and is usually a long smoldering behind closed doors contest whilst numbers are gathered.

I think the same thing happened to Turnbull but that did not count as he was in opposition at the time.


----------



## Mofra (16 July 2010)

explod said:


> The sour grapes and exagerated rubbish on this thread amazes me.
> 
> Rudd lost the confidence of the people, the parliament, the government and the ALP; he was a dead duck.
> 
> ...



Have to agree with this - seamless political leadership transformations are not really a commonplace event in Australian politics. Turnbull was knifed when his position on the ETS put him at odds with the party, Rudd was knifed because his lack of consultation with the caucus meant he had to shoulder the bulk of responsibility for the multitude of mistakes made since late 07.

As much as I think Costello would have made a good PM, Gillard at least had the intestinal fortitude to stand up and take the leadership when it was hers for the taking - arguably months later than she could have taken it anyway.


----------



## Calliope (16 July 2010)

explod said:


> The sour grapes and exagerated rubbish on this thread amazes me.




Never mind, you will get over it. Just continue to follow the party line. You are very adaptable. It used to upset you when it was Rudd who was rubbished  on the confidence threads.

Ms Gillard wants you to look forward. It is appropriate that that you regard Rudd's assassination as a "triviality".


----------



## explod (16 July 2010)

Calliope said:


> Never mind, you will get over it. Just continue to follow the party line. You are very adaptable. It used to upset you when it was Rudd who was rubbished  on the confidence threads.
> 
> Ms Gillard wants you to look forward. It is appropriate that that you regard Rudd's assassination as a "triviality".




Not sure about that ole Pal, Bob Brown is my idol in parliament and has been for years.   It was just that Rudd (the ALP) was bettter from a social/philosophic angle than the Libs.

And the tone of the thread would indicate others are having a much harder time than this black duck.

The whole thread in my view is a waste of effort and so, as you wish, will move on along as I am over it.

Still reckon she is inspirational compared to the long past.


----------



## trainspotter (16 July 2010)

PM Gillard has so far managed to U-Turn on many hasty decisions without copping any sort of blame or being perceived as a backflip. The media is still cautious on this teflon coated, fanta pants, atheist of a PM we have been thrust upon by the faceless men of the Labor Party. Bring on the election.


----------



## drsmith (16 July 2010)

explod said:


> The sour grapes and exagerated rubbish on this thread amazes me.
> 
> Rudd lost the confidence of the people, the parliament, the government and the ALP; he was a dead duck.
> 
> ...



A bigger issue is whether a political party in power feels it can paint over its mistakes by changing leaders. This is not a recipe for good government.


----------



## explod (16 July 2010)

drsmith said:


> A bigger issue is whether a political party in power feels it can paint over its mistakes by changing leaders. This is not a recipe for good government.




Well of course they can't.  But only a fool keeps belting his head against the wall, if its' not working, you have to ditch or change it.  As investor/traders we know it well.

But for Gillard, if I was not so old and useless I could go for her, 

"don't you worry about that"


----------



## drsmith (16 July 2010)

The question though is what have they really changed ?


----------



## Calliope (16 July 2010)

explod said:


> And the tone of the thread would indicate others are having a much harder time than this black duck.




Not me. I'm enjoying every bit of the various Labor leaders' nasty twists and turns.


----------



## explod (16 July 2010)

Calliope said:


> Not me. I'm enjoying every bit of the various Labor leaders' nasty twists and turns.




As I am enjoying the nasty, "cant take it", comments of the right wing on this thread.  Umpy has blown the whistle.

Remember. the real umpires are the wealthy and the powerfull, the rest of us, and our views for that matter, are not worth a thrup'ny dime.  To wit, the big miners over ALP policy.


----------



## Calliope (16 July 2010)

explod said:


> Remember. the real umpires are the wealthy and the powerfull, the rest of us, and our views for that matter, are not worth a thrup'ny dime.




I wouldn't say that. The Greens, whose leader is your idol, are a party of the rich. But you are right, they couldn't give a toss about the workers' views.


----------



## wayneL (16 July 2010)

explod said:


> As I am enjoying the nasty, "cant take it", comments of the right wing on this thread.  Umpy has blown the whistle.
> 
> Remember. the real umpires are the wealthy and the powerfull, the rest of us, and our views for that matter, are not worth a thrup'ny dime.  To wit, the big miners over ALP policy.




Right wing, left wing.... pfffft.

These are the redundant descriptions of those trapped in political tribalism. True political intelligence requires looking past these obsolete terms and to proper descriptions of political ideology. The British National Party, long tagged as the extreme right, are actually very socially democratic with the added dimension of addressing race in various policies. The old left/right paradigm is inappropriate.

Julia Dullard herself has apparently traversed the outdated spectrum in pursuit of popularity/electability.

The purported "right wing" are nothing more than liberal (in the true sense of the word) pragmatists who understand the poison that is social democracy.


----------



## Southern X (16 July 2010)

Does your vote count?

No.

SX


----------



## Julia (16 July 2010)

Southern X said:


> Does your vote count?
> 
> No.
> 
> SX



Perhaps you could explain why?   It is the collective votes of every individual Australian that determine the result, so some clarification of your suggestion would be appreciated.


----------



## billGhah (16 July 2010)

Great song cover that sums the situation up:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZ70opdCazI

It's a parody of The Herd's 2007 song The King is Dead


----------



## noirua (17 July 2010)

Yes! All a bit of a Swansong really as he is due to be booted into the long-grass after the election.
Mrs Thatcher, sorry, Ms Gillard is going to stamp her authority on this big-time. In due course, like Mrs Thatcher, she wont be able to change, not for turning, on her own policies that is.
Far off South Australia may think they'll get something out of this, I doubt it, it's Gillard who will.


----------



## jbocker (18 July 2010)

Julia said:


> Ms Gillard is looking a little foolish following the East Timor parliament unanimously rejecting Australia's request/suggestion to house would be asylum seekers there.
> 
> They join Papua New Guinea's similar decision.
> 
> ...




What will they try next?? Call an election as soon as you can because Gillard does not have an answer.
I have noticed a pronounced stop in the bleats about "you vote for the party not the leader of the party" soooo why didnt we stick with Krudd as PM? The answer appears to me that Krudd is made a scape goat for the rest of the party, and changing the facade (to Gillard) is a way to con the voters using an old trusted Aussie maxim to "give her a chance" and thus save the party.

Nice ploy, and will probably get away with it.


----------



## Logique (18 July 2010)

Gillard talking 'spendathon' yesterday, so the ALP spin-meisters are even pinching our material. 

News this morning that Labor is ahead after preferences. NSW voters will have the feeling of dread.  We knew what was coming when NSW Labor got back last time. It's a sinking feeling. The NSW Labor leader only has to satisfy the factional heads and union bosses. NSW is now the laughing stock of the federation. 

There's no guarantee that Gillard will be there next time anyway. She'll have to watch her back the minute the polls dip.  I'd say the factional heads would be looking to the likes of Shorten, Combet, and Robertson.


----------



## Happy (21 July 2010)

jbocker said:


> ..."you vote for the party not the leader of the party" soooo why didnt we stick with Krudd as PM? The answer appears to me that Krudd is made a scape goat for the rest of the party, and *changing the facade *(to Gillard) is a way to con the voters using an old trusted Aussie maxim to "give her a chance" and thus save the party.
> 
> Nice ploy, and will probably get away with it.





Exactly, same machine behind new facade!


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (23 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*

I believe that Gillard practices hypnotism en masse. 

She goes on in a monotone sprouting all sorts of bull****, and stares.

And everyone just listens, and then at the end she disarticulates her nose and stares anew with a fixed smile.

Then yer awake and can't remember what happened. 

Poor bloody Rudd he didn't have a chance against that sort of mooja.

Its eerie, but now that I've worked it out I'll close my eyes when she speaks, even if its on radio.

gg


----------



## Calliope (23 July 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> I believe that Gillard practices hypnotism en masse.
> gg




I believe that snakes do this with their prey. She certainly has a reptilian look about her with the long neck and long nose. She also speaks with a forked tongue. You are wise to close your eyes to resist the spell.


----------



## trainspotter (27 July 2010)

I found this amusing ....... Don't know why?


----------



## Calliope (28 July 2010)

Well she does inspire confidence in me that any initiative she comes up with will open the doors for rorters. Brace yourself for the* clunker rorters.*



> *THE biggest question to ask about Julia Gillard's plan to give people $2000 for trading in their old bombs for newer, more fuel-efficient cars is: Who will be the first to rort it and how will they do it?
> 
> A second is whether this expensive vow will serve any useful purpose except appealing to voters with crummy cars?
> 
> ...



.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...eady-for-rorting/story-e6frerdf-1225897629707


----------



## explod (28 July 2010)

trainspotter said:


> I found this amusing ....... Don't know why?




Give you a clue, if you go by the rear end it is dark and you cannot hear or see anything.

JMVHO of course.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (28 July 2010)

trainspotter said:


> I found this amusing ....... Don't know why?



There is a book called Liberal Fascism which talks about that very topic.


----------



## trainspotter (28 July 2010)

explod said:


> Give you a clue, if you go by the rear end it is dark and you cannot hear or see anything.
> 
> JMVHO of course.




Please explain? *in my best Pauline Hanson voice*


----------



## explod (28 July 2010)

trainspotter said:


> Please explain? *in my best Pauline Hanson voice*




Lost my way really, so cant' explain.

Too deep.

Pauline though looked nice back in her fish n chip cooking days, take away the political and we are left with nice ladies all round.

Political arguments should have nothing to do with the individual in my view and is why threads like this lose their way.

I do not believe there are any reasonable comparisons for Gillard and those upset at her lifestyle are cheap sexists, and one could go on adinfanitum if you could be botherered.


----------



## trainspotter (28 July 2010)

explod said:


> Lost my way really, so cant' explain.
> 
> Too deep.
> 
> ...




OH ! No explanation ? That is a shame. I was looking forward to your valued input into my rear end POV. Never mind.

I find it interesting that you say "political arguments should have nothing to do with the individual" then you go on to say that Pauline Hanson looked nice when she was slinging fish n chips? Bit Freudian explod?

Who is upset with Gillards lifestyle explod? Define "those upset" for me.

Does Gillard inspire confidence ? Yes ... as a successful and intelligent woman as well as an obviously skilled politician she has the kudos thus far. To govern this country under Labor and the waste of money for another term then ....... NO.

I still like the pearl necklace she has worn during the campaign. Pity the earrings don't match. Might have to talk to her PR people about this.


----------



## trainspotter (28 July 2010)

At least someone has a sense of humour !


----------



## moXJO (28 July 2010)

trainspotter said:


> I still like the pearl necklace she has worn during the campaign. .




Easy mistake to make TSpot. They were actually Kevin Rudd's nads worn trophy style.


----------



## trainspotter (28 July 2010)

moXJO said:


> Easy mistake to make TSpot. They were actually Kevin Rudd's nads worn trophy style.




PMSL ......... now that you mention it the items in question do have a similar spherical shape ! :22_yikes:


----------



## Calliope (28 July 2010)

If you have 20 minutes to spare to listen to Alan Jones's  interview with Gillard, any confidence you may have in her will disappear. She will not answer any questions but followed the Cheat Sheet. You will need a strong stomach otherwise you may throw up.

http://www.2gb.com/index2.php?option=com_newsmanager&task=view&id=6672


----------



## sam76 (28 July 2010)

I just pity the poor fella who gave her the pearl necklace...


----------



## sam76 (28 July 2010)

Does this pose inspire confidence?

personally, it makes me feel ill.


----------



## Mofra (28 July 2010)

trainspotter said:


> Does Gillard inspire confidence ? Yes ... as a successful and intelligent woman as well as an obviously skilled politician she has the kudos thus far. To govern this country under Labor and the waste of money for another term then ....... NO.



^ This actually illustrates a conundrum I should imagine is quite common amongst the voting poublic.


----------



## DocK (28 July 2010)

Mofra said:


> ^ This actually illustrates a conundrum I should imagine is quite common amongst the voting poublic.




Certainly applies to me.  I prefer Gillard as a person, and think she articulates well, but prefer her opposition's policies.  Neither would-be Prime Minister inspires me, but I can't help finding Abbott a bit creepy.  Wish Costello had had the guts to overthrow Howard prior to last election- we may have ended up with the "Abbott & Costello" show, but if Costello was PM I think that could have worked.  

For the first time in many years I don't really want to vote for anyone or any party - for me it's a question of who is least likely to stuff it up until a "real leader" emerges.  As a small business owner I'm also finding myself increasingly confused about which party is likely to benefit me the most (or hurt me the least!).  Seems neither party really knows what it stands for any more??


----------



## nioka (28 July 2010)

DocK said:


> For the first time in many years I don't really want to vote for anyone or any party - for me it's a question of who is least likely to stuff it up until a "real leader" emerges.  As a small business owner I'm also finding myself increasingly confused about which party is likely to benefit me the most (or hurt me the least!).  Seems neither party really knows what it stands for any more??




Exactly the way I have felt. However the longer this goes on the more that Gillard grates on me and the more I see disunity in labor. I seem to detest Abbott a little less so I am swinging towards voting for the local Nat who seems genuine, is a new face and acting "fair dinkum". However a way to go yet, I'm still on the swing. 

If only everyone would put the sitting member LAST we could start off fresh.


----------



## derty (28 July 2010)

DocK said:


> For the first time in many years I don't really want to vote for anyone or any party - for me it's a question of who is least likely to stuff it up until a "real leader" emerges.  As a small business owner I'm also finding myself increasingly confused about which party is likely to benefit me the most (or hurt me the least!).  Seems neither party really knows what it stands for any more??



I'm still in this boat too. I can't see myself voting for anyone really, I just need to workout who I am going to vote against.


----------



## Macquack (28 July 2010)

Calliope said:


> If you have 20 minutes to spare to listen to Alan Jones's  interview with Gillard, any confidence you may have in her will disappear. She will not answer any questions but followed the Cheat Sheet. *You will need a strong stomach otherwise you may throw up*.
> 
> http://www.2gb.com/index2.php?option=com_newsmanager&task=view&id=6672




You are right Calliope, the sound of Alan Jone's effeminate voice is enough to make me want to throw up.

Who listens to that biased liberal party **** sucker anyway?


----------



## noco (28 July 2010)

Macquack said:


> You are right Calliope, the sound of Alan Jone's effeminate voice is enough to make me want to throw up.
> 
> Who listens to that biased liberal party **** sucker anyway?




A hell of alot more than you could imagine!

Alan Jones should be leader of the Coaltition. He absolutely made 'mince meat' of Joolya. He really had her knickers in a knot and giggle, giggle she tried to spin her way out once again, except this time it didn't work and the likes of you Macquack didn't like it either with your obscene remark of Jones.


----------



## wayneL (29 July 2010)

Macquack said:


> You are right Calliope, the sound of Alan Jone's effeminate voice is enough to make me want to throw up.
> 
> Who listens to that biased liberal party <delete>  anyway?




How dare he impinge on the Labor Party territory of biased media! The nerve of that man! :


----------



## Timmy (29 July 2010)

Macquack said:


> Who listens to that biased liberal party **** sucker anyway?




Some thoughts on the these types of audiences:



> Shelley worked closely with conservative Milwaukee talk-show host Charlie Sykes at WTMJ, one of the most successful news/talk-radio stations in the US. He says talk-show hosts are popular and powerful because they appeal to a segment of the population that feels disenfranchised.
> 
> "To succeed, a talk-show host must perpetuate the notion that his or her listeners are victims and the host is the vehicle by which they can become empowered," Shelley says. ...
> 
> ...




http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment...ch-for-the-next-alan-jones-20100705-zwmx.html


----------



## moXJO (29 July 2010)

DocK said:


> As a small business owner I'm also finding myself increasingly confused about which party is likely to benefit me the most (or hurt me the least!).  Seems neither party really knows what it stands for any more??




This hits home with me as well. There is not much small business love coming from either party.


----------



## Logique (29 July 2010)

Calliope said:


> Brace yourself for the* clunker rorters.*http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...eady-for-rorting/story-e6frerdf-1225897629707



Indeed Calliope. What annoys me about this proposed ALP policy is the inherent social inequity built into it. 

Teenagers, and students looking for their first car, or pensioners looking for a cost efficient replacement car - tough luck folks, because those $900 dollar cars (and don't tell me they're not out there, because I've seen them), perfectly adequate for getting to Woolies and back, or to college and back - well now they're going to be worth minimum $2000 via rebate from the govt.

It must have been decided that the narrow demographic slice called 'working families', already fat on government handouts, wouldn't be affected by the policy, so that makes it alright.



> Just think, a bucket of nearly $400 million of Government money placed in the vicinity of people trading in used cars.



Due respect to car dealers, but that's a funny line.


----------



## Calliope (29 July 2010)

Macquack said:


> You are right Calliope, the sound of Alan Jone's effeminate voice is enough to make me want to throw up.
> 
> Who listens to that biased liberal party **** sucker anyway?




It takes one to know one..


----------



## trainspotter (29 July 2010)

"Who listens to that biased liberal party **** sucker anyway?" - Macquack

Did you mean "cork soaker" per chance? As in .... he who likes to soak the corks?


----------



## trainspotter (29 July 2010)

JULIA Gillard has laid down the law to senior members of the Labor party, warning she would sack any minister who leaked in a future Labor government.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ers-ill-sack-you/story-fn59niix-1225898443420

OH OH ! Doth that sound liketh a shrew being tamed?


----------



## Julia (29 July 2010)

I'd say she should be worrying a bit less about future leaks should she be re-elected, and more about the source of the present leaks.

The Chasers had a pretty good piece on this (quasi labelling Kevin Rudd) last night.


----------



## Calliope (2 August 2010)

Gillard said;  

" I would say to Kevin and his family we are all hoping, wishing, praying for a speedy recovery."

I wonder what, or who she prays to?  Was Kevin's minor procedure worth all that  hoping, wishing and praying?  A bit overdone I'd say.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...-in-the-trenches/story-e6frg6zo-1225899727962


----------



## trainspotter (2 August 2010)

Rudd to have operation on his gall bladder? The gall of the man ! Ahem ... the gall bladders job in the body is to store bile created by the liver. I reckon with the amount of bile Kruddy will have stored up after his axing he would need this organ about now !


----------



## Julia (2 August 2010)

There was a report on Radio National today that Therese Rein has said she will be encouraging Kevin to make a full recovery before returning to work.  She expected this would take at least two weeks following his discharge from hospital.  That pretty much takes him right up to the election date.

He continued campaigning for the rest of the day after the dodgy gall bladder had been diagnosed so it would appear the acute attack had subsided.

  I'm probably being fanciful, but can't help wondering if this little event is actually, um, heaven sent to save him from himself, and the  embarrassment of having to appear to be attempting to support Julia Gillard?


----------



## noco (3 August 2010)

Julia said:


> There was a report on Radio National today that Therese Rein has said she will be encouraging Kevin to make a full recovery before returning to work.  She expected this would take at least two weeks following his discharge from hospital.  That pretty much takes him right up to the election date.
> 
> He continued campaigning for the rest of the day after the dodgy gall bladder had been diagnosed so it would appear the acute attack had subsided.
> 
> I'm probably being fanciful, but can't help wondering if this little event is actually, um, heaven sent to save him from himself, and the  embarrassment of having to appear to be attempting to support Julia Gillard?




Julia, Rudd's op was by key hole surgery and in most cases a band aid is place over the holes; no stitches required. My wife had her appendixs out with keyhole surgery, was home the next day and back at work a week later.
Yes, as you say, it may have been a way out of not having to  campaign for Julia Gillard.


----------



## Calliope (3 August 2010)

Rudd is now caught between a rock and a hard place. He would dearly like to see Gillard thrashed in the election. If this happened then he would expect the faceless men to offer him the leader's job back.  

But to have to face a gloating Abbott across the Despatch Box would destroy his massive ego. 

I think he will now work towards (or at least not impede) Gillards re-election. He can then white-ant her from within the cabinet.

All the signs now point to Tanner as being Oakes's mole.

Rudd is now entering the third stage on handling grief/loss...the *bargaining * stage.


----------



## Julia (3 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> All the signs now point to Tanner as being Oakes's mole.



Do they?  Can you say what these signs are?   Lindsay Tanner has never come across as vengeful in the way Kevin Rudd does.  I'm a bit surprised to think he'd be the leaker.
Could it even have been one of Mr Rudd's children?  He would presumably have gone  home and talked about most of what happened in cabinet.


----------



## Mofra (3 August 2010)

Julia said:


> Do they?  Can you say what these signs are?   Lindsay Tanner has never come across as vengeful in the way Kevin Rudd does.  I'm a bit surprised to think he'd be the leaker.



Tanner is an out and out Rudd supporter though, and has nothing to lose by leaking considering he is leaving parliament.


----------



## awg (3 August 2010)

3 things

1) If you believe that physical illness can be at least partially linked at an intrinsic level to pychosomatic manifestation of psychological ailment, then Rudd having a faulty gall bladder is ironic.

2) Abbot will get the "family" vote, if there is such a thing..chalk and cheese between the two

3) She aint no redhead afaic, as I saw a childhood pic and she had ordinary dark brown hair, not auburn, carrot, ranga, bunsen or red.

ps I wonder what Terese Raine thinks about Julia, being a smart woman of business with many contacts, it wouldnt surprise me at all if she was the leaker


----------



## Calliope (3 August 2010)

Mofra said:


> Tanner is an out and out Rudd supporter though, and has nothing to lose by leaking considering he is leaving parliament.




It is common knowledge that Tanner's early departure was triggered by Gillard's ascendancy. It is also common knowledge that he and Gillard can't stand a bar of each other.

He was also probably fed up with the nauseating Swan, knowing that he would have done a better job. Rudd had to give the Treasury to Swan, against his better judgment, for his his help in betraying Beasley.

Latham said Rudd and Swan couldn't stand each other either. Politics makes strange bed fellows.


----------



## noco (3 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> It is common knowledge that Tanner's early departure was triggered by Gillard's ascendancy. It is also common knowledge that he and Gillard can't stand a bar of each other.
> 
> He was also probably fed up with the nauseating Swan, knowing that he would have done a better job. Rudd had to give the Treasury to Swan, against his better judgment, for his his help in betraying Beasley.
> 
> Latham said Rudd and Swan couldn't stand each other either. Politics makes strange bed fellows.




Swan had that much dirt on Rudd from Queensland state Government days that Rudd had to appoint him as Treasurer. Rudd would dearly liked  to have  got rid of Swan, but was too scared.


----------



## awg (3 August 2010)

noco said:


> Swan had that much dirt on Rudd from Queensland state Government days that Rudd had to appoint him as Treasurer. Rudd would dearly liked  to have  got rid of Swan, but was too scared.




Machievelli would suggest Swan is the leaker then, help destroy Rudd, knowing this might take out Tanner, then hope Gillard loses and blows up, then Swan can arise from the wreckage and pick up the pieces:


----------



## Calliope (3 August 2010)

awg said:


> Machievelli would suggest Swan is the leaker then, help destroy Rudd, knowing this might take out Tanner, then hope Gillard loses and blows up, then Swan can arise from the wreckage and pick up the pieces:




No. Swan is not a leader. He is the one who hands the stiletto to the assassin. In Beasley's removal he got the Treasury. In Rudd's betrayal he got Deputy Leader added on.

If he is true to form he will help Shorten dispose of Gillard, when her time is up.


----------



## Julia (3 August 2010)

Some interesting hypotheses so far.  I wonder if we'll ever know.

Bill Shorten is frequently referred to as the next leader.  He doesn't seem like leadership material to me.  Why would he be considered the most likely?
He doesn't have any real presence or charisma, is quite hesitant in discussion, and makes me think of a back office clerk.


----------



## Calliope (4 August 2010)

Julia said:


> Some interesting hypotheses so far.  I wonder if we'll ever know.
> 
> Bill Shorten is frequently referred to as the next leader.  He doesn't seem like leadership material to me.  Why would he be considered the most likely?
> He doesn't have any real presence or charisma, is quite hesitant in discussion, and makes me think of a back office clerk.




He was the leader of the gang which assassinated Rudd and put Gillard in the job. The rest of the gang are Feeney, Arbib, Bitar, Marles, Farrell, Ludwig and Howes. Most of these are unknown to the general public but they decide on the leader.

Most think Senator Mark Arbib was the head plotter and power broker but Shorten  was manipulating Gillard in the Reps. Don't underestimate the villainy of Bill Shorten. Herr Himmler also had no charisma and was nondescript.



> Fast forward to the events of nearly five weeks ago in Canberra, when Rudd fell to Julia Gillard. Arbib, a senator and a junior minister in Rudd's government, was again at the centre of the action, rustling up numbers for the coup.
> 
> His was not the only hand holding a knife, of course. Other chieftains from Labor's right - particularly Bill Shorten, David Feeney, and Don Farrell - were prime movers. And Rudd's autocratic style had left him ripe for the toppling. Nevertheless, Arbib's role in Rudd's downfall was ''pre-eminent'', according to one of Arbib's mates, Senator Glenn Sterle, from Western Australia.
> 
> ''Let's make no mistake: Mark put Kevin here [as leader] in the first place, which is why to take him out was a bloody big call,'' the plain-spoken former truckie says. ''It's like taking your granddad out.''




http://www.smh.com.au/federal-election/in-richos-footsteps-labors-new-mr-fixit-20100729-10y5j.html


----------



## noco (4 August 2010)

Has anybody spotted the difference between Joolya last week to Joolya this week?

If you quack like a duck today, I guess your quack will be the same tomorrow irrespect of whether you have lost some of your feathers or not.

I reckon she'll be a dead duck come election time as the pundits are expecting a bombshell of a leak in the last week.


----------



## Calliope (4 August 2010)

noco said:


> Has anybody spotted the difference between Joolya last week to Joolya this week?




She was no different with Kerry O'Brien last night. She was still using her girlish charm and throaty chuckle.

Kerry on the other hand *was* different and didn't succumb to her wiles. He honed in on the ridiculous Citizens Forum, which she still defends even though it was an old FAKE Julia thought bubble.

I think O'Brien senses she is a loser. It will be interesting to see how he goes with Abbott.


----------



## Julia (4 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> She was no different with Kerry O'Brien last night. She was still using her girlish charm and throaty chuckle.
> 
> Kerry on the other hand *was* different and didn't succumb to her wiles.



I thought so too.   And it quite throws Ms Gillard off balance when she realises her charm act just isn't cutting it.

The real Julia?   I may be quite wrong, but I suspect her waffling on over the last few days about how she's going to throw out the rule book and let the Australian people see the real Julia has just confused most people.

Inevitably there's going to be the conclusion drawn that prior to the 'real Julia' daringly being put on show, what we were seeing before was some sort of machine driven cardboard cutout.


----------



## Calliope (4 August 2010)

Julia said:


> Inevitably there's going to be the conclusion drawn that prior to the 'real Julia' daringly being put on show, what we were seeing before was some sort of machine driven cardboard cutout.




All is now revealed. It appears that the used car dealers were so pleased with her Cash for Clunkers initiative that they gave her a can of their secret New Car Smell spray.


----------



## explod (4 August 2010)

On Kerry O'Brien last night, every time Julia began to make inroads on her replies he talked over the top of her many times, cut her off a number of times and did not let her complete replies.  He was agressive and extremerly rude.  Never acted like that when interviewing little Johnny, or krudd for that matter.

The tone of this thread is little more than spitefull sour grapes and with O'Brien and that Laurie Oakes, who was seething with rage following the debate, there is no doubt that the chauvinists are finding it difficult to be objective.

Anyway, will be interesting to see how we go with a Catholic Prime Minister, does not inspire me too much.

In this case have much more confidence in the petticoat.

Gillard inspires me, she is certainly setting things on fire and creating rages.


----------



## Calliope (4 August 2010)

explod said:


> On Kerry O'Brien last night, every time Julia began to make inroads on her replies he talked over the top of her many times, cut her off a number of times and did not let her complete replies.




That's because she wasn't answering the question. Do you know what an interview is?  You get asked questions and you answer them, you don't trot out prepared spin about your opponent.


----------



## explod (4 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> That's because she wasn't answering the question. Do you know what an interview is?  You get asked questions and you answer them, you don't trot out prepared spin about your opponent.




Actually she was on topic in answers and as O'Brien could see she was handling it well he jumped on it, time and again.

And on that Little Johnny was an expert in answering a question not asked with the one liner he wanted to get across at the total exasperation of respective jounalists.

Of course when you are blinkered you will oniy see as you wish.  If you recorded the interview its well worth playing back, always clearer the second time.

She is great.


----------



## explod (4 August 2010)

noco said:


> Has anybody spotted the difference between Joolya last week to Joolya this week?
> 
> If you quack like a duck today, I guess your quack will be the same tomorrow irrespect of whether you have lost some of your feathers or not.
> 
> I reckon she'll be a dead duck come election time as the pundits are expecting a bombshell of a leak in the last week.




So who would be the spiteful one in this, the *lovely Krudd that you all adore *and say should not have been toppled.

Spare me the bias and give some intelligence to the debate.


----------



## Calliope (4 August 2010)

explod said:


> So who would be the spiteful one in this, the *lovely Krudd that you all adore *and say should not have been toppled.




I thought you *adored the lovely Senator Brown.* Don't tell me you're deserting him for the new Gillard. You are so fickle. Or don't you care as long as they are lefties.


----------



## drsmith (4 August 2010)

explod said:


> Actually she was on topic in answers and as O'Brien could see she was handling it well he jumped on it, time and again.



I thought it was a good interview by Kerry O'Brien. No change in Julia's style there.



explod said:


> Of course when you are blinkered you will oniy see as you wish.






explod said:


> She is great.


----------



## moXJO (4 August 2010)

explod said:


> On Kerry O'Brien last night, every time Julia began to make inroads on her replies he talked over the top of her many times, cut her off a number of times and did not let her complete replies.  He was agressive and extremerly rude.  Never acted like that when interviewing little Johnny, or krudd for that matter.
> 
> The tone of this thread is little more than spitefull sour grapes and with O'Brien and that Laurie Oakes, who was seething with rage following the debate, there is no doubt that the chauvinists are finding it difficult to be objective.
> 
> ...




This guy feels your pain


----------



## noco (4 August 2010)

explod said:


> So who would be the spiteful one in this, the *lovely Krudd that you all adore *and say should not have been toppled.
> 
> Spare me the bias and give some intelligence to the debate.




Any intellectual person would have no difficulty in determining how inefficent our unelected Prime Minister is when you examine her record under the now assassinated duely elected Prime Minister  Kevin Rudd on the BER scheme debacle, the waste of tax payers money, the rorts that were allowed and the over budget spending.

One would only have to examine her record in the past 6 weeks with the gaffe on the Miners RSPT, which I might add is still far from being finalised, the stupity of claiming she would set up an off shore detention centre in East Timor without talking to the Prime Minister of that Country and the setting of a 150 person forum to tell her whether she should act on an ETS. And if her hand picked forum votes in favour, she will say she has overwhelming support from the Australian people or is this just a delaying tactic not to make a decision before the election. She just does not have any policy at all.

Anyone would give her a big "D" for dunce.

OMG how can anyone be inspired with this woman "MOVING FORWARD DOWN THE GURGLER". She should be telling people, " I'm the new PIED PIPER, (the new Julia Gillard) FOLLOW ME TO THE RIVER WHERE YOU CAN ALL DROWN".


----------



## Macquack (4 August 2010)

Leave Tony Alone



This guy is a dead ringer for the mad monk.


----------



## explod (4 August 2010)

noco said:


> Anyone would give her a big "D" for dunce.
> 
> OMG how can anyone be inspired with this woman ".




You just have to get your *D's* there noco, it means *delectable* 

And if you cant see Julia as nice you are either under 50 years of age or all spired out.

So frustrating for you Liberals.  He he he.

You are all letting her nut ya


----------



## noco (4 August 2010)

Macquack said:


> Leave Tony Alone
> 
> 
> 
> This guy is a dead ringer for the mad monk.





Macquack, you have sick mind. Perhaps you need some some psychiatric help.

This thread is about whether Julia Gillard is capable of Governing this country of ours in the right direction and to date she has not shown too much promise based on her record.

Get back on track Macquack or stay off the thread if don't have some intelligent input.


----------



## Julia (4 August 2010)

> Gillard inspires me, she is certainly setting things on fire and creating rages.



Is she?  Most of the commentary I've seen is to do with how boring the whole campaign is.  




Calliope said:


> That's because she wasn't answering the question. Do you know what an interview is?  You get asked questions and you answer them, you don't trot out prepared spin about your opponent.






explod said:


> Actually she was on topic in answers and as O'Brien could see she was handling it well he jumped on it, time and again.



Oh Explod, how our existing bias allows us to see what we wish to.
Kerry O'Brien imo was not rude at all, but what he was doing was attempting to get her to actually answer his questions rather than allow her to deflect off into her usual recitation of spin.  Even despite his best attempts, she managed not to answer most of his questions.



> She is great.



The polls indicate that approximately half the electorate disagree with you.
You think she is great.   I have no idea why, but you're absolutely entitled to that view.



explod said:


> And if you cant see Julia as nice you are either under 50 years of age or all spired out.



Now, explod, I'm going to quite politely take exception to the above.
I don't think it's at all reasonable to suggest that those of us who don't happen to agree with your unquestioning adoration of Ms Gillard don't have a view which is, like your own, simply a valid opinion.   Let's leave the personal stuff out of it.
Btw what is "spired out"?

And, explod, just one more question:  which Julia are you actually talking about who is so inspiring you?  The Real Julia Version 1, or the Even More Real Julia Version 2?  Gee whiz, there might be a Version 3 out tomorrow.


----------



## Calliope (4 August 2010)

noco said:


> Get back on track Macquack or stay off the thread if don't have some intelligent input.




Intelligent input? Macquack? Since he was warned about his gutter language his vocabulary is very limited.


----------



## Macquack (4 August 2010)

noco said:


> Macquack, you have sick mind. Perhaps you need some some psychiatric help.
> 
> This thread is about whether Julia Gillard is capable of Governing this country of ours in the right direction and to date she has not shown too much promise based on her record.
> 
> Get back on track Macquack or stay off the thread if don't have some intelligent input.




Noco, you obviously do not have a sense of humour.

I was responding to the video posted by MoxJo "Leave Julia Alone".

Castigating me while ignoring MoxJo's post just highlights your bias and double standards.

I believe Julia Gillard has done a "fair" job under the circumstances and the Labor Party deserves a second term of office.

Footnote: One consolation if the Liberal Party is elected is that Noco and Calliope might shut the f*** up for the next three years.


----------



## sails (4 August 2010)

If Abbott had re-invented himself as many times as Gillard, he would be a total laughing stock.  Imagine what the media would have done to him if he had come out this week and told us that "now we would have the real Tony"...

Gillard refused to debate earlier, but now she's changed her mind like a spoiled child and Tony cops the blame...

She must laugh at the stupidity of the "Austrahlian peeople" ...


----------



## drsmith (4 August 2010)

Of minor interest is the background the ALP are using in their media presentations. It's white text on a blue background like that of the Liberal Party.

There's not a dash of red in sight.


----------



## explod (5 August 2010)

Julia said:


> Is she?  Most of the commentary I've seen is to do with how boring the whole campaign is.




Agree, but the argument on her lightens it up a bit.



> Oh Explod, how our existing bias allows us to see what we wish to.
> Kerry O'Brien imo was not rude at all, but what he was doing was attempting to get her to actually answer his questions rather than allow her to deflect off into her usual recitation of spin.  Even despite his best attempts, she managed not to answer most of his questions.




We have to agree to differ, a number of times within seconds of asking a question he cut her off, previous P/Ms would never have stood this. 




> The polls indicate that approximately half the electorate disagree with you.
> You think she is great.   I have no idea why, but you're absolutely entitled to that view.




I think she is a bit ordinary in fact but someone has to try and ballance the skewed scales on this thread.



> Now, explod, I'm going to quite politely take exception to the above.
> I don't think it's at all reasonable to suggest that those of us who don't happen to agree with your unquestioning adoration of Ms Gillard don't have a view which is, like your own, simply a valid opinion.   Let's leave the personal stuff out of it.




Accepted



> Btw what is "spired out"?




Exhausted



> And, explod, just one more question:  which Julia are you actually talking about who is so inspiring you?  The Real Julia Version 1, or the Even More Real Julia Version 2?  Gee whiz, there might be a Version 3 out tomorrow.




Take a bow *Julia*

In fact I think the majority on ASF love you.


----------



## Calliope (5 August 2010)

Macquack said:


> Footnote: One consolation if the Liberal Party is elected is that Noco and Calliope might shut the f*** up for the next three years.




I spoke too soon. Your potty mouth is again out of control.


----------



## sails (5 August 2010)

*ALP website edits out Julia's socialist past*



> THE Labor Party has been caught posting an incomplete transcript of a recent Julia Gillard interview on her official website...
> 
> ...The party also excluded from its official record criticism of the Prime Minister's proposal for a citizens' assembly to seek a consensus on climate change policy, along with questions over whether Labor had made deals with the Greens in return for electoral preferences...




Is this the real Julia at work?  Still trying to be someone she isn't??  

More here: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...s-socialist-past/story-fn59niix-1225901317945


----------



## nioka (5 August 2010)

Macquack said:


> Footnote: One consolation if the Liberal Party is elected is that Noco and Calliope might shut the f*** up for the next three years.




And possibly open the other eye and see that there actually is another world out there.


----------



## Calliope (5 August 2010)

nioka said:


> And possibly open the other eye and see that there actually is another world out there.




If you are looking for the most one-eyed contributors to this thread, you, Macquack and explod win hands down. You have obviously been well indoctrinated. 

Contrary to your claim, you have never shown any evidence of thinking outside the square.  You think like a party hack.


----------



## nioka (5 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> And possibly open the other eye and see that there actually is another world out there.[/QUOTE
> 
> If you are looking for the most one-eyed contributors to this thread, you, Macquack and explod win hands down. You have obviously been well indoctrinated.
> 
> Contrary to your claim, you have never shown any evidence of thinking outside the square.  You think like a party hack.




Please open the other eye. Just try it. I guarantee you it wont hurt. You will be a much better person. I'm sure that somewhere within you lurks another side. Back to stocks, I have a couple firing up today and by thinking outside the square I am making heaps and heaps.


----------



## Mofra (5 August 2010)

sails said:


> If Abbott had re-invented himself as many times as Gillard, he would be a total laughing stock.  Imagine what the media would have done to him if he had come out this week and told us that "now we would have the real Tony"...



Well, if people did recognise this than he would already be a total laughing stock. 

Compare the 2007 Tony (his acidic response to Kerry O'Brien's question about meeting Archbishop Pell when he was caught out as lying is hard to forget) to the family-greeting, faux polite 2010 Tony ("A cup of tea? That would be ab-sol-utely fantastic") and there is no comparison.

Spin is something both parties do - trying to pin one party for it over another is something I do find amusing.


----------



## Calliope (5 August 2010)

nioka said:


> Back to stocks, I have a couple firing up today and by thinking outside the square I am making heaps and heaps.




Very strange, considering that the side you obviously support is anti private enterprise. I suppose you donate some of your "heaps and heaps" to support the unions' propaganda. 

I can't get this picture out of my mind of you going down the mines as a nine year old to support your family during the depression. I think you are full of it.


----------



## nioka (5 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> I can't get this picture out of my mind of you going down the mines as a nine year old to support your family during the depression. I think you are full of it.




Nine yes. Mines no. You should pay more attention.


----------



## Julia (5 August 2010)

My apologies for a bit of a diversion, but I just have to thank the posters on this page (sails and drsmith obviously excepted) for a really good laugh at the insults you're all throwing at one another.   It makes for very funny reading.

Sails, I share your concern about the Greens.  Most of those people saying "I'm so disappointed in the two main parties, I think I'll vote for the Greens" have no idea that they represent anything more than hugging trees and stroking frogs.

dr, I noticed the loss of the red also.


----------



## trainspotter (5 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> Please open the other eye. Just try it. I guarantee you it wont hurt. You will be a much better person. I'm sure that somewhere within you lurks another side. Back to stocks, I have a couple firing up today and by thinking outside the square I am making heaps and heaps.




I have no eye dear what you are talking about nioka. What is this "heaps and heaps" you are refering to? Try and put it in a context that I might be able to understand and I will see if it really is "heaps and heaps" of what?


----------



## explod (5 August 2010)

Julia said:


> Sails, I share your concern about the Greens.  Most of those people saying "I'm so disappointed in the two main parties, I think I'll vote for the Greens" have no idea that they represent anything more than hugging trees and stroking frogs.




The Greens have gone well past tree hugging.   The policy that I am most behind is for the thrust for education world wide to be focussed on women.  In this I am talking about the opportinities to be created for women in third world countries to be educated to at least tertiary level.  Even slight actions in this direction are doing amazing things in parts of South Africa.

In a generation this would bring about controls over population growth, aids, poverty, religious extremism etc.  This is thinking outside the square.   As a Greens supporter I see a new ballance with Gillard that may at least get other thinking outside the square too. 

So maybe we should wait and see.


----------



## Calliope (5 August 2010)

Julia said:


> My apologies for a bit of a diversion, but I just have to thank the posters on this page (sails and drsmith obviously excepted) for a really good laugh at the insults you're all throwing at one another.   It makes for very funny reading.




I don't think it is amusing at all, especially Mq's foul-mouthed advice to noco and me.



> dr, I noticed the loss of the red also.




It's still Red  Anna's favourite colour.


----------



## Mofra (5 August 2010)

explod said:


> The policy that I am most behind is for the thrust for education world wide to be focussed on women.  In this I am talking about the opportinities to be created for women in third world countries to be educated to at least tertiary level.  Even slight actions in this direction are doing amazing things in parts of South Africa.



Interestingly I have read articles recently suggesting that female education levels are the prime driver behind a slowing birthrates and harnessing population growth. 

Can't say I would want it to be one of the major issues an _Australian_ political party is focussed on (we do have domestic issues that are more pressing and more appropriate for our nation government to focus on), however would support international agencies tackling the problem.


----------



## nioka (5 August 2010)

trainspotter said:


> I have no eye dear what you are talking about nioka. What is this "heaps and heaps" you are refering to? Try and put it in a context that I might be able to understand and I will see if it really is "heaps and heaps" of what?




I can explain it with one word. STOCKS. I'm having a great day. Mostly green and some healthy gains. Heaps and heaps of profit, beats politics. Got to keep both eyes on the ball. Aye aye.

PS. Never did have confidence in Gillard. Haven't a lot in Abbott either and a lot less in Brown.  However with one eye it should be possible to see that Australia in doing better than the rest of the world if you don't count China.


----------



## trainspotter (5 August 2010)

TTY is a good one nioka .... up nearly 21% on 2nd August. If you bought them on the 29th July at 26.5 cents then sold a few days later at 32 cents you would be doing OK. Let' see ... 400000 shares means a 22k profit in a few days. Now that would qualify as "heaps and heaps" to me.

Joolyah Gizzard on the other hand is running scared and I heard that she admitted that Tony Abbott just may win this election? What a strange thing for a PM to say in the heat of battle. I also see her hair needs a colour through it. Her roots are showing. I also note that the Henry Tax Review has been put to sleep. Not a peep about tax reform on this election campaign from the Labor camp?


----------



## Julia (5 August 2010)

trainspotter said:


> TTY is a good one nioka .... up nearly 21% on 2nd August. If you bought them on the 29th July at 26.5 cents then sold a few days later at 32 cents you would be doing OK. Let' see ... 400000 shares means a 22k profit in a few days. Now that would qualify as "heaps and heaps" to me.



Agree that 'heaps and heaps' is pretty meaningless.  Reminds me of another poster a while ago who consistently talked about what good profits he was making.  When pressed for detail, he revealed that this constituted about 6% over a few weeks!
Now maybe we could leave stock discussion out of the general threads.


----------



## Calliope (5 August 2010)

On a lighter note.

The cartoonist have concentrated on Julia's red hair, long nose, long neck and big rump. I wonder when they will include her big ear lobes.

http://hubpages.com/slide/Julia-Gillard-has-huge-Ear-Lobes/3499584


----------



## trainspotter (5 August 2010)

Whoa Mamma ! That is a lot of skin there brother ! :


----------



## trainspotter (5 August 2010)

Julia said:


> Agree that 'heaps and heaps' is pretty meaningless.  Reminds me of another poster a while ago who consistently talked about what good profits he was making.  When pressed for detail, he revealed that this constituted about 6% over a few weeks!
> Now maybe we could leave stock discussion out of the general threads.




Sorry .... was just trying to establish a rudimentary guide for "heaps and heaps". I will have myself taken outside and shot for this faux pas of talking stock related matter in the General Chat pages. *tongue firmly pressed against cheek*

:axt:


----------



## sails (5 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> On a lighter note.
> 
> The cartoonist have concentrated on Julia's red hair, long nose, long neck and big rump. I wonder when they will include her big ear lobes.
> 
> http://hubpages.com/slide/Julia-Gillard-has-huge-Ear-Lobes/3499584




She can't help what she was born with, but she COULD stop the nonsense she is dishing up to the "Austrahlian Peeople" whom she must be hoping are total idiots.

Anyone else noticed that with every stuff-up she simply walks away - never to be mentioned again.  Maybe the "moving forward" thingy is a reminder to herself to ignore the blunders.


----------



## IFocus (5 August 2010)

sails said:


> If Abbott had re-invented himself as many times as Gillard, he would be a total laughing stock.  Imagine what the media would have done to him if he had come out this week and told us that "now we would have the real Tony"...
> 
> Gillard refused to debate earlier, but now she's changed her mind like a spoiled child and Tony cops the blame...
> 
> She must laugh at the stupidity of the "Austrahlian peeople" ...




Still waiting for the real Tony to start the election campaign currently we just have a puppet run by the faceless men of the Liberal party.



> Gillard's demand for a debate and Abbott's rejection is a stunning insight into the two camps -- Labor fears it is ebbing out of office and the Coalition has succumbed to frontrunner status. Abbott now listens to the faceless men and Liberal spin merchants telling him to avoid any face-to-face encounter. What happened to brave Tony?




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-risky-arrogance/story-e6frgd0x-1225901379334

BTW which is the real Tony scripted or un-scripted


----------



## nulla nulla (5 August 2010)

If the real Tony Abbott opens his mouth and departs from the carefully prepared script he will lose. From this point, all he has to do is keep his mouth shut and let Julia Gillard self destruct. 
It would appear that the knife attact on K Rudd was premature and the Australian populace isn't as ready and willing to forget this. The glamour of having a female prime minister was short lived and now the substance behind her is starting to pale.


----------



## todster (5 August 2010)

trainspotter said:


> Sorry .... was just trying to establish a rudimentary guide for "heaps and heaps". I will have myself taken outside and shot for this faux pas of talking stock related matter in the General Chat pages. *tongue firmly pressed against cheek*
> 
> :axt:




It would depend on tongue length and the cheek in question!


----------



## noco (5 August 2010)

IFocus said:


> Still waiting for the real Tony to start the election campaign currently we just have a puppet run by the faceless men of the Liberal party.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Care to name the faceless men of the liberal Party or are getting mixed up with Labor Party.


----------



## Macquack (5 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> The cartoonist have concentrated on Julia's red hair, long nose, long neck and big rump. I wonder when they will include her *big ear lobes*.
> 
> http://hubpages.com/slide/Julia-Gillard-has-huge-Ear-Lobes/3499584




Calliope, picking on poor Julia's ear lobes has confirmed my suspicions, you are in fact a petty 'old woman'.


----------



## drsmith (5 August 2010)

explod said:


> The Greens have gone well past tree hugging.   The policy that I am most behind is for the thrust for education world wide to be focussed on women.  In this I am talking about the opportinities to be created for women in third world countries to be educated to at least tertiary level.  Even slight actions in this direction are doing amazing things in parts of South Africa.
> 
> In a generation this would bring about controls over population growth, aids, poverty, religious extremism etc.  This is thinking outside the square.   As a Greens supporter I see a new ballance with Gillard that may at least get other thinking outside the square too.
> 
> So maybe we should wait and see.



The fertility rate in Australia is currently 1.79.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_territories_by_fertility_rate

As can be seen from the graphic within the above link, there's nothing outside the square about the impact of education (and economic development) on the birth rate. It's long established history.

The Greens need to explain the economic consequences of their policies and imparticular, the impact on living standards of ordinary Australians. What, for example, would be the impact of an overall 66.5% tax on the profit from resource extraction ?

Until the Greens do this, they cannot be taken seriously.

As for fertility rate, the simplest method of influencing this is to modify tax and welfare benefits related to having/raising children.


----------



## Julia (5 August 2010)

drsmith said:


> The Greens need to explain the economic consequences of their policies and imparticular, the impact on living standards of ordinary Australians. What, for example, would be the impact of an overall 66.5% tax on the profit from resource extraction ?
> 
> Until the Greens do this, they cannot be taken seriously.



I agree.  Earlier today I tried to read their policy statements on their website, but the total 'pie in the sky' nonsense was too much for me.
They are full of touch feely motherhood statements but have zilch in the way of economic consequences and no costings for any of their extravagant intentions.

A caller to ABC Radio tonight suggested balance of power in the Senate going to the Greens will mean before long we're all riding bicycles and eating tofu.  Probably about right.


----------



## trainspotter (5 August 2010)

Julia said:


> I agree.  Earlier today I tried to read their policy statements on their website, but the total 'pie in the sky' nonsense was too much for me.
> They are full of touch feely motherhood statements but have zilch in the way of economic consequences and no costings for any of their extravagant intentions.
> 
> A caller to ABC Radio tonight suggested balance of power in the Senate going to the Greens will mean before long we're all riding bicycles and eating tofu.  Probably about right.




Wandering around Nimbin hugging trees and making tie dye T shirts is going to be the new economy.


----------



## drsmith (5 August 2010)

Julia said:


> They are full of touch feely motherhood statements but have zilch in the way of economic consequences and no costings for any of their extravagant intentions.



In absence of the above, I'm just going to assume they have watched Star Trek Insurrection once too often.


----------



## Calliope (5 August 2010)

Macquack said:


> Calliope, picking on poor Julia's ear lobes has confirmed my suspicions, you are in fact a petty 'old woman'.




Is that the best insult you can come up with? When you have to rein in your gutter language you reveal your other weaknesses, and they are many. You obviously think to call someone an "old woman" is insulting. What did your mother do to you to make you so bitter?


----------



## drsmith (5 August 2010)

Entertaining take on Kevin Rudd's speech.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-elect...-you-with-my-mighty-power-20100805-11jwc.html

Not too far from the truth ?


----------



## wayneL (6 August 2010)

trainspotter said:


> Wandering around Nimbin hugging trees and making tie dye T shirts is going to be the new economy.




Their rhetoric suggests that is what they want. IMNTBCHO this is just a smokescreen, a brilliant disguise; they are in fact revolutionary socialists/communists playing the Fabian game on rhoids. 

This what disturbs me most about compulsory voting is that lots of muppets will vote for these Marxist bastids, never realising what they are doing.


----------



## explod (6 August 2010)

Julia said:


> A caller to ABC Radio tonight suggested balance of power in the Senate going to the Greens will mean before long we're all riding bicycles and eating tofu.  Probably about right.




And that would be very good, the villiage idea would come back, large forms of transport would not be required and each group would become self sufficient again.

There was a doco on Iran last night on country life, the richness of life and food prodiced amazing and they all seemed happy.

Wonder about that, people in harmony and happy.

Go greens

Not off topic,  Julia has inspired me.  (all three in fact)


----------



## moXJO (6 August 2010)

explod said:


> There was a doco on Iran last night on country life, the richness of life and food prodiced amazing and they all seemed happy.




Yeah so move there and enjoy. I don't want to go back to the stone age. I doubt many of the suburban green voters would survive for to long in your type of scenario.


----------



## trainspotter (6 August 2010)

wayneL said:


> Their rhetoric suggests that is what they want. IMNTBCHO this is just a smokescreen, a brilliant disguise; they are in fact revolutionary socialists/communists playing the Fabian game on rhoids.
> 
> This what disturbs me most about compulsory voting is that lots of muppets will vote for these Marxist bastids, never realising what they are doing.




OMFG ! WayneL you have exposed them before their peers ! Sneaky pinko commo damn Ruskies pretending to be Greens. What idiot will vote for them now that they have been placed under the spotlight of truth?


----------



## Logique (6 August 2010)

Getting a bit willing this thread. 

Nioka had a point of view on threads and expressed it, I'm cool with that.

Explod, on voluntary euthanasia and denticare, I think these are good policies, and invesigation into Very Fast Train for the Syd-Mel corridor as well. Delivery on these policies from the Greens would be good. I think they would also support the Coalition's opposition to the internet filter.

Must admit, I just can't listen to Julia Gillard anymore, I have to change the channel. The latest fireside chat-styled tv advert a case in point. It made me feel like a patronized Year 4 school kid. Such a scripted and condescending recital. So I'm in the 'not listening anymore' camp - she seems a Prime Minister designed by a committee. Oh for sure the Libs have also had their moments in this respect, but sheesh.


----------



## DocK (6 August 2010)

drsmith said:


> Entertaining take on Kevin Rudd's speech.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-elect...-you-with-my-mighty-power-20100805-11jwc.html
> 
> Not too far from the truth ?




Absolutely!  I quite enjoyed Jennifer Byrnes' comments on tv last night   http://7pmproject.com.au/video.htm?channel=7PM+Catch+Up&clipid=2689_spm-050810-seg1-web&bitrate=300&format=flash  where she said she thought Kev had a case of "limelight deprivation syndrome", and his press conference was akin to Batman Returns to Gotham City to Save the Day!

The wording that he used 







> I'm not going to sit idly by and watch Tony Abbott slide into office



 was eerily similar to that used by Gillard in her acceptance speech upon becoming PM 







> I love this country and I was not going to sit idly by and watch an incoming Opposition cut education, cut health and smash rights at work.



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/edited-transcript-of-julia-gillards-acceptance-speech/story-e6frg6n6-1225883840584

IMO he certainly did have a Prime Ministerial presence about him - I wonder if the Labour Party "faceless men" are regretting their decision.  I think Gillard certainly does have a fight on her hands, but not necessarily just against Abbott.


----------



## sam76 (6 August 2010)

The way DAVE HUGHES gushes when talking about the Labor party makes me ill.


----------



## sails (6 August 2010)

explod said:


> And that would be very good, the villiage idea would come back, large forms of transport would not be required and each group would become self sufficient again.
> 
> There was a doco on Iran last night on country life, the richness of life and food prodiced amazing and they all seemed happy.
> 
> ...




Surely you are joking, Explod?  It's very difficult to go backwards.  These people you mention have not known any other life. 

I have visited some very primitive places during the course of my life and was always quite happy to return to the civilization with which I had grown up.  It never left me with a desire to take on their lifestyle.  They didn't seem to be any happier than myself.   Life goes on regardless with it's ups and downs.


----------



## sails (6 August 2010)

*State's schools blowout exposed*



> The Brumby government, which had refused to release costing data since the inception of Julia Gillard's Building the Education Revolution program, has released figures revealing the extent of cost blowouts, fee duplications and poor value for money spent on state primary schools.




Will Gillard claim this is in her past as she has with her socialist affiliations?  Will be interesting to see how she deflects this one...


----------



## DocK (6 August 2010)

sails said:


> *State's schools blowout exposed*
> 
> 
> 
> Will Gillard claim this is in her past as she has with her socialist affiliations?  Will be interesting to see how she deflects this one...




Come on now sails, say it with me - she'll ignore it and "move forward"


----------



## moXJO (6 August 2010)

sam76 said:


> The way DAVE HUGHES gushes when talking about the Labor party makes me ill.




His only other qualification was pot smoking dole bludger, so no wonder he endorses them.


----------



## Calliope (6 August 2010)

drsmith said:


> What, for example, would be the impact of an overall 66.5% tax on the profit from resource extraction ?
> Until the Greens do this, they cannot be taken seriously.
> The Greens need to explain the economic consequences of their policies




Geeen voters are acting irresponsibly and they cannot change. They say their aim is to ruin the the industries that kept us afloat during the GFS.

But I would like to ask any Labor supporters on this forum how they can equate  preferencing the Greens to give them control of the Senate with *moving Australia forward*. Is this being responsible?

Remember the Greens rejected Rudd's ETS in the Senate because it did not harm the coal and energy industries and the consumers enough for their liking.


----------



## sails (6 August 2010)

DocK said:


> Come on now sails, say it with me - she'll ignore it and "move forward"




Haha, DocK.  No doubt she will with that thin, twisted smile.  

Yeah, I'm convinced that the whole "moving forward" thing is a reminder to herself to keep well away from all the stuff-ups.  Not a peep about East Timor anymore - and that was a huge stuff-up (IMO!) that she made AFTER the last government lost it's way...

Unfortunately, I was married to a con artist for a number of years before I found out what he was up to.  When I eventually found out, he hated being reminded of his history and had the "moving forward" mentality.  Perhaps that's why Gillard sickens me so much.


----------



## todster (6 August 2010)

Libs might be getting a little cocky letting little Johnny out of the cricket dressing rooms during the campaign.
Can you imagine Tony Rabbit on the world stage ar ur um least Gillard can put a sentence together.


----------



## sails (6 August 2010)

todster said:


> Libs might be getting a little cocky letting little Johnny out of the cricket dressing rooms during the campaign.
> Can you imagine Tony Rabbit on the world stage ar ur um least Gillard can put a sentence together.




I thought Tony has improved somewhat with his speech.

Some people aren't born with the gift of the gab, just like others that can't help that they are born with large earlobes.

I'm more concerned with party policy than Tony's ability to speak.  At least he doesn't stutter.

Anyway, I have seen Gillard um and ah on more than one occasion - why just pick on Tony?


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (6 August 2010)

todster said:


> Libs might be getting a little cocky letting little Johnny out of the cricket dressing rooms during the campaign.
> Can you imagine Tony Rabbit on the world stage ar ur um least Gillard can put a sentence together.



Gillard seems to be a boring obfuscating struggling in over her head type of image. She can't answer a question clearly without interjection from interviewers clarifying points.  It was refreshing to see Howard speak again yesterday and it seems he thinks she is a failure.


----------



## moXJO (6 August 2010)

todster said:


> least Gillard can put a sentence together.




Yeah with the most bogan sounding tones I have ever heard. I mean how can it not grate on your nerves everyti..... oh wait your from W.A, as you were


----------



## drsmith (6 August 2010)

explod said:


> And that would be very good, the villiage idea would come back, large forms of transport would not be required and each group would become self sufficient again.
> 
> There was a doco on Iran last night on country life, the richness of life and food prodiced amazing and they all seemed happy.
> 
> Wonder about that, people in harmony and happy.



Here, our affluence gives us much more choice in the type of lifestyle that we live. If we try an alternative and discover the grass really isn't greener on the other side, then we can abandon it. That though is a choice I suspect the Greens don't want us to have and one they are unlikely to achieve for the majority as a whole. Their policies if implemented would simply be a road to the impoverishment of Australia. I dare them to demonstrate otherwise.

As for the above vision of utopia, I would also suggest that it would be very difficult to achieve for a number of reasons. For one, the self sufficient village model was a step in our evolution as a species. One which we have long since passed.


----------



## trainspotter (6 August 2010)

moXJO said:


> Yeah with the most bogan sounding tones I have ever heard. I mean how can it not grate on your nerves everyti..... oh wait your from W.A, as you were




You mean the state that exports 60% of all of the nations total ....... oh wait we must be Cashed Up Bogans over here ? :


----------



## Julia (6 August 2010)

moXJO said:


> Yeah with the most bogan sounding tones I have ever heard. I mean how can it not grate on your nerves everyti..... your from



And she changes the tone of voice and the accent according to which image she's presenting at the time.  When she was dressed all in white, and trying to appear presidential (before she realised that wasn't working), her accent and tone were much less bogan, but then when she declared we were going to see the real Julia, then she was 'gunna' do stuff, and the voice became strident again.  Horrible.




explod said:


> And that would be very good, the villiage idea would come back, large forms of transport would not be required and each group would become self sufficient again.
> 
> There was a doco on Iran last night on country life, the richness of life and food prodiced amazing and they all seemed happy.
> 
> Wonder about that, people in harmony and happy.



Iran?????  The people in harmony and happy????  One of the most oppressed societies in the world, fergawdsake!




> Go greens
> 
> Not off topic,  Julia has inspired me.  (all three in fact)



Explod, in trying to understand that you seem to have some compulsion to put up contrary points of view just for the sake of so doing, I've thought maybe you're some kind person who always wants to defend the underdog.

But I'm coming to believe you are genuinely as naive as your above post indicates.

And the big worry is that there are probably lots more Australians just like you who have no idea of the havoc the Greens will wreak.


----------



## todster (6 August 2010)

moXJO said:


> Yeah with the most bogan sounding tones I have ever heard. I mean how can it not grate on your nerves everyti..... oh wait your from W.A, as  were




More Kath and KIm Victorian than your classic WA bogan differerent whine,more nasely anyway gotta go and park my v8 ute at the airport and off to the mine for 2 weeks,damn tv is not big enough need more cash


----------



## Calliope (6 August 2010)

moXJO said:


> Yeah with the most bogan sounding tones I have ever heard. I mean how can it not grate on your nerves everyti..... oh wait your from W.A, as you were




Can you imagine her on the World stage sitting around the table with world leaders. It is a cringeworthy thought.

I don't think she could pull it off. I think she is getting cold feet at the thought, and is sucking up to Kevin to use him as a surrogate.


----------



## Calliope (6 August 2010)

Julia said:


> Explod, in trying to understand that you seem to have some compulsion to put up contrary points of view just for the sake of so doing, I've thought maybe you're some kind person who always wants to defend the underdog.
> 
> But I'm coming to believe you are genuinely as naive as your above post indicates.
> 
> And the big worry is that there are probably lots more Australians just like you who have no idea of the havoc the Greens will wreak.




Julia, I think you have summed up this guy in a nutshell. Anyone who votes Green is not only naive, but irresponsible.


----------



## todster (6 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> Geeen voters are acting irresponsibly and they cannot change. They say their aim is to ruin the the industries that kept us afloat during the GFS.
> 
> But I would like to ask any Labor supporters on this forum how they can equate  preferencing the Greens to give them control of the Senate with *moving Australia forward*. Is this being responsible?
> 
> Remember the Greens rejected Rudd's ETS in the Senate because it did not harm the coal and energy industries and the consumers enough for their liking.




Industries like BP? how would you like that washing up on the Sunshine coast
Irresponsible,if you took your foot out of your mouth sometime you might just see out of the other eye,some people dont give a rats about big business and thats there choice,like the poor miners have you seen Rio tintos profit.


----------



## explod (6 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> Julia, I think you have summed up this guy in a nutshell. Anyone who votes Green is not only naive, but irresponsible.




I do not agree with a great deal of green's policy but have found it the only party (*at this time*) that may bring the changes in the future needed to cope with the planet that is now changing at break neck speed.

So my role is to try to help change policies to be realistic and achievable.   I say for example that we may have to still burn some coal for awhile.   The greens will achive nought unless they become more realistic.   Heady long term visions are one thing, and I aspire to some of those, but the here and now and the getting to them is the connundrum I toss with.   

I work quietly a great deal in other areas so do not have the time sometimes to put in here.  But yes Julia I do try to keep people guessing as I learn more about them that way.

And thanks Julia, you are inspiring and always taking an active interest in the different facits to the debates without prejudice.


----------



## Logique (6 August 2010)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Gillard seems to be a boring obfuscating struggling in over her head type of image.



I was thinking that if the ALP loses, I will feel some genuine sympathy for Julia Gillard. No I have not morphed into Andrew Bolt.

The ALP machine men have got their hooks into her, the lines are recited word for word. No question is answered directly. You here this faint whirring...launch spin menu...smokescreen launched. Sorry Kerry O'Brien, your national current affairs program is just here as a stage for my recitations. All concocted by the backroom boys. 

It's this teflon-coated, wave the magic wand, magical dissolving of the embarassing immediate past. 

All silver moonbeams now, we'll move forward together on gossamer wings. But in the real world you can't get away with that forever, sooner or later you are found out. This will happen whether the ALP win or not.

Julia Gillard has real abilities and talents (if not necessarily in public administration), but she has been very poorly advised, both politically and personally, by the ruthless ALP machine. They picked their mark, here was strong ambition wanting an opportunity.


----------



## drsmith (6 August 2010)

explod said:


> I do not agree with a great deal of green's policy but have found it the only party (*at this time*) that may bring the changes in the future needed to cope with the planet that is now changing at break neck speed.



Do you agree with an effective tax rate of 66.5% on profit from resources as proposed by the Greens ?



explod said:


> So my role is to try to help change policies to be realistic and achievable.   I say for example that we may have to still burn some coal for awhile.   The greens will achive nought unless they become more realistic.   Heady long term visions are one thing, and I aspire to some of those, but the here and now and the getting to them is the connundrum I toss with.



The Greens too need to change their policy position to be more realistic and achievable in both a national and global context.

I won't consider voting for them in any capacity until they articulate projected outcomes from their policies.


----------



## Logique (6 August 2010)

Bizarre this talk of three leaders now, ie two Labor leaders.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-but-one-to-lead/story-e6frgd0x-1225901825100   (From Dennis Shanahan)



> In six weeks, Labor has dumped Kevin 07 as leader because he was unpopular, installed Gillard because she was popular, changed strategy and Gillard's image to the "real Julia" because the false, campaigning Julia was unpopular and now turned to Kevin 10 because the real Julia was unpopular.
> 
> It's about time Labor stopped switching images and leaders and started to say where it stands on a range of policies which are unresolved except for negative attacks on Abbott.


----------



## Calliope (6 August 2010)

todster said:


> Industries like BP? how would you like that washing up on the Sunshine coast
> Irresponsible,if you took your foot out of your mouth sometime you might just see out of the other eye,some people dont give a rats about big business and thats there choice,like the poor miners have you seen Rio tintos profit.




So you're a Greenie. That explains your nonsense ranting and raving, but it doesn't excuse it.


----------



## Macquack (6 August 2010)

nulla nulla said:


> If the real Tony Abbott opens his mouth and departs from the carefully prepared script he will lose. From this point, all he has to do is keep his mouth shut and let Julia Gillard self destruct.
> It would appear that the knife attact on K Rudd was premature and the Australian populace isn't as ready and willing to forget this. The glamour of having a female prime minister was short lived and now the substance behind her is starting to pale.




This is what I would call "fair" comment.

Calliope should take note as it does not include any reference to Julia's length of nose, length of neck, length of ear lobes or the colour of her hair.


----------



## todster (6 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> So you're a Greenie. That explains your nonsense ranting and raving, but it doesn't excuse it.




Vote green just to screw liberal zealots like you
Difference between you and a airbus?
The airbus stops whining when you shut down the engines.
If your ever in Perth come round and i will give you a hug,Gee i think you need one pops


----------



## Logique (6 August 2010)

Progress report on the BP oil spill:

http://www.rttnews.com/Content/Policy.aspx?Id=1383242



> *Feds: Almost 75% Of Oil From BP Gulf Spill Dispersed Or Recovered*
> 8/4/2010 (4th August)
> 
> (RTTNews) - Federal officials said Wednesday that *most of the oil from the now-capped leak in the Gulf of Mexico has already been dispersed or captured by cleanup efforts.*
> ...


----------



## Macquack (6 August 2010)

todster said:


> If your ever in Perth come round and *i will give you a hug*,Gee i think you need one pops




Maybe you could also give him a kiss, as in a Liverpool kiss.


----------



## Calliope (6 August 2010)

Macquack and toadster sound like soul mates. I suspect they might be living together.


----------



## todster (6 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> Macquack and toadster sound like soul mates. I suspect they might be living together.




Like Bob Brown?or Julia out of wedlock? oh dear what next women in the public bar, sandals with no socks


----------



## Calliope (6 August 2010)

todster said:


> Like Bob Brown?or Julia out of wedlock? oh dear what next women in the public bar, sandals with no socks




Don't take it to heart. I was only doing a bit of match making. You too have so much in common.


----------



## IFocus (6 August 2010)

noco said:


> Care to name the faceless men of the liberal Party or are getting mixed up with Labor Party.




Tony is currently a puppet, small target election campaign run by the back room faceless Liberals. Same people who back stabbed Turnbull.

How do we know simple because its nothing like the Tony we all know total fake / spin what every you wish to call it.   

Looking forward to being governed by the Pope.


----------



## IFocus (6 August 2010)

Julia said:


> A caller to ABC Radio tonight suggested balance of power in the Senate going to the Greens will mean before long we're all riding bicycles and eating tofu.  Probably about right.




Julia the current term required the greens to vote for any bills opposed by the Liberals for Labor to pass any thing through the Senate other than the two independents whats the difference?


----------



## Calliope (6 August 2010)

IFocus said:


> Tony is currently a puppet, small target election campaign run by the back room faceless Liberals. .




But you can't name them as noco asked. Either put up or shut up.


----------



## noco (6 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> Can you imagine her on the World stage sitting around the table with world leaders. It is a cringeworthy thought.
> 
> I don't think she could pull it off. I think she is getting cold feet at the thought, and is sucking up to Kevin to use him as a surrogate.




Calliope, I don't think it so much of sucking up to Kevin, as perhaps a 'blackmail' by Kevin on Julia. 
I beleive he could be asking for something she does not want to give. She has the fear of God in her. I think she should convert from an atheist to a religion and start praying now.


----------



## todster (6 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> But you can't name them as noco asked. Either put up or shut up.




There faceless????????very hard to name someone with no face


----------



## todster (6 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> Don't take it to heart. I was only doing a bit of match making. You too have so much in common.




Yeah were not senile lol


----------



## Julia (6 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> Can you imagine her on the World stage sitting around the table with world leaders. It is a cringeworthy thought.
> 
> I don't think she could pull it off. I think she is getting cold feet at the thought, and is sucking up to Kevin to use him as a surrogate.



Calliope, do you really think Kev's re-entry was Ms Gillard's choice?
I'm more inclined to think she was told to get him on side, in much the same way as she was told what to do and when in the assassination, as Logique refers to below.



Logique said:


> I was thinking that if the ALP loses, I will feel some genuine sympathy for Julia Gillard. No I have not morphed into Andrew Bolt.
> 
> The ALP machine men have got their hooks into her, the lines are recited word for word. No question is answered directly. You here this faint whirring...launch spin menu...smokescreen launched. Sorry Kerry O'Brien, your national current affairs program is just here as a stage for my recitations. All concocted by the backroom boys.
> 
> ...



Great summary, Logique.  I think you have it absolutely.  I even feel a bit sorry for Ms Gillard now, as she is deemed to have failed on  her own.
(The sympathy only lasted about a minute and a half, though.)



IFocus said:


> Looking forward to being governed by the Pope.



IFocus, this is a bit of a cliche, isn't it?   I don't think Tony Abbott is so stupid as to imagine  he may transfer his personal religious views to the political arena when it comes to legislation.  And if he did have any such delusions, his colleagues would soon set him straight.
Their announcement of refusing to support the internet filter is a step in the right direction.
That said, I'd certainly much rather he shared Ms Gillard's atheism.



IFocus said:


> Julia the current term required the greens to vote for any bills opposed by the Liberals for Labor to pass any thing through the Senate other than the two independents whats the difference?



The difference is very important, in that Labor needed Nick Xenophon and Steve Fielding to get any legislation through and these two independents usually held a view on pretty much anything that was contrary to that of the government.  If the Greens have the balance of power all to themselves there is no mediating influence and their nuttiness can prevail.  We can only hope that in such a situation, the two major parties would manage to come to a compromise and make the Greens irrelevant.


----------



## explod (6 August 2010)

drsmith said:


> Do you agree with an effective tax rate of 66.5% on profit from resources as proposed by the Greens ?




Yes, we need to put more back into the future and slow the mining companies down so that future generations may have some left to tap into and perhaps with cleaner technologies to boot.

My Avatar features two of my Granchildren, Jake welcoming his Sister Drew into the world.  I want something left for thier future.


----------



## noco (6 August 2010)

explod said:


> I do not agree with a great deal of green's policy but have found it the only party (*at this time*) that may bring the changes in the future needed to cope with the planet that is now changing at break neck speed.
> 
> So my role is to try to help change policies to be realistic and achievable.   I say for example that we may have to still burn some coal for awhile.   The greens will achive nought unless they become more realistic.   Heady long term visions are one thing, and I aspire to some of those, but the here and now and the getting to them is the connundrum I toss with.
> 
> ...




Explod, if you do away with coal fired power statations for base load power, what is your alternative?

Solar and wind power are both only 15% efficent, expensive to install and lots of the time are unreliable. If this method was not subsidized by the Federal Government, it would be a hell of a lot more expensive.

The Victorian Government have just installed 30 ceramic fuel cells (known as Blu gen units) into a new housing estate in an endeavour to close the dirty brown coal power stations. They are run by gas, are 60% efficient and have very low CO2 emmissions. They not only produce power but also water heating. Excess power is then fed back into the grid. These units are the size of a washing machine and many cases may be the answer in Brittain and Europe. Coal fired power stations are only 35% efficient
Nuclear power is out of the question with the current Government irrespect of the fact there are now over 459 nuclear power stations throughout the world and figure was in 2005. France alone has 70.


----------



## Calliope (6 August 2010)

todster said:


> Yeah were not senile lol




Probably pre-senile and practically illiterate.



> There faceless????????very hard to name someone with no face




Hard for you for reasons I gave above.


----------



## noco (6 August 2010)

IFocus said:


> Tony is currently a puppet, small target election campaign run by the back room faceless Liberals. Same people who back stabbed Turnbull.
> 
> How do we know simple because its nothing like the Tony we all know total fake / spin what every you wish to call it.
> 
> Looking forward to being governed by the Pope.




Still waiting the names of those Liberal faceless men. We know the Labor Party faceless men as they have been published many times.


----------



## Calliope (6 August 2010)

Logique said:


> Julia Gillard has real abilities and talents (if not necessarily in public administration), but she has been very poorly advised, both politically and personally, by the ruthless ALP machine. They picked their mark, here was strong ambition wanting an opportunity.




Gillard has been part of the ruthless party machine since her uni days. If they are manipulating her now then she is hoist with her own petard.


----------



## todster (6 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> Probably pre-senile and practically illiterate.
> 
> 
> 
> Hard for you for reasons I gave above.




Yeah you got to love WA 2 weeks on 1week off 180k a year and practically illiterate imagine what i could earn if i was as smart as you the mind boggles


----------



## Calliope (6 August 2010)

explod said:


> My Avatar features two of my Granchildren, Jake welcoming his Sister Drew into the world.  I want something left for thier future.




That's the Greenies' excuse. They claim that by ruining the economy now they can make the world a better place for their grandchildren. A real heartstring tugger. Commonsense says just the opposite. But as I said above Greenies are irresponsible.


----------



## IFocus (6 August 2010)

Julia said:


> IFocus, this is a bit of a cliche, isn't it?   I don't think Tony Abbott is so stupid as to imagine  he may transfer his personal religious views to the political arena when it comes to legislation.  And if he did have any such delusions, his colleagues would soon set him straight.
> Their announcement of refusing to support the internet filter is a step in the right direction.
> That said, I'd certainly much rather he shared Ms Gillard's atheism.




To be fair Abbott is one of the few Australian politicians as a minister that actually made decisions based on his religious back ground fact is he has form of projecting his religious beliefs into action.

To have Abbott as Prime Minister is much more scarier than just an extreme right wing hit man with an ego but some one who is fraught with the insecurities of failing to complete the priesthood of the Roman Catholic Church tell me thats a normal every day Australian.


----------



## Julia (6 August 2010)

IFocus said:


> To be fair Abbott is one of the few Australian politicians as a minister that actually made decisions based on his religious back ground



Did he?   Can you let us know what these were?


----------



## IFocus (6 August 2010)

Julia said:


> Did he?   Can you let us know what these were?




You have to be joking start with RU486


----------



## Calliope (6 August 2010)

todster said:


> Yeah you got to love WA 2 weeks on 1week off 180k a year and practically illiterate imagine what i could earn if i was as smart as you the mind boggles




And yet you hate the big miners. If it wasn't for the big miners an unskilled bloke like you would be a dole bludger.


----------



## Julia (6 August 2010)

IFocus said:


> You have to be joking start with RU486




Do you need to be sarcastic?  I asked you politely because offhand I couldn't think of anything.



> Mifepristone was banned in Australia in 1996. In late 2005, a Private Member's bill was introduced to the Australian Senate to lift the ban and transfer the power of approval to the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). The move caused much debate in the Australian media and amongst politicians. The Bill passed the Senate on 10 February 2006, and whilst mifepristone is now legal for use in Australia, as of yet, no drug company has applied to import and distribute it. Currently there are only a couple of known instances where a doctor has applied to the TGA for dispensing mifepristone in specific cases.




In 2006 the Libs were still in power.

The Labor government hasn't exactly shown any enthusiasm for its use, given how difficult it is for doctors to obtain and prescribe it.

OK, what other decisions has he made that have been dictated by his religious beliefs?


----------



## todster (6 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> And yet you hate the big miners. If it wasn't for the big miners an unskilled bloke like you would be a dole bludger.




Illiterate maybe unskilled no,dont hate the companies i work for just have a very good insight to how they operate.
If it wasn't for forums i wonder where you would vent all that piss and vinegar.


----------



## IFocus (6 August 2010)

Julia said:


> Do you need to be sarcastic?  I asked you politely because offhand I couldn't think of anything.




Julia did not think I was sarcastic Abbotts nic the mad monk is for good reason I am sure Wiki should have some thing.........


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (6 August 2010)

IFocus said:


> Julia did not think I was sarcastic Abbotts nic the mad monk is for good reason I am sure Wiki should have some thing.........



Mad monk. That's a bit deceptive and you know like all Labor that it is wrong.


----------



## explod (7 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> That's the Greenies' excuse. They claim that by ruining the economy now they can make the world a better place for their grandchildren. A real heartstring tugger. Commonsense says just the opposite. But as I said above Greenies are irresponsible.




If approached the correct way how do you know it will ruin the economy? To counter your slur, thats what the right wing extremist's always say.  

Lets look at the idea and see if from a conceptual point putting more back into our own country may infact make it better for ourselves.  Protectionist maybe, but notice Russia the last day or so indicating that with wheat.  Tough times, tougher ideas and realities perhaps.


----------



## drsmith (7 August 2010)

explod said:


> If approached the correct way how do you know it will ruin the economy?



What then is the economic impact of a total tax take of 66.5% on resource profits ?


----------



## DocK (7 August 2010)

Julia said:


> .
> The difference is very important, in that Labor needed Nick Xenophon and Steve Fielding to get any legislation through and these two independents usually held a view on pretty much anything that was contrary to that of the government.  If the Greens have the balance of power all to themselves there is no mediating influence and their nuttiness can prevail.  *We can only hope that in such a situation, the two major parties would manage to come to a compromise and make the Greens irrelevant*.




This concerns me, as I worry that if the Greens do wind up with the balance of power the Senate could become stymied altogether with virtually nothing achieved for a term.  It can be a good thing to have someone to "keep the bastards honest" as the Democrats urged, and the prospect of the Greens having outright power to pass whatever legislation they choose is a scary prospect , but so too is the prospect of a govt having their hands tied on every policy they want to put into effect.  To have a Senate that does nothing but squabble and bicker over every piece of legislation couldn't be good for the country, and is the reason imo that a protest vote to the Greens could be the worst thing a voter may do.  Better to vote for whichever of the major parties you prefer and give them a fair go at governing for a term, I think.  If they make a (bigger) mess of the job, we'll all have our say again next election.

Having said that, I do like some of the Green's policies and am quite happy for them to have a voice, just not the power to halt progress.


----------



## trainspotter (7 August 2010)

IFocus said:


> Julia did not think I was sarcastic Abbotts nic the mad monk is for good reason I am sure Wiki should have some thing.........




ROFL ... Then go and get it from Wiki then ! You blabbed claiming that Abbot had made decisions that affected Australian's based on his religious beliefs. Still waiting for some FACTS.


----------



## IFocus (7 August 2010)

Paul Kelly with a good summery of post election may look like

"Post-election, we'll be heading for a train wreck"


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...or-a-train-wreck/story-e6frgd0x-1225902293275


----------



## IFocus (7 August 2010)

Peter van Onselen is onto Abbott and his spin machine.



> It is therefore only appropriate I now turn that attack on Abbott for listening to his spin doctors instead of his own political instincts and choosing to cower away from the sort of scrutiny a debate allows.




And there is reference to the faceless men of the Liberal Party 



> The irony that Abbott, the man who has been railing against the "faceless men" of Labor, will have his own faceless men to thank for shielding him from the scrutiny of a debate would push Australian politics to a new low in the election's aftermath.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ot-talk-about-it/story-e6frgd0x-1225902269716


----------



## IFocus (7 August 2010)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Mad monk. That's a bit deceptive and you know like all Labor that it is wrong.




As a Minister Abbott was anti-abortion, anti-contraception, anti-IVF, anti-stem cell research and  wanted to ban no-fault divorce.

Yep its all wrong


----------



## IFocus (7 August 2010)

Julia said:


> Do you need to be sarcastic?  I asked you politely because offhand I couldn't think of anything.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Julia this is a pretty good article that covers some of the issues



> Abbott said. He listed what they had achieved. "This government's decisions to: overturn the Northern Territory's euthanasia law, ban gay marriage, stop the ACT heroin trial, provide additional financial support for one-income families and try to reduce abortion numbers through pregnancy support counselling, show that the tide of secular humanism was not as irreversible as (Santamaria) thought either … the DLP is alive and well and living inside the Howard government…"






> It is this nudging of Australia towards social conservatism that worries feminists, such as the bio-ethicist and writer Leslie Cannold. "There's little question he would do everything he could short of bringing issues before Parliament to progress his views on abortion, stem cells and dying with dignity," she says. "He would use his power of appointments to boards, research institutes, and so on to influence the agenda."





http://www.smh.com.au/federal-elect...harm-and-disarm-offensive-20100806-11oif.html


----------



## Calliope (7 August 2010)

explod said:


> If approached the correct way how do you know it will ruin the economy? To counter your slur, thats what the right wing extremist's always say.
> 
> Lets look at the idea and see if from a conceptual point putting more back into our own country may infact make it better for ourselves.  Protectionist maybe, but notice Russia the last day or so indicating that with wheat.  Tough times, tougher ideas and realities perhaps.




The usual nonsense post from you.

I know that as an ex-copper you can't tolerate dissent, and making false accusations is normal practice. However perhaps you can tell me what the "slur" is that you are trying to fit me up with.

And who are these "right wing extremists"? Are they Coalition voters?  The Party with the most extreme views is the Greens.


----------



## glenn_r (7 August 2010)

Reading the paper last week about a local private catholic primary school celebrating the opening of their new assembly hall by the sitting Labour MP, now the school has 85 students and the cost of building the hall was $960,000.00.

Now does this give you confidence in Gillard with her recent comments that if we didn't waste money on the school building program we would have fallen into the GFC abyss, what a crock of poo.


----------



## trainspotter (7 August 2010)

IFocus said:


> As a Minister Abbott was anti-abortion, anti-contraception, anti-IVF, anti-stem cell research and  wanted to ban no-fault divorce.
> 
> Yep its all wrong




So what has changed? How did he influence these matters so that it has changed the Australian psyche? Last time I checked all the above are still in modus operandi? Your statement of fact is not holding water IFocus. YES he was against them as a man of his faith and or principles but none of them were implemented??  You can get an abortion on demand, you can buy contraception pills or rubbers, you can still obtain IVF, stemcell research is expanding and I can still get a DIVORCE !

http://www.stemcellcentre.edu.au/ for some info on the stem cell research. Very interesting !

AND as the "Mad Monk" has listed the acievements as outlined above what EXACTLY has Labor done to remedy the situation? The sound of silence is deafening.


----------



## explod (7 August 2010)

drsmith said:


> What then is the economic impact of a total tax take of 66.5% on resource profits ?




I do not know, but the point that comes out in my view is that you do not really know either.

Of course we could suppose that to the multinational players like BHP and RIO it would be devastating and of course the employees with that too.   But for us rank and file serf's perhaps not ?


----------



## explod (7 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> The usual nonsense post from you.
> 
> I know that as an ex-copper you can't tolerate dissent, and making false accusations is normal practice. However perhaps you can tell me what the "slur" is that you are trying to fit me up with.
> 
> And who are these "right wing extremists"? Are they Coalition voters?  The Party with the most extreme views is the Greens.




Dodge the question again with your side of nonsense as usual Calliope.

And why not dissect some out of the box concepts, it is known that from the craziest beginnings have grown some of the greatest inventions and ideas of mankind.

Forums such as this are in effect becoming great think tanks and the tussell is stimulating to us both.


----------



## moXJO (7 August 2010)

IFocus said:


> And there is reference to the faceless men of the Liberal Party




You mean those that bow before big business?
Oh that’s right Abbott shafted them with the Paid Parental Leave. The minders are the only ones advising him to keep out of trouble. And after Labors stupendous amount of spin during last election and this one, no bloody wonder.

Abbott as a person seems to be well liked by neighbors



> A man who lives just above the Abbotts says we won't find anyone who'll say a bad word about Abbott.
> 
> He's right. They love him. Not as a politician but, I think, for being a man who has raised nice children, has a nice wife and works hard.
> 
> "He's a nice guy, believe me," the man says. "I wouldn't like to see you write a single derogatory word about him. I'm not saying everyone has the same political views, but he's a good family man.



http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/election/locals-say-that-abbott-is-right-up-our-street/story-fn5zm695-1225898197721
I would like to see Rudd have the same said about him. And Gillard well lets go back to that affair with Craig Emmerson. If Abbott is classed as a religious nut by you, then Gillard is nothing but a home wrecking wh0re. When you think about it she is basically a Godless lawyer that has proven her worth.
While I don't think much of Abbott politically he has proven himself in other areas of his life. Triathlon at his age would have taken a lot of dedication mental and intestinal fortitude. Raising 3 daughters, well liked by those around him, involved in charity events where he actually puts in physical effort on top of his participation (running, cycling).
While most of those things don't mean jack in a political sense at least it gives us more scope of what the man is made of. Bring up his religious past is only half the story. How about we bring Gillards past up for all to see.


----------



## Calliope (7 August 2010)

explod said:


> Forums such as this are in effect becoming great think tanks and the tussell is stimulating to us both.




 Sorry, but I find you more boring than stimulating.


----------



## Julia (7 August 2010)

IFocus said:


> To be fair Abbott is one of the few Australian politicians as a minister that actually made decisions based on his religious back ground fact is he has form of projecting his religious beliefs into action.






IFocus said:


> As a Minister Abbott was anti-abortion, anti-contraception, anti-IVF, anti-stem cell research and  wanted to ban no-fault divorce.



You have failed to show any legislation that resulted from Tony Abbott's religious views.  As TS has pointed out, he may hold these views, but they have not been translated into legislation.

The Northern Territory voluntary euthanasia legislation being overturned (sadly) was instigated by Kevin Andrews.  Most probably Mr Abbott supported this, but that is the only thing you can legitimately claim.

I'm just living in eternal hope that we can have this discussion by offering legitimate comments, rather than perjorative cliches which are simply not truthful.

That said, I'll be the first to disagree with many of Mr Abbott's social views, but as long as they don't become legislation then where is the problem?




moXJO said:


> You mean those that bow before big business?
> Oh that’s right Abbott shafted them with the Paid Parental Leave. The minders are the only ones advising him to keep out of trouble. And after Labors stupendous amount of spin during last election and this one, no bloody wonder.
> 
> Abbott as a person seems to be well liked by neighbors
> ...



Very fair comment, moXJO.   And I don't think Labor should underestimate the number of middle class Australians who will go for Tony Abbott's personal family image as preferable to an unmarried, childless woman whose partner is a hairdresser turned real estate salesman with a DUI conviction.

I'm not saying her partner isn't a great bloke, but some voters are going to have a hard time imagining him strutting the world stage at Ms Gillard's side.


----------



## Julia (7 August 2010)

IFocus said:


> Paul Kelly with a good summery of post election may look like
> "Post-election, we'll be heading for a train wreck"



As always, Paul Kelly gets it exactly right.



IFocus said:


> Peter van Onselen is onto Abbott and his spin machine.



But he made the point at the beginning of the article that he was writing it in the interests of objectivity and to demonstrate lack of political bias.
Something you could perhaps consider emulating.

You seem to think that any of us who dislike Rudd/Gillard/the Labor Machine, automatically think all to do with Abbott/Liberal Party is wonderful.   Most of us are able to show more objectivity than that.   
It's a bit like saying that if I declare I dislike oranges, then I love apples.
Nonsense.


----------



## todster (7 August 2010)

Julia said:


> Do you need to be sarcastic?  I asked you politely because offhand I couldn't think of anything.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




where did you mention legislation


----------



## explod (7 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> Sorry, but I find you more boring than stimulating.




You target the person again, so much bias you do not seem to be able to help it.

Cuummmoorrn enjoy the fun and be inspired under the banner of Julia, if you are going to be miserable the next four years, what can we say.


----------



## drsmith (7 August 2010)

explod said:


> I do not know, but the point that comes out in my view is that you do not really know either.
> 
> Of course we could suppose that to the multinational players like BHP and RIO it would be devastating and of course the employees with that too.   But for us rank and file serf's perhaps not ?



If we don't know, then it is up to the proponents of such a policy (the Greens) to explain. No policy should be supported from a position of ignorance.

BHP and RIO's employees are people too as are those who benefit indirectly from their economic activities.


----------



## explod (7 August 2010)

drsmith said:


> If we don't know, then it is up to the proponents of such a policy (the Greens) to explain. No policy should be supported from a position of ignorance.
> 
> BHP and RIO's employees are people too as are those who benefit indirectly from their economic activities.




Very good article todays Herald Sun on current Green policy, will try and post up the reference later on the election thread.

It is hard for them to get it out like all marginal fledgling parties as the majors have their fingers all over the press as the press do for all thier own ends, and that's accepted.

And of course the employees within all changes can be hard hit but a party with a wide social conscience (often referred to as socialists, wonder why) will work to resolve these issues too.

Ingnorance, interesting he he; no will hold my peace here.


----------



## drsmith (7 August 2010)

If the Greens want to exercise a major influence on the economic and social direction of this country, it's their responsibility to articulate the projected outcomes of their policies, minor party or not.


----------



## IFocus (7 August 2010)

Julia said:


> You have failed to show any legislation that resulted from Tony Abbott's religious views.  As TS has pointed out, he may hold these views, but they have not been translated into *legislation*.




Don't want to be pedantic but this what I said



> To be fair Abbott is one of the few Australian politicians as a minister that actually made decisions based on his religious back ground fact is he has form of projecting his religious beliefs into *action*.






> I'm just living in eternal hope that we can have this discussion by offering legitimate comments, rather than perjorative cliches which are simply not truthful.




Would that be like the shrill comments from the pro Liberals on the thread?




> That said, I'll be the first to disagree with many of Mr Abbott's social views, but as long as they don't become legislation then where is the problem?




Problem is Abbott is a *politician* who is running for Prime Minister of Australia and I don't trust him.....ever. 

His continual change in position over major issues is legendary ETS is but a minor example.

In fact I would trust Howard before Abbott.




> Very fair comment, moXJO.   And I don't think Labor should underestimate the number of middle class Australians who will go for Tony Abbott's personal family image as preferable to an unmarried, childless woman whose partner is a hairdresser turned real estate salesman with a DUI conviction.
> 
> I'm not saying her partner isn't a great bloke, but some voters are going to have a hard time imagining him strutting the world stage at Ms Gillard's side.




Westpoll favors Gillard slightly concerning the above



> Asked if Ms Gillard's atheism made a difference to their vote, 76 per cent said it made no difference, 11 per cent said it made them more likely to vote Labor and 12 per cent said it made them more likely to vote coalition.
> 
> Mr Abbott's Catholicism made no difference to how 73 per cent of respondents would vote, while 17 per cent said it made them more likely to vote Labor and 10 per cent said it made them more likely to vote coalition.




http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/wa/7723522/green-vote-surges-to-record-high-westpoll/


----------



## IFocus (7 August 2010)

drsmith said:


> If the Greens want to exercise a major influence on the economic and social direction of this country, it's their responsibility to articulate the projected outcomes of their policies, minor party or not.




"Green vote surges to record high: Westpoll"

The best asset the Greens have currently is Liberal and Labor and this in WA of all places, should be a Liberal strong hold.



> Disillusionment with Labor and the Liberal Party has thrust the Greens into the role of political kingmakers in WA, with the third political force attracting a record number of voters, according to the latest Westpoll.




http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/wa/7723522/green-vote-surges-to-record-high-westpoll/


----------



## noco (7 August 2010)

Julia Gillard may as well have written the report on the enquiry into the BER debacle herself judging by the way it was presented by a hand picked stooge of the Labor Party.

It has also been stated she removed from her web site her affiliation with the Communist and Fabian sociaist society. I wonder why?

http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...og_that_a_lefitst_pm_like_gillard_would_love/


----------



## Calliope (7 August 2010)

noco said:


> Julia Gillard may as well have written the report on the enquiry into the BER debacle herself judging by the way it was presented by a hand picked stooge of the Labor Party.
> 
> It has also been stated she removed from her web site her affiliation with the Communist and Fabian sociaist society. I wonder why?
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...og_that_a_lefitst_pm_like_gillard_would_love/




There would have been a lot more complaints from principals, but Orgill refused to give them whistle blowers's anonymity. As Joh Petersen once said you don't start an inquiry unless you know the outcome.

 - 







> the complaints are limited to those from schools, most of them state ones led by principals who might well feel it not in their interests to make a fuss - not least because the vast majority of them serve under state Labor governments.


----------



## todster (7 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> There would have been a lot more complaints from principals, but Orgill refused to give them whistle blowers's anonymity. As Joh Petersen once said you don't start an inquiry unless you know the outcome.
> 
> -




WA has a Liberal State Government,8 complaints in the state!
"Orgill a former investment banker said there had been a lot of misinformation
about the program and it absolutely should continue no matter who won the 
election.
He said there had been no proof of the coalition's claims that 8 billion had been wasted,or there had been rorting


----------



## drsmith (7 August 2010)

As a proportion of finding, the WA govenment had the lowest agency, management and design fees of all the state governments.

I have not read the report in full, but does it delve into whether what was built for schools was appropriate for their individual needs ?

EDIT: Detailed project value for money and cost reviews appear somewhat incomplete. 

http://www.deewr.gov.au/Department/Documents/BERIT_Interim_Report_06082010.pdf

Pages 29 and 30 and Appendix 12 (pp 82 & 83).


----------



## moXJO (7 August 2010)

I've worked on some of the BER sites and it's a massive balls up. And money is being wasted like nothing I have ever seen before. Those at the trade level are getting ripped blind in a lot of cases as well.


----------



## drsmith (7 August 2010)

The report does look very rushed.

*Page 25: Factors to be considered when reviewing initial cost modelling*



> Results at this stage may indicate a trend but the current sample size in inadequate to make conclusive findings.


----------



## todster (7 August 2010)

moXJO said:


> I've worked on some of the BER sites and it's a massive balls up. And money is being wasted like nothing I have ever seen before. Those at the trade level are getting ripped blind in a lot of cases as well.




How about a bit of detail then on the balls up and waste and then tell me where the government fits in,more likely dirt bag east coast builders.
The local primary school is being done by John Holland and from all appearances from the outside looks to be progressing quite well with a high level of OH&S


----------



## IFocus (7 August 2010)

todster said:


> How about a bit of detail then on the balls up and waste and then tell me where the government fits in,more likely dirt bag east coast builders.
> The local primary school is being done by John Holland and from all appearances from the outside looks to be progressing quite well with a high level of OH&S




LOL WA not only paying for the free loaders over East with our boom but their corrupt builders as well love it Todster.


----------



## moXJO (7 August 2010)

todster said:


> How about a bit of detail then on the balls up and waste and then tell me where the government fits in,more likely dirt bag east coast builders.






Here is a few off the top of my head where the government fits in
 The administration requirements and beurocracy (I’m not surprised with the current delays). 

The over-specifying material being used in the building pushing up costs.

The need to rush the stimulus at a stupid speed. The time constraints and fines for delays have created even bigger delays because no one wants to touch the job. Who wants to be fined because you can't do your job because the last guy hasn't finished

Communication with the school, builder and government is almost non existent.

Payment delays causing tradies to buckle under.

The catholic schools are doing it for about half of what it costs state.

But the point of dirt bag east coast builders is also exactly right. These guys have screwed over a lot of the smaller guys.

No offense, but I ain't going into naming specifics of problems on school sites.


----------



## todster (7 August 2010)

I don't know what it's like where you live but where i grew up an where i live now there are schools that before the BER are exactly the same as they were when i went to school 40 years ago.
If a bit of so called waste went into giving todays kids a bit more of a chance of attending a school of a higher calibre in facilities than the 70s i call that progress.
This is money well spent imo.


----------



## moXJO (7 August 2010)

todster said:


> I don't know what it's like where you live but where i grew up an where i live now there are schools that before the BER are exactly the same as they were when i went to school 40 years ago.
> If a bit of so called waste went into giving todays kids a bit more of a chance of attending a school of a higher calibre in facilities than the 70s i call that progress.
> This is money well spent imo.




I agree with the sentiment. Hell, I liked a lot of labors policies and voted for them last election. Problem was their implementation of those policies sucked extremely badly. It's like they had no game plan other than throw fistfuls of dollars in the hope that it would all work out in the end. Instead we got a multitude of expensive F^ups and a bigger government with more bureaucracy. 
Currently I like some of labors policies, but don't have much faith in their planning or rolling out. 
I'm not that keen on some of the libs policies and what they intend to cut (mining tax and some others) but their position on the internet filter will probably slide my vote.


----------



## Julia (7 August 2010)

drsmith said:


> If we don't know, then it is up to the proponents of such a policy (the Greens) to explain.




I've looked through their website in the hope of finding some indication of costings for any of their policies and/or where these funds will come from.
Nothing.
Have therefore emailed The Greens asking for this.
Will be happy to post whatever response I receive.


> No policy should be supported from a position of ignorance.



But that is exactly what will happen.  How many times have you heard voters say "I'm not happy with either of the main parties so I think I'll vote Green".

It's becoming a default choice which is really stupid.  At least when the Democrats filled that role, they had some reasonable understanding of the economic ramifications of policies.


----------



## Julia (7 August 2010)

moXJO said:


> I agree with the sentiment. Hell, I liked a lot of labors policies and voted for them last election. Problem was their implementation of those policies sucked extremely badly. It's like they had no game plan other than throw fistfuls of dollars in the hope that it would all work out in the end. Instead we got a multitude of expensive F^ups and a bigger government with more bureaucracy.
> Currently I like some of labors policies, but don't have much faith in their planning or rolling out.
> I'm not that keen on some of the libs policies and what they intend to cut (mining tax and some others) but their position on the internet filter will probably slide my vote.



moXJO, will your decision be based purely on policies?  Will personality/characteristics/attitudes of Ms Gillard and Mr Abbott influence your choice?


----------



## Julia (7 August 2010)

> Originally Posted by Julia
> You have failed to show any legislation that resulted from Tony Abbott's religious views. As TS has pointed out, he may hold these views, but they have not been translated into legislation.





IFocus said:


> > Don't want to be pedantic but this what I said
> >
> > "To be fair Abbott is one of the few Australian politicians as a minister that actually made decisions based on his religious back ground fact is he has form of projecting his religious beliefs into action."
> 
> ...


----------



## nioka (7 August 2010)

Julia said:


> But that is exactly what will happen.  How many times have you heard voters say "I'm not happy with either of the main parties so I think I'll vote Green".
> 
> It's becoming a default choice which is really stupid.  At least when the Democrats filled that role, they had some reasonable understanding of the economic ramifications of policies.




This is exactly the problem that worries me. I don't want to vote for either party and certainly don't want the greens to control anything. They ruin everything they get associated with and you can start on the enviroment  if there is any doubt. They are no help there at all. 

We actually need a "One Nation" party. Not the old one but a new party that has a true one nation as its aim.
 Failing that then I'll vote National. That is only half way to supporting the dreaded Abbott and hopefully they will keep some debate going on some issues, at least in the party room. I have decided.

The bit that really swung me was Julia no longer referring to the "Labor" government but now calls it the "Gillard" government.


----------



## Julia (7 August 2010)

DocK said:


> This concerns me, as I worry that if the Greens do wind up with the balance of power the Senate could become stymied altogether with virtually nothing achieved for a term.  It can be a good thing to have someone to "keep the bastards honest" as the Democrats urged, and the prospect of the Greens having outright power to pass whatever legislation they choose is a scary prospect , but so too is the prospect of a govt having their hands tied on every policy they want to put into effect.  To have a Senate that does nothing but squabble and bicker over every piece of legislation couldn't be good for the country, and is the reason imo that a protest vote to the Greens could be the worst thing a voter may do.  Better to vote for whichever of the major parties you prefer and give them a fair go at governing for a term, I think.  If they make a (bigger) mess of the job, we'll all have our say again next election.



Is a hung parliament a possibility and if so, what would be the likely outcome?
It's something I've never come across.


----------



## trainspotter (7 August 2010)

IFocus said:


> Don't want to be pedantic but this what I said
> "ACTION"
> Would that be like the shrill comments from the pro Liberals on the thread?
> 
> ...




Please respond to post #447.What has changed? What is he responsible for exactly? Voting with a conscience? What was influenced on Australian society and what legislation was passed with his ACTION ?

How is this different to Julia Gillard being exposed that she voted against raising the old age pension and questioned paid parental leave allownace? NOW ... she is all for it??

GOSH ........ I sound so shrill asking such logical questions being a Librarian. Ooopsss a Liberatore ....... nope ..... a Laberalologist ........ dare I say it ? A blue blood ?

And you say you can't trust Abbott?? HUH ?? Please explain?


----------



## drsmith (7 August 2010)

Julia said:


> At least when the Democrats filled that role, they had some reasonable understanding of the economic ramifications of policies.



It's a pity the Democrats lost their way. Their broad thrust on income tax still makes sense, but they want to increase taxes overall.

Their policy of ditching the proposed resources rent tax is misleading in that they want to tax mining to the same extent as Henry, but through state royalties.

Overall their manifesto is somewhat fringy.


----------



## moXJO (7 August 2010)

Julia said:


> moXJO, will your decision be based purely on policies?  Will personality/characteristics/attitudes of Ms Gillard and Mr Abbott influence your choice?




Policies and the ability to roll the scheme out. Going off personality/characteristics/attitudes would lead me to hang myself.

In the end Gillard is just a front to the factions and so is Abbott (maybe to a lesser extent). I'm more interested in where they want to lead us and how much it's going to cost me.  

Basically it's which environment I am likely to do best under (or capitalize on) as a small business owner.
The least amount of bureaucracy and government interference. 
Education
Health
Infrastructure
Probably in that order

I'm not immune to some of the spin and my own bias though.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (7 August 2010)

IFocus said:


> As a Minister Abbott was anti-abortion, anti-contraception, anti-IVF, anti-stem cell research and  wanted to ban no-fault divorce.
> 
> Yep its all wrong



Ifocus,
Not getting at you in anyway but the point I was getting at is the labeling of someone as being mad. Not that I agree with overly religious dogma. 

Cheers.


----------



## Calliope (8 August 2010)

If you missed the "Insiders" this morning you didn't miss much, The panel was stacked with two Labor supporters and one Abbot critic.

The interview with Gillard by Barrie Cassidy was a farce. He let Gillard run off at the mouth with her usual waffle. You would have thought that after her stage mannered meeting with Rudd yesterday Cassidy could have asked some searching questions. But no, he let her take over the interview.

I would like to have known what Cabinet job she offered Rudd. I can't imagine him joining the team without a firm offer.


----------



## noco (8 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> If you missed the "Insiders" this morning you didn't miss much, The panel was stacked with two Labor supporters and one Abbot critic.
> 
> The interview with Gillard by Barrie Cassidy was a farce. He let Gillard run off at the mouth with her usual waffle. You would have thought that after her stage mannered meeting with Rudd yesterday Cassidy could have asked some searching questions. But no, he let her take over the interview.
> 
> I would like to have known what Cabinet job she offered Rudd. I can't imagine him joining the team without a firm offer.




I thought Cassidy would have pushed home on Gillard the point that Abbott initially wanted three debates and she was adamant with Abbott that there would only be one. Then she changes her mind on wants two because it now suits her. OMG Cassidy was weak and as you say he let her waffle on. He is very biased and I have let ABC know on several occassions, but it's like pouring water on a duck's back with the ABC. They take no notice at all.


----------



## Calliope (8 August 2010)

The cost of this unwanted library is* $19,574 per pupil.*

*WHEN parents of children at Cattai Public School learned their school's library would cost $920,000, it was obvious the price was inflated.
*



> *The worst part is that the tiny school of 47 students and three teachers never wanted a new library; it wanted a hall, and students have to travel 18km to neighbouring Maroota to use one*




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-waste-confirmed/story-fn59niix-1225902293985


----------



## todster (8 August 2010)

noco said:


> I thought Cassidy would have pushed home on Gillard the point that Abbott initially wanted three debates and she was adamant with Abbott that there would only be one. Then she changes her mind on wants two because it now suits her. OMG Cassidy was weak and as you say he let her waffle on. He is very biased and I have let ABC know on several occassions, but it's like pouring water on a duck's back with the ABC. They take no notice at all.




Women quite often change there mind!


----------



## sails (8 August 2010)

todster said:


> Women quite often change there mind!




lol todster... and yet you want this mind changing woman to run our country?

Women in power usually don't have the luxury of changing their minds if they want to stay in power.


----------



## noco (8 August 2010)

sails said:


> lol todster... and yet you want this mind changing woman to run our country?
> 
> Women in power usually don't have the luxury of changing their minds if they want to stay in power.




Hear, Hear!


----------



## todster (8 August 2010)

sails said:


> lol todster... and yet you want this mind changing woman to run our country?
> 
> Women in power usually don't have the luxury of changing their minds if they want to stay in power.




Not really  but i wont be voting for Tones.
Is a vote for the Greens more irresponsible than not voting at all,maybe heckle or jeckle could answer that?


----------



## sails (8 August 2010)

todster said:


> Not really  but i wont be voting for Tones.
> Is a vote for the Greens more irresponsible than not voting at all,maybe heckle or jeckle could answer that?




Agree the choices aren't great, but Tones seems to be trying to improve.  

Surely we can't go on with the on-going circus acts produced by Labor in the name of running our country.


----------



## todster (8 August 2010)

sails said:


> Agree the choices aren't great, but Tones seems to be trying to improve.
> 
> Surely we can't go on with the on-going circus acts produced by Labor in the name of running our country.




Either way is going to provide a good laugh,Abbott unleashed would be something.


----------



## sails (8 August 2010)

todster said:


> Either way is going to provide a good laugh,Abbott unleashed would be something.




Isn't that jumping to conclusions about Abbott?  

Here's an article quoting what Abbott's neighbours think about him. 
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/el...ht-up-our-street/story-fn5zm695-1225898197721



> A man who lives just above the Abbotts says we won't find anyone who'll say a bad word about Abbott.
> 
> He's right. They love him. Not as a politician but, I think, for being a man who has raised nice children, has a nice wife and works hard.
> 
> "He's a nice guy, believe me," the man says. "I wouldn't like to see you write a single derogatory word about him. I'm not saying everyone has the same political views, but he's a good family man.




When it comes to policy, I would think he will have to toe the line with party policy.  Turnball lost the leadership when he tried to run with his own ideas on ETS.   

Tony has been in politics for a while and should know there is a certain discipline to leadership.  If he does start running his own ship, I suspect his days would be numbered as leader.


----------



## todster (8 August 2010)

sails said:


> Isn't that jumping to conclusions about Abbott?
> 
> Here's an article quoting what Abbott's neighbours think about him.
> http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/el...ht-up-our-street/story-fn5zm695-1225898197721
> ...




When Minchin and Nutt dont have there hands up his butt we will see the arrogance and lack of discipline return dont you worry about that as Joh would say!


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (8 August 2010)

todster said:


> Either way is going to provide a good laugh,Abbott unleashed would be something.



But current labor and the potential of the greens to turn this country into a basket weaving country is far worse. It will be hell.

The fiscal recklessness has to be stopped first. Liberal is the solution.


----------



## Calliope (8 August 2010)

Sails, I'm surprised that you are ignoring the old adage;


*Don't argue with idiots. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
*


----------



## sails (8 August 2010)

todster said:


> When Minchin and Nutt dont have there hands up his butt we will see the arrogance and lack of discipline return dont you worry about that as Joh would say!




Only time will tell if you are right or just jumping to conclusions.

And, don't forget, Joolya has Swan nipping at her heels (shudder).

Anyway Todster, what do you reckon has happened to deputy PM Swan?  Has he fled the country?  Being muzzled???  If labor win (shudder), this is the guy who will run the country if Joolya is o/seas and yet he is not actively part of the election campaign?  What are Labor trying to hide?  

I think the answer is obvious, but willing to hear a different view point...lol


----------



## pilots (8 August 2010)

The thing that worries me most is if Labor gets in again:the Libs won't want to govern the country after them, as we will be so far in the red, what have we borrowed to date, and at what interest rate is it.


----------



## sails (8 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> Sails, I'm surprised that you are ignoring the old adage;
> 
> 
> *Don't argue with idiots. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
> *




lol Calliope - I see it more as having differing view points rather than an argument.  Although, I have let my frustration out at times too.

Sometimes a level headed conversation can do more good than a full scale attack.  Once an argument starts, both sides put their defences up and it becomes a waste of words -  IMO, of course...


----------



## todster (8 August 2010)

pilots said:


> The thing that worries me most is if Labor gets in again:the Libs won't want to govern the country after them, as we will be so far in the red, what have we borrowed to date, and at what interest rate is it.




I thought you were into borrowing?


----------



## todster (8 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> Sails, I'm surprised that you are ignoring the old adage;
> 
> 
> *Don't argue with idiots. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
> *




I fly out this arvo old mate so get your carer to change your nappy and relax
Gone for two weeks no internet ok


----------



## pilots (8 August 2010)

todster said:


> I thought you were into borrowing?



The last loan we paid off was at 17%, will not need any more loans again.


----------



## drsmith (8 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> If you missed the "Insiders" this morning you didn't miss much, The panel was stacked with two Labor supporters and one Abbot critic.



Criticism of the Coalition's costings by one of the panelists was particularly scathing. This was on the basis of lost revenue from ditching the ALP's RRT but still counting tax cuts that flowed from it as savings.

More on costings from the SMH,

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/coalitions-promises-in-search-of-costings-20100805-11kqw.html


----------



## Julia (8 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> If you missed the "Insiders" this morning you didn't miss much, The panel was stacked with two Labor supporters and one Abbot critic.
> 
> The interview with Gillard by Barrie Cassidy was a farce. He let Gillard run off at the mouth with her usual waffle. You would have thought that after her stage mannered meeting with Rudd yesterday Cassidy could have asked some searching questions. But no, he let her take over the interview.



I don't think I've ever seen a more passive, 'let her say whatever she wants' interview!  She just ran off at the mouth about Tony Abbott with no interruption from Barrie Cassidy at all.  Unbelievable.



> I would like to have known what Cabinet job she offered Rudd. I can't imagine him joining the team without a firm offer.



The saintly Mr Rudd having a personal strategy rather than nobly swallowing his humiliation for the good of the mighty Labor Party?  You must be joking, Calliope, and completely maligning the motives of Messiah Rudd.

Seriously, yep it will be Foreign Minister at the very least, perhaps Deputy PM?   Move over Mr Swan.  Could that happen?


----------



## Logique (8 August 2010)

todster said:


> Yeah you got to love WA 2 weeks on 1week off 180k a year and practically illiterate imagine what i could earn if i was as smart as you the mind boggles



Two on and one off, would be brutal at my age. I do admire your stamina, but the salary looks ok! Might be wrong but Smelly Terror could be on a similar roster also?  Working hard for the country and keeping our miners going. Caught vision of Twiggy in a box at the MCG this weekend, catching the footy.

Anyway feel free to come back on and let off some steam. I don't think think Calliope takes it too personally.


----------



## Logique (8 August 2010)

Julia said:


> Seriously, yep it will be Foreign Minister at the very least, perhaps Deputy PM?   Move over Mr Swan.  Could that happen?



My tip would be Foreign Minister, playing Downer to Gillard's Howard, in Rudd's mind anyway. Rudd mouldering away in a junior domestic ministry would be too destabilizing for Labor.


----------



## Calliope (8 August 2010)

Logique said:


> Anyway feel free to come back on and let off some steam. I don't think think Calliope takes it too personally.




I agree. No forum would be complete without one or two todsters.


----------



## todster (8 August 2010)

Logique said:


> Two on and one off, would be brutal at my age. I do admire your stamina, but the salary looks ok! Might be wrong but Smelly Terror could be on a similar roster also?  Working hard for the country and keeping our miners going. Caught vision of Twiggy in a box at the MCG this weekend, catching the footy.
> 
> Anyway feel free to come back on and let off some steam. I don't think think Calliope takes it too personally.




Not real hard you know 13x12 hour shifts then a full week to yourself,no traffic jams,hardest thing is doing your own washing at night,but have been known to sneak home in the shift to do it.
Not too many people work hard at the mine,drillers and co do, but starting to warm up that drains you even bludging lol


----------



## IFocus (8 August 2010)

drsmith said:


> Criticism of the Coalition's costings by one of the panelists was particularly scathing. This was on the basis of lost revenue from ditching the ALP's RRT but still counting tax cuts that flowed from it as savings.
> 
> More on costings from the SMH,
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/coalitions-promises-in-search-of-costings-20100805-11kqw.html




One panelist pointed out the paid parental leave scheme blowing out to $4 billion and George Megalogenis from the Australian has been pointing out for awhile about the black hole in Liberal savings around $9 billion I believe.



July 29th


"Liberals’ double counting staggers"

OUR first campaign lesson in economic comedy comes from Tony Abbott’s 1.5 per cent cut in the company tax rate.



> He is pretending to pay for it by scrapping Labor’s 1 per cent cut to the company tax rate””a double counting exercise that has to be seen to be believed.




http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com...n/comments/liberals_double_counting_staggers/


----------



## drsmith (8 August 2010)

IFocus said:


> George Megalogenis from the Australian has been pointing out for awhile about the black hole in Liberal savings around $9 billion I believe.



Where ?


----------



## IFocus (8 August 2010)

drsmith said:


> Where ?




I thought that's what George said on the Insiders?

Try this I think you will understand the numbers better than me.

http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/2010/s2976693.htm


----------



## drsmith (8 August 2010)

IFocus said:


> I thought that's what George said on the Insiders?



It was. He is saying the Coalition is claiming savings from scrapped programs linked to the Resources Rent Tax. It adds up provided the Coalition is not spending the proceeds of the RRT itself as obviously, there wouldn't be any. 

If the Coalition has identified $24bn in savings, but $9bn is from RRT spending measures, then they have $15bn to spend themselves to balance the books.

Politically, I can understand why the Coalition would claim $24bn over $15bn because the $9bn RRT dependant programs is money the ALP plans to spend. I find it hard to believe though that the Coalition would then make the error of including RRT revenue as part of their own spending. Had they done that, the ALP could have simply torn the Coalition apart instead of tearing themselves apart.


----------



## drsmith (8 August 2010)

I have quickly added up the Coalition's savings and spending measures from the Liberals website and note the following,

1) Savings (minus programs linked to the RSPT/RRT) ~$14.8bn.
2) Funding from other programs cut and extra taxes ~$14.1bn. This includes $6.1bn in tax raised by the 1.5% corporate profit levy to fund their maternity leave scheme.
3) Cost of their programs ~$20.8bn.

That leaves ~$8.1bn in the kitty. Not all programs are there however with the 1.5% cut to the corporate tax rate in 2013/14 being one example. That will be more than $3.1bn as this is what the 1.5% maternity scheme levy is estimated to raise in the same year.


----------



## drsmith (9 August 2010)

According to Joe Hokey, the Coalition's spending is $25.7bn and their savings are $28.5bn.


----------



## Julia (9 August 2010)

drsmith said:


> According to Joe Hokey, the Coalition's spending is $25.7bn and their savings are $28.5bn.



Are they including the savings from the non-application of the resources tax in this?


----------



## drsmith (9 August 2010)

Julia said:


> Are they including the savings from the non-application of the resources tax in this?



The quote was on today's debate with Wayne Swan but Joe did not go into further detail.

The savings I added up from the Liberal's web site last night was $28.9bn. This excluded savings from the RRT but included transfers of funds from Labor's programs to the Coalition's and the $6.1bn business tax to fund their maternity scheme.


----------



## IFocus (9 August 2010)

drsmith said:


> The quote was on today's debate with Wayne Swan but Joe did not go into further detail.
> 
> The savings I added up from the Liberal's web site last night was $28.9bn. This excluded savings from the RRT but included transfers of funds from Labor's programs to the Coalition's and the $6.1bn business tax to fund their maternity scheme.




Thanks for the numbers


----------



## moXJO (9 August 2010)

todster said:


> WA has a Liberal State Government,8 complaints in the state!




A little more on this



> According to a 2006 report from the IPA, the Bracks Labor government dictated that while Commonwealth Games village was a series of houses the contractor had to use ‘union-friendly’ work practices, similar to those used on high-rise building developments. And because this was an unusual instruction the contract reflected some of the cost differences.
> 
> Hey presto! What do you find? The IPA says the ‘union-friendly’ contracts boosted the cost of the Commonwealth Games village by between 25 and 34 per cent, almost exactly the figure that we are seeing around the country in education buildings.
> 
> ...


----------



## overhang (9 August 2010)

moXJO said:


> According to a 2006 report from the IPA, the Bracks Labor government dictated that while Commonwealth Games village was a series of houses the contractor had to use ‘union-friendly’ work practices, similar to those used on high-rise building developments. And because this was an unusual instruction the contract reflected some of the cost differences.
> 
> Hey presto! What do you find? The IPA says the ‘union-friendly’ contracts boosted the cost of the Commonwealth Games village by between *25 and 34 per cent, almost exactly the figure that we are seeing around the country in education buildings.*
> 
> ...




Not sure where 25 to 34% is coming from as the inquiry has revealed blowouts of 5-6%, this being the preliminary inquiry of course.  Also I haven't seen 1 school project in Vic to what would be considered "union friendly"


----------



## moXJO (10 August 2010)

overhang said:


> Not sure where 25 to 34% is coming from as the inquiry has revealed blowouts of 5-6%, this being the preliminary inquiry of course.




Really? not cost blowouts (thats another thing altogether), the way they were priced compared to catholic schools or normal jobs. 



> But the cost doubling is not isolated to prefabricated buildings. The estimates document shows the price the department expects to pay for most school buildings is roughly double what comparable buildings cost to deliver.
> 
> The Catholic Holy Trinity Primary School in Wagga Wagga, in regional NSW, has just completed building a brick 240sq m commercial-quality tuckshop for $600,000. The canteen includes a commercial kitchen with stainless-steel benchtops, a separate cold room and a toilet block.
> 
> Tottenham Central School, near Dubbo in central NSW, is receiving a 25sq m tuckshop for $594,000. That canteen is not even big enough to fit a full-sized fridge or a meat slicer. According to NSW government records, the Tottenham school is one of 19 schools receiving the tiny canteens. Government audits have found no problems with the price.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/politics/frustrations-build-around-the-states-as-costs-blow-out-well-beyond-needs/story-e6frgczf-1225872379542



> Also I haven't seen 1 school project in Vic to what would be considered "union friendly"




LOL uh huh


----------



## trainspotter (10 August 2010)

Last night on Q&A the "REAL" Julia was on display. She worked the crowd over like a snake oil saleswoman. The crowd was eating out of her hand all night. Well done Julia ! The Mark Latham question was deflated before it began to burst like an angry boil. She appeared relaxed and in control of her candid remarks that kept the audience enthralled. It was a pity it was a solo appearance and there were no "REAL" curly questions that would have asked about policies and the future of the nation. More like a social chit chat at the Country Womens Association. More pie?


----------



## sails (10 August 2010)

Ms Gillard certainly knows how to work the crowd - it's a pity she represents such wasteful fiscal policy and has done deals with the greens..


----------



## noco (10 August 2010)

trainspotter said:


> Last night on Q&A the "REAL" Julia was on display. She worked the crowd over like a snake oil saleswoman. The crowd was eating out of her hand all night. Well done Julia ! The Mark Latham question was deflated before it began to burst like an angry boil. She appeared relaxed and in control of her candid remarks that kept the audience enthralled. It was a pity it was a solo appearance and there were no "REAL" curly questions that would have asked about policies and the future of the nation. More like a social chit chat at the Country Womens Association. More pie?




Tony Jones was absolutely soft on Gillard.

I would like to have seen the questions Jones knocked back. I'm sure he would have hand picked the esay ones.

It will be different when Abbott has his turn. The questions will be designed to embarrass him to the kilt.


----------



## trainspotter (10 August 2010)

It will be intersting to see how the crowd reacts to Tony Abbott and what questions will be asked of him. I note that when he went on "Hey Hey it's saTURDay" that the crowd booed him. 

Not helping that Hockey said 25 billion and Abbott said 18 billion. Of course this was the interest saved on the NBN rollout etc etc but on't let the truth get in the way of a good story. Also Treasury has crunched the numbers on election promises and are also claiming a 800 million funding shortfall ??

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/federal-election/abbott-caught-short-by-800m-20100809-11u62.html

WHY oh WHY do newspapers publish pictures like this?? HUH ??


----------



## Mofra (10 August 2010)

Interestingly, the normally right-leaning Terry McCrann has penned an unflattering article regarding Abbott's tax agenda. Will provide a boost the the Labour-types who will shift the focus onto the economy which is seen as Abbott's weakest area:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/busines...-ticks-wrong-box/story-e6frfig6-1225903182377

He does raise the politically unpalatable (but possibly the most effective) GST issue in the article as well.


----------



## drsmith (10 August 2010)

To me the GST should not be raised but rather expanded to cover all goods and services.

Getting rid of the minor taxes as suggested by Terry McCrann does at face value make sense.


----------



## noco (10 August 2010)

drsmith said:


> To me the GST should not be raised but rather expanded to cover all goods and services.
> 
> Getting rid of the minor taxes as suggested by Terry McCrann does at face value make sense.





Yes I agree. An extra 2.5% on the GST would amount to about the same as an ETS.

An ETS will add heaps to the cost of living and we won't know where or how it will affect goods and services. At least with an extra 2.5% (12.5% GST) we will know exactly what any increase will be. 

Unfortuneatly the Labor Party would dare not increase the GST for fear of losing votes.

NZ has just up the GST to 15%.


----------



## drsmith (10 August 2010)

I suggested the GST should be expanded to include all goods and services, not raised. The purpose should be as part of overall tax simplification, not to raise extra revenue.

Raising the GST rate is a slippery slope. 12.5%, 15%, ??% ?


----------



## bigdog (10 August 2010)

*Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/..._look_at_past_extremism_lets_look_at_gillards

I’m just dying for someone to track down the former Catherine Emerson and ask if she will be voting for Gillard. 

Ms Emerson is the ex wife of small business minister Craig Emerson and the mother of his three children. She apparently learned that Julia and Craig were an item when hubby said he wanted a divorce and would be moving in with the future PM. 

They were together for two years. Reckon any widespread mention of “other woman” Gillard’s home-wrecking activities will pretty much torpedo Abbott’s problems with the purported “gender gap.” You won’t hear another word about it after that.


----------



## bigdog (10 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*

http://www.abc.net.au/austory/content/2006/s1586140.htm

The Gillard Diaries - Transcript
PROGRAM TRANSCRIPT: Monday, 6 March , 2006 

JULIA GILLARD: My relationship with Craig Emerson was a very important one to me. Being involved with a colleague has got its down side in the sense that drawing the line between what's work and what's not work becomes increasingly blurred. Craig and I were staying together at a hotel and I'd managed to forget to pack my contact lens holder. So I was just storing the contact lenses at the bottom of a glass, which wasn't exactly the smartest thing in the world to do. Er, so...in the bathroom, this glass with the contact lenses and a bit of solution in them. So, you know, during the course of the night, Craig gets up and thinking it's water, grabs the glass and drinks it. So I was wandering around National Conference blind for the next morning. I did have to give the Health Policy Report at the podium not basically able to see my notes or see the audience. Craig and I lived in different states in very demanding positions. And in the hurly-burly of the Labor world, ultimately it was just too difficult. I'm not involved in a relationship now, and you know, your, sort of, your life history rolls on.


----------



## bigdog (10 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*

http://www.rightpulse.com/archives/2181

*Gillard the home wrecker*
August 3rd, 2010
It is widely know that between 2003 – 2005 Gillard had a relationship with fellow ALP hack Craig Emerson. The relationship destroyed Emerson’s marriage and his family of three young children. Gillard is a feminist so her disdain for marriage should come as no surprise. The media think Gillard’s personal life should be off limits to reporting, because it is supposedly irrelevant to Gillard being PM. 2GB’s Ray Hadley on Monday said he didn’t care about the affair. I wonder what Craig Emerson’s wife and children think. I gather they cared at the time.

Gillard’s personal choices are relevant to the campaign. Hadley and others of his ilk might consider that Gillard’s personal life clearly indicates that she cares nothing for the institutions of family and marriage – two of the foundation blocks of the modern conservative movement. Gillard’s true opinions on a host of other social issues then follow. For instance, how much does Gillard really want to support stay home mums, the family tax-benefit, etc… Or given Gillard’s extra-martial affair, de facto relationship and feminist background how convincing is her opposition to homosexual marriage. Not very.

The feminist movement has been rallying against heterosexual marriage for 30 to 40 years, so it is no surprise that they support homosexual marriage, hoping such a social change will devalue marriage generally to make it meaningless. Spectator Australia asks the question but can’t come up with the answers:

What I’m getting at here is that these feminists can’t have it both ways. Marriage is either, by its very nature, an anachronistic heterosexual institution that advantages heterosexual men and should be done away with, or it isn’t. It can’t simply be extended to include any type of person who is intrinsically excluded from it just because minority rights are cool. Why put so much time and effort into exposing the tradition as a tyrannical, oppressive, bourgeois fiction then campaign to resurrect it for a particular group?

I think the answer is not to be found in a Gillard born-again political conversion. The radical left know what they are doing and it is hard to believe that Gillard is too far away from them. Devalue – destroy.


----------



## explod (10 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*

That is not right, the marriage was broken before she ever started going out with him and they were living seperate lives.  

The press would have been right over this like s... to a blanket if there was any chance of such a scenario being correct.

This post is being  written with my wife looking over my shoulder, she says "totally incorrect information"

Big dog you are barking up the wrong tree here.   Go elsewhere with your sculduggery.


----------



## IFocus (10 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*



bigdog said:


> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/..._look_at_past_extremism_lets_look_at_gillards
> 
> I’m just dying for someone to track down the former Catherine Emerson and ask if she will be voting for Gillard.
> 
> ...




Bigdog are you claiming Craig Emerson wasn't responsible for the break up of his own marriage?


----------



## basilio (10 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*

This thread is a piece of irrelevant, maliciously stupid drivel. I don't believe it adds anything to ASF forums.

For the record  Julia Gillard had a relationship with Craig Emerson in 2003 when he was then separated (but not divorced ) from his wife.


----------



## pixel (10 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*

Question to Joe Blow:
If enough members rate this thread as "terrible" like I've just done, will you simply remove it?
How many "votes" does it take?


----------



## explod (10 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*



pixel said:


> Question to Joe Blow:
> If enough members rate this thread as "terrible" like I've just done, will you simply remove it?
> How many "votes" does it take?




Agree, I can be a bit low and testy at times but if this type of stuff is allowed on what does it do to our standards going forward.

Be serious, vehement and into it for your beliefs, particularaly at a time like this with the election, but surely its not that bad that you have to try to invent this type of thing.


----------



## trainspotter (10 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*

ROFL ..... Bigdog has struck a chord ...... do the research .... some of it is true!

The shadow ministers' affair ... http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/07/05/1057179204775.html
By Jim O'Rourke
*July 6 2003*
The Sun-Herald

"Meet Canberra's newest power couple: upwardly mobile Julia Gillard, now with the crucial health portfolio, and Craig Emerson, new workplace relations shadow.

And already the pair, dubbed Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton by colleagues aware of their affair away from the political limelight, have caused Mr Crean an unexpected controversy over his appointments."

Whatever happened to free speech?


----------



## explod (10 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*



> One senior ALP figure has told Labor colleagues that if the pair - one of them separated but not divorced - are looking at taking on senior leadership roles it would not be a "good look" if they did not marry.




Trainspotter, this is the only mild reference in the article your link purports to support.

And it does not.  The divorce may not have been in but the marriage was over by that time.

You cannot bend the facts.


----------



## Julia (10 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*



pixel said:


> Question to Joe Blow:
> If enough members rate this thread as "terrible" like I've just done, will you simply remove it?
> How many "votes" does it take?



I echo pixel's question.  I'd further ask why the thread could not equally be entitled "Craig Emerson, the Home Wrecker".  
And if I really wanted to be unpleasant, I'd have something to say about her past and present taste in blokes.


----------



## trainspotter (10 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*



explod said:


> Trainspotter, this is the only mild reference in the article your link purports to support.
> 
> And it does not.  The divorce may not have been in but the marriage was over by that time.
> 
> You cannot bend the facts.




Not bending the facts at all explod. I thought I quantified my response with the word "SOME" when I typed _"some of it is true!"_ The article I referred to was written in *July 6th 2003* for Christoper Robins sake ! The article went on to say she is LEADERSHIP *ding dong* material !!

I never agreed she was a home wrecker but then again if you believe anything written on the right pulse website you are a candidate for a frontal lobotomy.

Didn't Gareth Evans and Cheryl Kernot do something similar? Ummmm as Mrs Emerson has decided NOT to comment we really do not know for sure now do we?


----------



## Joe Blow (10 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*



pixel said:


> Question to Joe Blow:
> If enough members rate this thread as "terrible" like I've just done, will you simply remove it?
> How many "votes" does it take?




It's not really a question of votes. I'm sure there quite a few one star threads floating around the forums. 

I will generally only remove a thread if it particularly offensive, particularly idiotic or spam. Of course, I think we could probably all agree on what constitutes spam but there would less agreement about what amounted to offensive content or blatant idiocy.

Sometimes a thread gets left just because of its entertainment or comedic value, such as this one: Any followers of Jesus here???????

All in all, it's a pretty hard call to make most times and can often depend on variables such as the time of day or how many glasses of red wine I've had.


----------



## Joe Blow (10 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*

In the spirit of democracy I have added a poll to this thread asking if it should be deleted. 

If there are more "Yes" votes by the time I go to bed I will remove it. If there are more "No" votes it can stay.


----------



## Julia (10 August 2010)

noco said:


> NZ has just up the GST to 15%.



It's not meaningful to quote that on its own.
NZ at the same time is about to reduce the top marginal rate to 33% and the corporate rate to 28%.
NZ has no CGT.
NZ has *non means-tested national superannuation available to every person over 65.*


----------



## IFocus (10 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*



Joe Blow said:


> All in all, it's a pretty hard call to make most times and can often depend on variables such as the time of day or how many glasses of red wine I've had.




Lot to said about the health benefits of red wine Joe


----------



## sails (10 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*

Joe - if the thread stays, maybe a change of title woud be more appropriate?

I don't like to see politicians (or anyone for that matter) knocked for their personal lives.  However politicians know they are pretty much in a gold fish bowl and that their lives are often under scrutiny.  Anti liberal people have no qualms about knocking anything they can find on Abbot - personal or not.

I suppose what's good for the goose is good for the gander... lol


----------



## Calliope (10 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*



sails said:


> Joe - if the thread stays, maybe a change of title woud be more appropriate?
> 
> I don't like to see politicians (or anyone for that matter) knocked for their personal lives.  However politicians know they are pretty much in a gold fish bowl and that their lives are often under scrutiny.  Anti liberal people have no qualms about knocking anything they can find on Abbot - personal or not.
> 
> I suppose what's good for the goose is good for the gander... lol




The virgin PM is above reproach. It was a nice touch to be dressed in virginal white the day she went to see the G.G. Like the virgin queen she has had multiple partners. I think Emerson was a novice seducer compared to her.  It will be interesting to see how long her latest gigolo lasts.


----------



## moXJO (10 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*

This thread would have just died if everyone didn't jump up and down and post on it.


----------



## basilio (10 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*



> This thread would have just died if everyone didn't jump up and down and post on it




*Excellent idea.  * Your point is an excellent way to finish this conversation


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 August 2010)

Julia said:


> It's not meaningful to quote that on its own.
> NZ at the same time is about to reduce the top marginal rate to 33% and the corporate rate to 28%.
> *NZ has no CGT.*
> NZ has *non means-tested national superannuation available to every person over 65.*



Which Australia has and was introduced by Labour. 

On another point:
For anyone to say Abott has no economic credentials is rubbish. What are Gillards credentials? We have seen lot's of spending and wastage by Labour, 100 million a day being paid for borrowed funds. Under the last Liberal government we had a fiscally sound time. I haven't seen that under the current Labour gov, Rudd etc. 
Can someone show me how we have a fiscally sound government?


----------



## wayneL (11 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*



sails said:


> Joe - if the thread stays, maybe a change of title woud be more appropriate?
> 
> I don't like to see politicians (or anyone for that matter) knocked for their personal lives.  However politicians know they are pretty much in a gold fish bowl and that their lives are often under scrutiny.  Anti liberal people have no qualms about knocking anything they can find on Abbot - personal or not.
> 
> *I suppose what's good for the goose is good for the gander... lol*




Yep, The socialists always squeal when their own methods are used on their own. 

But as a general point, I couldn't give a fat rat's about Dullard's (or Abbot's) personal life either and wish it wouldn't be an election issue.


----------



## explod (11 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*



wayneL said:


> Yep, The socialists always squeal when their own methods are used on their own.
> 
> But as a general point, I couldn't give a fat rat's about Dullard's (or Abbot's) personal life either and wish it wouldn't be an election issue.




Agree with the last point.   But because some my have a leaning to socialist ideas does not mean they cannot judge a fair go.

In fact this thread, or correctly Bigdogs assertion borders on libel in my view and surprised the mods did not jump right onto it for that reason.  Starting to see the political leanings are a bit one sided around here.  I am a green but a fair go please.

There was a two page article about two weeks ago according to my wife (shae cannot remember which rag) in regard to this matter and it was clearly shown that there was no impropriety on Gillards part in any of this according to her.   My wife was deserted in a previous life and left alone with her two young children.  She detests Tiger Woods et.al., so if she reckons Gillard is okay in this you better believe it.

Of course those with a Liberal bent will continue to mud rake instead of being constructive.  

Sorry I had retired before Joe put up the poll.


----------



## Knobby22 (11 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*

Agree with above.

I don't want to hear this sort of stuff about Liberal or Labor politicians.
It reminds me of US elections.

Do we have to go this low or is this the future for us?


----------



## trainspotter (11 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*

Bugger ........ had an epiphany and placed fingers to keyboard and wrote a massive body of work only to hit the wrong button and delete the lot. Ummmmmmm ...... I agree with sails was the essence of my post. They can dish it but not take it.

explod - if you click on the links that Bigdog has provided you will see that he has not written the spiel. It is not his point of view. He has pasted what is written on other Right wing websites. So therefore libel is out of the question. I think you could get him expelled from University for plagerism though !


----------



## nioka (11 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*

A Prime Minister should be above reproach. They should be someone we can all trust 100%. Their life should be available to withstand any scrutiny.

I dont know if it possible to find such a person but we should aim to get as close as possible to that objective. Rudd couldn't trust Gillard so can we. Then again can we trust Abbott, I dont. So we are between a rock and a hard place. 

I have found in life that those that are suspicious of everyone else is that way inclined because they cant be trusted themselves. So I try to base my criticism on facts not suspicions. Therefore I voted for the subject to continue to be debated assuming that there is truth in the allegations, that they are actual facts.

After all the CEO of DJs had to resign because he couldnt be trusted to resist the urge to fratenise with a staffer. Surely we would expect the same standard of our Prime Minister.


----------



## explod (11 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*



> After all the CEO of DJs had to resign because he couldnt be trusted to resist the urge to fratenise with a staffer. Surely we would expect the same standard of our Prime Minister.




In an ideal world, but this is not so.  However I think this is very different to the DJ incident and two side are emerging from that also.

Look at the way Hawke womanised and drank to excess only to become, some claim, a great Prime Minister.


----------



## sails (11 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*

IMO labor has chosen to make this election a personality contest between Gillard and Abbot.  If that's the case then labor has to put up with scrutiny into Gillards history.  

They know Gillard's ability to spin her way out of difficult questions with a flick of the head, a giggle, a few hand signals, a babble on about something irrelevant... and next question please... 

Billion dollar blunders are treated with the same brush off...

Is this what we really want for the next three years...


----------



## noco (11 August 2010)

Julia said:


> It's not meaningful to quote that on its own.
> NZ at the same time is about to reduce the top marginal rate to 33% and the corporate rate to 28%.
> NZ has no CGT.
> NZ has *non means-tested national superannuation available to every person over 65.*




Yes good point Julia, and a lot of people do not realise that when the GST was introduced into the Australian system, the states were supoosed to have drop their state taxes but in lots of cases this has not happened and to this day are still applying stamp duty certain financial transactions.


----------



## Joe Blow (11 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*

I think the poll results highlight not just the diversity of opinion on ASF but the reality of the "Damned if you do, damned if you don't" role of a forum administrator.

With approximately 58% voting for the thread to stay and 42% voting for its removal I hope everyone can see how impossible it is to please everyone. That's what makes these kind of decisions difficult. Whatever I decide, on whatever issue, there are going to be some on ASF who think I made the right decision and those who think I made a terrible decision. In this particular instance, there are also probably those who think allowing a vote was the wrong decision.

Anyway, I said I would abide by the decision of the majority and will allow the thread to stay for that reason. However, as sails suggested, I will consider editing the thread title so that it's not so provocative. I will also be removing the poll from the thread shortly.


----------



## moXJO (11 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*

We already have a thread on Julia Gillard just merge it


----------



## Joe Blow (11 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*



moXJO said:


> We already have a thread on Julia Gillard just merge it




Good idea. Threads merged.

For those who wish to alter their thread rating you are free to do so.


----------



## Logique (11 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*



bigdog said:


> http://www.rightpulse.com/archives/2181Gillard the home wrecker
> August 3rd, 2010
> Gillard’s personal choices are relevant to the campaign....*The feminist movement has been rallying against heterosexual marriage for 30 to 40 years*, so it is no surprise that they support homosexual marriage, hoping *such a social change will devalue marriage generally to make it meaningless*. Spectator Australia asks the question but can’t come up with the answers:
> ....The radical left know what they are doing and it is hard to believe that Gillard is too far away from them. Devalue – destroy.



I'm no reader of right pulse, but if Labor want to dish it out, they shouldn't squeal when they get some back. Personal attack ads on Abbott are still running daily..'mad monk'..off the cuff student remarks..any other grubby smear they can rake up. So let's not have a double standard here.

Also bigdog made a relevant point that might have been overlooked, as bolded above. 

Q: Do these things undermine traditional hetero marriage and family structure - paid maternity leave, rebates on childcare, rebates on education.

If you think it's a fantasy claim, go to your local library or bookshop and pick up a copy of former NZ Labour PM Helen Clark's biography, it will make your hair curl. Back me up here NZ posters who know this history. To the credit of the Kiwis, they finally woke up and turfed the lot of them out.


----------



## Mofra (11 August 2010)

*Re: Julia Gillard the Home Wrecker*



wayneL said:


> Yep, The socialists always squeal when their own methods are used on their own.



I highly doubt any one side of politics is cleaner than the other.

The minor parties on both side of the political spectrum tend to be cleaner, but when you are all care and no repsonsibility your task is much easier.


----------



## bigdog (11 August 2010)

I believe that both Abbot and Gillard are both duds and it is embarrassing that one of them will be our prime minister shortly!


----------



## explod (11 August 2010)

bigdog said:


> I believe that both Abbot and Gillard are both duds and it is embarrassing that one of them will be our prime minister shortly!




Good, some agreement at last coming through.

Maybe time to dump this thread and go to the election discussion.

Still thinks she looks nice though.


----------



## sails (11 August 2010)

explod said:


> ...Still thinks she looks nice though.




lol - that's a matter of opinion - all I see is someone who can't answer questions properly - giggles on about other things with those annoying hand signals.  It's too frustrating to watch.

But how will looks help her manage the country?  Her track record in fiscal management isn't inspiring.


----------



## Mr Z (11 August 2010)

bigdog said:


> I believe that both Abbot and Gillard are both duds and it is embarrassing that one of them will be our prime minister shortly!




+1



but the spending has to slow down! We have been fortunate so far despite government actions, now if they can just stop digging while the hole is relatively smallish.


----------



## trainspotter (11 August 2010)

explod said:


> Good, some agreement at last coming through.
> 
> Maybe time to dump this thread and go to the election discussion.
> 
> Still thinks she looks nice though.




Compared to Abbot she is a Godess


----------



## explod (11 August 2010)

sails said:


> lol - that's a matter of opinion - all I see is someone who can't answer questions properly - giggles on about other things with those annoying hand signals.  It's too frustrating to watch.
> 
> But how will looks help her manage the country?  Her track record in fiscal management isn't inspiring.




Looks and gender have nothing to do with it, agreed, just being a tounge in cheek chauvinist and should know better.

A Prime Minister alone cannot run the country, nor can they know or formulate the policy.  It is done by astute delegation.

Creen spoke well on ABC last night and it suddenly occurred to me we had not seen that for awhile.  Rudd was a one man band, it all fell off the truck for him (he in fact did it to himself) and the rest is now history.

It is my view also that Howard lost the last election for similar reasons.   There is a saying that goes back a bit now,  "elections are not won they are lost"

Gillard seems to have the ability to take questions in her stride and laugh along at the same time.   Rudd treated reporters and most others with contempt in the end.   Others, were Howard, Keating, Hawke, Fraser and Whitlam.   Takes a huge ego to aspire to and become a leader, so maybe an occupational hazard to some degree.

Gillard has a refreshing approach that is different so many of us are not yet in tune with this style.  We instinctively gravitate to the autocrat perhaps.

Interesting times ahead.


----------



## Julia (11 August 2010)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Which Australia has and was introduced by Labour.
> 
> On another point:
> For anyone to say Abott has no economic credentials is rubbish. What are Gillards credentials? We have seen lot's of spending and wastage by Labour, 100 million a day being paid for borrowed funds. Under the last Liberal government we had a fiscally sound time. I haven't seen that under the current Labour gov, Rudd etc.
> Can someone show me how we have a fiscally sound government?



Tony Abbott has an Economics degree, plus a law degree, was a Rhodes scholar, and has an MA in Politics and Philosophy (Oxford).

Andrew Robb also has an Economics degree, as does Sussan Ley, Shadow Treasury spokeswoman, plus MTax and MAcc.

The Coalition's spokesman on consumer affairs has a B.Comm, and the Small Business spokesman has B.Bus plus additional Business Leadership qualifications.


On the government side, they are mostly Arts and Law graduates except for Chris Bowen who has a BEc, and Craig Emerson, who has BEc, MEc, and PhD in Economics.


----------



## sails (11 August 2010)

explod said:


> ...Interesting times ahead.




Possibly scary times ahead for those of us who are nervous about labor's ability to govern efficiently.

Agree that there is much more to Government than the leader.  What about Swan lurking in the background.  He is deputy and apart from the odd appearance, he seems to be keeping fairly quiet in this election campaign.  Please correct me if I am wrong!

If it came down to a contest between Swan and Abbott, I don't think Swan would stand a chance.  It would make Abbott's slower speech quite acceptable.

A vote for labor is also a vote for Swan...


----------



## Mr Z (11 August 2010)

Swan looked like a bunny in the headlights when the GFC hit, he had no idea what was coming down the pike when he took the job. If it where another country it would have been funny to watch, as it was, it was terrifying. He is clueless, why you don't have to be at least partially qualified to be treasurer I will never know. That in itself is just plain scary, talk about blind leading the blind.

Mr Swan please just go away!


----------



## Calliope (11 August 2010)

Mr Z said:


> Mr Swan please just go away!




Yes. Even explod couldn't say that he looks nice. His face is quite weird when he tries to smile. It doesn't come natural.


----------



## sails (11 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> Yes. Even explod couldn't say that he looks nice. His face is quite weird when he tries to smile. It doesn't come natural.




He will be all over our TV screens if labor wins the election.  If Gillard is o/seas - he will be running the country.

No wonder he is keeping quiet for now...


----------



## Mr Z (11 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> Yes. Even explod couldn't say that he looks nice. His face is quite weird when he tries to smile. It doesn't come natural.




He is so slow there is a 30 second lag between the brains command to smile and the actual smiling... by the time he smiles the realization that his timing is now inappropriate is just dawning and he is actually trying to stop smiling half way through the act of smiling. Call him conflicted in the miniature of his life...LOL, don't get me started on the important things! If I had a pet rock I would not let Wayne mind it while I was on holidays.


----------



## trainspotter (11 August 2010)

*WHY OH WHY DON'T THE LIBS MAKE MORE OF THIS MESS?*

Or is it that the Catholics drive a hard bargain?

_NSW government schools are likely to pay as much as double what Catholic schools were charged under the $16.2 billion schools stimulus program. 

The NSW government's "anticipated final cost" for the standard 319sq m school library is $4860 per square metre, compared with $2451 per square metre reported by the NSW Catholic Block Grant Authority.

According to the figures, published on the NSW government's website, it expects to pay $3833 per square metre for a 464sq m block of four classrooms, compared with $2426 per square metre forecast by the Catholic Church._

Remember Julia Gillard was the minister that oversaw this pet project?

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...for-ber-projects/story-fn59niix-1225903680753


----------



## drsmith (11 August 2010)

I've never seen The Australian pound anything like they are pounding the BER.


----------



## IFocus (11 August 2010)

sails said:


> Agree that there is much more to Government than the leader.  What about Swan lurking in the background.  He is deputy and apart from the odd appearance, he seems to be keeping fairly quiet in this election campaign.  Please correct me if I am wrong!
> 
> If it came down to a contest between Swan and Abbott, I don't think Swan would stand a chance.  It would make Abbott's slower speech quite acceptable.
> 
> A vote for labor is also a vote for Swan...




Agree Swan has been a treasurer that any opposition should have torn apart and shredded but they haven't simply because they are extremely weak on the economy hence Abbott refuses the debate.


----------



## trainspotter (11 August 2010)

drsmith said:


> I've never seen The Australian pound anything like they are pounding the BER.




I wonder if it is the same journalists with an axe to grind? (Anthony Klan, Milanda Rout) Front page of The Australian today as well ? They are pounding alright !


----------



## Mr Z (11 August 2010)

trainspotter said:


> *WHY OH WHY DON'T THE LIBS MAKE MORE OF THIS MESS?*




It wasn't about effective expenditure of public money, silly boy! It was about speed, didn't you listen to Julia? Fast was good.... that is how you fix a GFC, open the fire hose and spray money around the place as fast as you possibly can. BTW is your house insulated?


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (11 August 2010)

IFocus said:


> Agree Swan has been a treasurer that any opposition should have torn apart and shredded but they haven't simply because they are extremely weak on the economy hence Abbott refuses the debate.



Abbott has given a reason for not doing a second debate. Originally, Gillard didn't want a 2nd debate (according to the media). Abbott has performed well throughout the campaign and looks like he will be the better leader.


----------



## Julia (11 August 2010)

IFocus said:


> Agree Swan has been a treasurer that any opposition should have torn apart and shredded but they haven't simply because they are extremely weak on the economy hence Abbott refuses the debate.



Yes, you're right.  Andrew Robb and Joe Hockey have been quite inadequate.
I've been wistfully thinking "oh, if only Peter Costello were still around".  He'd make mincemeat of Swan in about a minute and a half.


----------



## drsmith (11 August 2010)

Today's debates:

*Health (Nicola Roxon and Peter Dutton):*
Both appeared to have broad knowledge of the portfolio and it was a higher quality discussion than most of these events. Nicola's overall presentation had more polish.

*Leaders forum (Rooty RSL):*
Only saw part of TA's QandA. He tried to be himelf and give honest answers without promising the world. Crowd reaction to his answers seemed quiet positive. Didn't see JG but media opinion leand towards TA as the better performer. 

*Education debate (7:30 Report):*
Christopher Pyne brushed off Martin Ferguson's interruptions with ease. This guy oozes confidence and had a more positive closing statement. Only need to see facial expressions at the end to understand who won.


----------



## IFocus (11 August 2010)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Abbott has given a reason for not doing a second debate. Originally, Gillard didn't want a 2nd debate (according to the media). Abbott has performed well throughout the campaign and looks like he will be the better leader.




Understand your point re Abbotts reason Snake but I still think its damaging to Abbott not to go the 2nd debate its allowing Labor back into the game.


----------



## IFocus (11 August 2010)

Julia said:


> Yes, you're right.  Andrew Robb and Joe Hockey have been quite inadequate.
> I've been wistfully thinking "oh, if only Peter Costello were still around".  He'd make mincemeat of Swan in about a minute and a half.




Costello would coast to election victory in this contest I think smirk and all  but the irony is I suspect is that I am not sure Costello could galvanize the party together like Abbott.

Costello's strength was to manage and reduce dept my only criticism is he was never a significant investor of infrastructure but still Australia is a better place for him being treasurer.


----------



## trainspotter (11 August 2010)

Mr Z said:


> It wasn't about effective expenditure of public money, silly boy! It was about speed, didn't you listen to Julia? Fast was good.... that is how you fix a GFC, open the fire hose and spray money around the place as fast as you possibly can. BTW is your house insulated?




Aaaah of course ..... the "firemans piss" appraoach ..... why didn't I think of that? Some of it gets in the bowl but the rest is up the wall and ...... you get the picture.

My house was insulted loooooong before this catastrophe became topical. (amazing the difference when you drop a vowel) I am insulated as well.


----------



## drsmith (11 August 2010)

drsmith said:


> *Education debate (7:30 Report):*
> Christopher Pyne brushed off Martin Ferguson's interruptions with ease. This guy oozes confidence and had a more positive closing statement. Only need to see facial expressions at the end to understand who won.



Simon Crean, not Martin Ferguson.


----------



## Mr Z (12 August 2010)

Macquack said:


> Interesting point there Trainspotter.
> 
> After listening (reading) a barrage of labor bashing comments over the past two years, I have come to the conclusion that the best course of action for a government is to do f*** all. If the Labor government did 'f*** all', all the professional whingers on ASF would be happy and have nothing to whinge about (except for maybe a recession).
> 
> John Howard was in power for a very long time using this same policy of doing 'f*** all' (except bring in the regressive GST).




Actually you are right... the best thing any government could do is cut taxes and get out of the f'ing way of the people. It is and always will be the fastest way out of a hole. Econ 101.... look at Germany's history. All Labour have done here is dug a hole deeper and we will pay for it in the end.

GST regressive.... you really need to learn a bit more about our tax system. The GST was a step forward... now if we can just get them to let go of a whole bunch of other taxes we might just have a shot at a fair tax system.

Oh yeah... and the GST was first muted by Labour.... or don't you remember that!


----------



## Mr Z (12 August 2010)

trainspotter said:


> Aaaah of course ..... the "firemans piss" appraoach ..... why didn't I think of that? Some of it gets in the bowl but the rest is up the wall and ...... you get the picture.
> 
> My house was insulted loooooong before this catastrophe became topical. (amazing the difference when you drop a vowel) I am insulated as well.




Mine too... yet here I am paying for idiots with no sense or foresight to get free insulation. The left love to punish those who do the right thing off their own back.

Some where back there some one was saying this is the private sectors fault because the installers where private. What a whack job! Jeeze... The government distorts any market it enters, artificial demand, poorly supervised will always bring out the unscrupulous. 

Anyway, all this did was damage, talk to a solar supplier about when they pulled the pug on them... talk about build up an industry, have people invest and then cut it off at the knee's! IDIOT's!!! All they have manged to do here is install a bunch of dodgy insulation and DAMAGE the legitimate players in the industry by stimulating a whole bunch of fly by night competition. Screwing over legit small business once again!

They are a damn nuisance at best with these schemes, at worst they have run people into the wall and broken their business's.

Central planning sucks! Haven't we learned that yet comrades?


----------



## DB008 (12 August 2010)

My reply to the title of this thread; NO


----------



## Macquack (12 August 2010)

Mr Z said:


> *GST regressive*.... you really need to learn a bit more about our tax system.






> *regressive tax*
> *Definition*
> A tax that takes a larger percentage of the income of low-income people than of high-income people.
> www.investorwords.com







Mr Z said:


> Oh yeah... and the GST was first muted by *Labour*.... or don't you remember that!




This is what I remember.


Never ever.


----------



## Mr Z (12 August 2010)

I took it to mean a step backwards.

Regressive in terms of income.... so what? We needed to broaden the base of our tax system. The more you soak the successful the more you damage the economy. Ever had a poor man give you a job? Its like the insane income tax brackets, how they ever determined that was fair I will never know!

The wealthy spend more and pay more in net $ terms, the poor payless, what is the issue... oh yeah I forget, this is Australia, we hate you if you succeed comrade and we prefer to punish you for trying.


----------



## Mr Z (12 August 2010)

Macquack said:


> Never ever.




They are politicians mate, what do you expect? They lie, they all say what suits at the time. Christ if we get into who promised what and never delivered we'd be here for years. Don't try and tell me you think Labor are squeaky clean in that department.

I hate the Libs slightly less than I hate Labor only because they are less of a danger to our economy... they are still however a problem.


----------



## noco (12 August 2010)

Macquack said:


> This is what I remember.
> 
> 
> Never ever.





Macquack, you and the lefties love to misconstrue the truth. When Howard stated no GST ever he was talking about that particular term. He then went to the next election seeking a mandate for the GST and he was voted back in with voters blessing. It was a dam shame the Labor state Governments did not play their part and reduce the state taxes as per the agreement with the Federal Government. They reneged.

Of course the propaganda used by the Labor Party at the time was that everything will cost 10% more, which as you and they knew was a lie.
I have explained it all before, however, if you would like me to explain it again, do not hesitate to let me know.

The Labor Party not the "Labour Party" as you descrIbe it (SOUNDS LIKE HARD LABOUR) when Keating was Treasurer under Hawke, Keating wanted to introduce the GST only to be squashed by Hawke. The reason was simple, Hawke feared losing voters support and did not have the 'guts' to do it.

When Howard/Costello gained support for the GST Beasley and the Labor Party were going to wind it back. Rudd wanted to get his hands on it by depriving the states of 40% to pretend to suppliment the Health system.
Now I will prod your memory when he said he would take over the hospital system nationally by July 2009 if the states did not improve their performance. The states failed and Rudd did a back flip.

Hope this helps you with the history of the GST.


----------



## Macquack (12 August 2010)

noco said:


> The Labor Party not the "Labour Party" *as you descrIbe it* (SOUNDS LIKE HARD LABOUR) .




If you are going to be a smart ar*e Noco, at least attribute quotes to the correct person. It was Mr Z who penned "Labour" and I was quoting his post. That is why I highlighted it, because it was spelt wrong.

So according to Noco, "never ever" means "never ever in our current term of office".


----------



## Duckman#72 (12 August 2010)

IFocus said:


> Understand your point re Abbotts reason Snake but I still think its damaging to Abbott not to go the 2nd debate its allowing Labor back into the game.




I disagree IFocus.

Originally I thought it was a mistake BUT as the weeks progress, the decision has made Abbott look strong. And the more Labor squeals about it, the more it smacks of desperation. Tony looks a strong leader as a result. Julia doesn't tell Tony what he will do - he tells Julia. I think it has been one of the significant turning points of the whole campaign. 

Abbott turning down Gillard for a 2nd debate suggested to everyone that the Coalition was actually in control and comfortable with the way their campaign was heading. The louder and more venomous the chorus from Labor, the more panicked they appear. Even Todd Samson on The Gruen Transfer last night said that Tony Abbott has positioned himself as "The Man of Stability". I have never heard him say a positive word about the Coalition ever!!!

Isn't it amazing - only a few weeks ago the Coalition were being hammered for being "too negative". Now with only a week to go - the only thing Labor can throw at the electorate is negative scare campaigns. 

Even unimpressive Coalition members (up to this point) have found their feet. Peter Dutton did well against Roxon yesterday as did Joe Hockey against Swan earlier in the week. Chris Pyne did well against Ferguson on the 7:30 Report. 

I'm pleased to say that finally someone has come out to refute the "we saved200,000 jobs" claim of Swan and Gillard. Unfortunately it was someone from the Reserve Bank rather than the Opposition. But the Opposition let them get away with saying that crap for months.   

If it was a football game.....the Coalition would be going into the last quarter with "all the momentum". (Not bad for a side that 6 months ago were 20-1 shots)

Duckman


----------



## Mr Z (12 August 2010)

Macquack said:


> So according to Noco, "never ever" means "never ever in our current term of office".




At least Howard took it to an election and got a mandate for it.... that is how democracy is supposed to work no?


----------



## wayneL (12 August 2010)

Macquack said:


> So according to Noco, "never ever" means "never ever in our current term of office".





I guess "never ever" has about the same honesty as the "L A W law" tax cuts.


----------



## noco (12 August 2010)

wayneL said:


> I guess "never ever" has about the same honesty as the "L A W law" tax cuts.




Yeah, the L-A-W  Law tax cuts the Keating promised in his pre election speach and then reneged. Can well remember that was the year of the recession we had to have.


----------



## trainspotter (12 August 2010)

Whale Oil Beef Hooked !

"At the end of the day government is about teamwork and partnership and we will be proving that by working together." Julia Gillard (try telling that to Kevvie 07)

Probably just as well with the L-A-W tax cuts thingy that the Govt reneged on. The Budget deficit was a mere 68 billion at the time.

http://www.andrewmurray.org.au/documents/167/keating_memory.pdf  .... some good reading here !


----------



## Mr Z (12 August 2010)

It is still a Faustian Choice... 

I liked Paul Keating, at least they had some part of a clue back then. We seem to be all out of clues all round these days....

Damn whippersnippers! (YES I KNOW!)

and I do mean HARD LABOUR.... LOL they are going to tax your tax before this is all over. The idea that less is more when it comes to tax is lost in this country... fight or flight. I fight.


----------



## Mofra (13 August 2010)

Macquack said:


> So according to Noco, "never ever" means "never ever in our current term of office".



Fair's fair - spin is spin regardless of whichever side of the political spectrum is starts.
"Never ever" in plain English does not carry qualifiers with it. It would as ludicrous as suggesting a promise can be broken if it's "non-core".


----------



## IFocus (13 August 2010)

Duckman#72 said:


> I disagree IFocus.
> 
> (Not bad for a side that 6 months ago were 20-1 shots)
> 
> Duckman




Yes over all so far Abbotts campaign is as good as Liberals could have hoped for and Abbott as good as he could deliver.

This is of course is helped by the small target strategy and Labors own goals.

One thing about the Labor issues depriving their campaign of clear air early on is the way Gillard has withstood the pressure over all she hasn't blinked which I have found impressive. 

Hockey / Swan last night on the 7.30 report was pretty tame, I am no Swan fan but he can remember his lines and he is across the numbers with a smile. Some thing Hockey could do well to emulate he seemed under pressure and negative with out to much depth.

As for momentum the betting has turned back around for Labor

http://i.imgur.com/YmuWz.jpg


Before I had Abbott winning now I don't know suspect state Labor NSW and possibly QLD could win it for the Liberals on a seat by seat contest in those states but think its to close to call.


----------



## noco (13 August 2010)

Swanie is like a parrot with his repetitive lines.

* We have a plan.

* We have the balance right.

* It's very important for this country.

* It's good to be with you.

* Polly wants a cracker.

Would anybody like to add to the list?


----------



## trainspotter (13 August 2010)

Sorry noco I am still laughing at "polly wants a cracker" !! LOLOL.


----------



## Julia (13 August 2010)

noco said:


> Swanie is like a parrot with his repetitive lines.
> 
> * We have a plan.
> 
> ...



How could you possibly omit "It was our stimulus that saved Australia from the GFC".   No acknowledgement of the role of the Reserve Bank, the excellent position the coffers were left in courtesy the Libs, the prudent management of the banks, etc etc.  
If it's possible, Swan is even more irritating than any of his colleagues, particularly as he gets worked up and becomes more and more shrill, even quite hysterical at times.


----------



## Duckman#72 (13 August 2010)

Julia said:


> If it's possible, Swan is even more irritating than any of his colleagues, particularly as he gets worked up and becomes more and more shrill, even quite hysterical at times.




Its amazing how we see things differently. I don't know what show IFocus was watching but on the 7:30 Report I thought Swan seemed nervous, agitated and at times flustered, whereas Hockey was measured, calm and gave a performance that suggested he was in control.

Swan is certainly the weakest link. 

Duckman


----------



## IFocus (13 August 2010)

Yes we do see things differently.......makes the world go round

Just on the GFC people speak of it now like it was no big deal.......


In case you forgot from Christine Christian, CEO of credit reporting firm Dun & Bradstreet Australia

At the end of the first quarter — in October 2008 — the research indicated that the crisis had much further to play out. There are about 3 million businesses in our database, 800,000 that actively trade on any sort of credit basis, that generate the majority of GDP.



> We re-rated 130,000 of them. There's never been such an adjustment at one time. 130,000 firms had been rated at a higher risk of financial distress between October 1 and March 2009, [which meant that] over the next 12 months they would experience severe financial distress — they were seriously on the brink.


----------



## sails (13 August 2010)

I wonder how many of Labor's expensive promises will be conveniently delayed due to insufficient funding. Or perhaps they intend to borrow the money - so no need for costing anyway... 



> WAYNE Swan has admitted policies announced at Labor's official campaign launch on Monday will not be costed by Treasury, as he hammered the Coalition for refusing to have their prices checked.



http://www.news.com.au/features/fed...ampaign-costings/story-e6frfllr-1225904750492


----------



## basilio (13 August 2010)

> Just on the GFC people speak of it now like it was no big deal.......
> 
> 
> In case you forgot from Christine Christian, CEO of credit reporting firm Dun & Bradstreet Australia
> ...




The  terror surrounding the GFC  has been sort of forgotten.  I remember when there were runs on the English banks,  the series of  investment bank collapses in America and then the realisation that the Australian banks were about 2 days away from a run. That was when the government stepped in with the bank guarantees.

Whatever we may think of their morality the banks are the linchpin of our economic system. If there are widespread failures amongst the banks  then every other  business will be paralyzed as well as the operations of transfer payments to pensioners, wages the lot.

It's worth remembering this because we still haven't separated the functional elements of the banking system - savings and payments, from the speculative side which has got them into so much trouble and could still take us all down.


----------



## Mr Z (14 August 2010)

Julia said:


> How could you possibly omit "It was our stimulus that saved Australia from the GFC".




Reality is we did OK because this did not hit Asia as hard as was touted. The stimulus has just added future pressure to our situation by dragging future spending forward, it lead some people up the slaughter house path and will cost most more in the longer run. You cannot borrow and stimulate, you are merely redistributing funding from the private sector to the public and typically expending it in a much more inefficient and non economic way. The real stimulus ran out with the surplus and that was blown in a disgusting give away. The sad thing is that the lag is such between cause and effect that the culprit is not normally blamed once the full cost becomes due. Government and we need to accept that the best thing they can do is stay out of the way, in most all cases this will produce a better result.

As mad as it sounds, if you look at the total of our economy letting banks and these large enterprises fail is the shortest way out of the woods. Yes the damage short term is greater but the net damage longer term is less and the economy will bounce back healthier faster than you would think is possible. The way we do things today is more palatable politically but its rife with moral hazard and ensures that the culprits actually have a chance to continue their bad habits. It works against one of the basic tenants of capitalism, against one of the things that makes it work, failure is apart of the process of efficiently distributing resources, failure is the market telling you you are have it wrong.  The fact is we are punishing the people in our economy who are doing the fundamentally correct thing and rewarding those that are not. 

Anyway... they saved us from nothing, in the end this will be what it is and government will just share the bill for it in some arbitrarily decided way.

Be clear on that much.... Oh and I don't expect that the Libs would have been stellar in their handling of the scene either, should it have been down to them.

No Gillard does not inspire confidence, neither does Abbot and it seems the people that would maybe inspire confidence saw the light early and decided it was a probable no win situation. Look for Costello to return when we are near the lows of this cycle, just a hunch.

I agree Julia, there are still big issues for our banks to face and there is likely a GFC round two coming. There is certainly enough fuel in the derivatives market to light up something that would eclipse the 'GFC'. When is the question, there is plenty of why.


----------



## Julia (14 August 2010)

Great summary, Mr Z.  Governments, sadly, have little interest in anything other than their short term survival.


----------



## trainspotter (14 August 2010)

Howard took over from Keating and debt was a mere 96 billion BUT he had the good fortune of 10 years of economic growth to pay it off. I think he left around 40 billion for Krudd to play with. IF Tony Abbott gets up and wins on 21st August he will inherit a country that will be 120 billion in debt with the economic future not looking as rosy as to what Howard had to fiddle with.

(figures are open to conjecture as I am working off memory here and not research) But you get my drift.


----------



## Calliope (14 August 2010)

The audience at Rooty Hill certainly had no confidence in her. I'm not surprised they laughed at her



> When the Labor party stops "moving forward" and starts looking back after next Saturday to understand why its election campaign was such a debacle, there's hardly a better place to begin than the public forum at Rooty Hill on Wednesday night.
> 
> The message from the audience of 200 undecided voters, selected by the political polling company Galaxy, was one that has dogged the Gillard government for its entire seven-week reign.
> 
> ...




http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/humble-abbott-levels-with-voters-20100813-1232s.html


----------



## Mr Z (14 August 2010)

Julia said:


> Great summary, Mr Z.  Governments, sadly, have little interest in anything other than their short term survival.




I agree, I find the short term outlook frustrating. Of course we elect the government we deserve and if we are silly enough to have our loyalties bought with promises funded by raiding the productive, well, then there is little hope. We need a decent economic education as a fundamental part of our upbringing, IMO it should be mandatory that you at least gain a basic understanding of the system that feeds you. It's not really in governments interest to let that happen but IMHO it would be a decent step toward 'keeping the bastards honest'.... then maybe small business would get a little more respect..... nah, I think I am dreaming! Oh well, you have to have hope!


----------



## Mr Z (14 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> The audience at Rooty Hill certainly had no confidence in her. I'm not surprised they laughed at her




I've not been there in a long while but that kinda surprise me. I would have thought they would be more supportive of her.


----------



## wayneL (14 August 2010)

Mr Z said:


> Government and we need to accept that the best thing they can do is stay out of the way, in most all cases this will produce a better result.
> 
> As mad as it sounds, if you look at the total of our economy letting banks and these large enterprises fail is the shortest way out of the woods. Yes the damage short term is greater but the net damage longer term is less and the economy will bounce back healthier faster than you would think is possible. The way we do things today is more palatable politically but its rife with moral hazard and ensures that the culprits actually have a chance to continue their bad habits. It works against one of the basic tenants of capitalism, against one of the things that makes it work, failure is apart of the process of efficiently distributing resources, failure is the market telling you you are have it wrong.  The fact is we are punishing the people in our economy who are doing the fundamentally correct thing and rewarding those that are not.




Oh kaloo kalay, oh hip hip hooray, someone with a brain!

I have been saying the same thing for years on here... in fact an Austrian bust should have happened 2003-2005. The price would have been less and in all likelihood, western economies would be chugging along quite nicely right now.


----------



## Mr Z (14 August 2010)

Hi Wayne!

Yeah I agree... actually I would have rather seen in happen in the early 90's. We had an opportunity then to reset and stabilize then with minimal damage but instead we cracked open the hooch and went for it (globally speaking). When those Americans start up its hard not to get dragged into into the party. Hey, its been a good party, we should not really complain about the aftermath.... but somehow I think we will. Payback is never fun!

Discovering the Austrian School was a revelation to me, finally economics that made sense! I would encourage anyone to visit mises.org and start reading, pennies will drop and things will become clear.... I can assure people of that much.

Wayne its nice too see people with an Austrian bent around here! Kinda gives me hope! Now if I could import Mr Schiff and get him into politics here I would be happy!


----------



## sails (17 August 2010)

She's been caught out with this one:

Full story: The hidden truth behind the PM's 'impromptu' speech







> As Gillard took the stage, a thick sheaf of typed papers was discreetly placed upon the podium by a stagehand crouching almost out of sight. A video camera and The Sydney Morning Herald's chief photographer, Andrew Meares, captured the moment when the staffer slipped the papers into place.


----------



## Logique (18 August 2010)

Nice work Sails.

Going back to the theme of this thread, does Ms Gillard inspire confidence?

>>Secret notes at the launch, pretending to extemporize = phony; show-boating intellectual vanity (not uncommon in the legal profession)

>>Only willing to interact or debate on her terms = arrogant, and a little bit of a control freak, a la Rudd. For a national leader, everything can't always be contrived and scripted, there isn't always time for focus groups and a random 150 people from the phone book. Or time to ask the unions and the factions what to do.

>>Gillard has not in my opinion resolved the key question: is she genuinely intelligent and visionary, _or just a dill with a photographic memory for pre-prepared scripts?_ A leader with true resolve, _or just a power hungry slave to the opinion polls?_

Sorry unions and ALP back room boys, but 'Mr Rabbit' scores better than your girl.


----------



## Logique (20 August 2010)

Inflammatory stuff Noco.

Once again in these pages I repeat, the parallels with former NZ PM Helen Clark are eerie. Re-engineer, re-distribute, deconstruct. 

How insulting to voters intelligence is the desperate mendacity of the 11th hour claims by Labor and the Greens - a vote for Abbott they say, is 'an attack on groceries', 'a vote for work choices', an 'attack on national broadband'. 

On and on the falsehoods go.


----------



## noco (20 August 2010)

Logique said:


> Inflammatory stuff Noco.
> 
> Once again in these pages I repeat, the parallels with former NZ PM Helen Clark are eerie. Re-engineer, re-distribute, deconstruct.
> 
> ...




Gillard has become so repetitive in the last days of this election campaign she is like cracked record, in particular she keeps flogging the dead horse on WORK CHOICES.


----------



## overhang (20 August 2010)

noco said:


> Gillard has become so repetitive in the last days of this election campaign she is like cracked record, in particular she keeps flogging the dead horse on WORK CHOICES.



It’s so desperate how they keep resorting back to this mundane line about work choices.  Even if Abbott still supports work choices he knows it would be suicide at the next election to revive it.


----------



## Calliope (20 August 2010)

noco said:


> Gillard has become so repetitive in the last days of this election campaign she is like cracked record, in particular she keeps flogging the dead horse on WORK CHOICES.




Yes, so many lies. She is becoming increasingly desperate.


----------



## sails (20 August 2010)

What makes Gillard think her policies are any better than Bligh's... They are both labor - what part of labor doesn't Gillard understand.  It's federal labor that lost it's way too.



> The Prime Minister is battling vote's dissatisfaction with state governments in NSW and Queensland, and fears that some people may not be distinguishing between state and federal issues



 - then she goes on and on bagging Abbott....grrr

Full article:
Gillard worried Queenslanders protesting against state premier Anna Bligh might cost Labor the federal election


----------



## sails (13 October 2010)

I didn't realise just how tiny and unusable these tuckshops really were:






> The Healthy Kids Association general manager, Jo Gardner, described the buildings as unsuitable for producing healthy food on a mass scale.
> Advertisement: Story continues below
> 
> ''The standards being implemented by the state Department of Education and Training in new and refurbished canteens are grossly inadequate,'' she said.
> ...




http://www.smh.com.au/national/600000-school-tuckshops-are-unusable-20100918-15h4h.html


----------



## moXJO (13 October 2010)

sails said:


> I didn't realise just how tiny and unusable these tuckshops really were:
> 
> View attachment 39212
> 
> ...




Lol
One thing I do know is that these things would be the last thing standing after a bomb blast.


----------



## Julia (13 October 2010)

moXJO said:


> Lol
> One thing I do know is that these things would be the last thing standing after a bomb blast.



Would they?  Why?
(Or am I being too literal again?)


----------



## moXJO (14 October 2010)

Julia said:


> Would they?  Why?
> (Or am I being too literal again?)




They over spec'd on most of the material, just in case you want to land a plane on them. So at least they are built to last.


----------



## sails (14 October 2010)

lol - nice to know they are aeroplane proof - but what about no bench space for food preparation.  More likely to need bench space than be a bomb shelter with standing room only for very few...  From the same article:



> But Louise Appel, secretary of the Parents and Citizens' Association at Orange Grove Public School, which received the same canteen, said the design was flawed.
> 
> ''They told us that this was the standard design and I would say, 'But read my lips - there is no bench space,' '' Ms Appel said. ''What sort of standard design for a canteen has no food preparation space?''


----------



## moXJO (14 October 2010)

sails said:


> lol - nice to know they are aeroplane proof - but what about no bench space for food preparation.  More likely to need bench space than be a bomb shelter with standing room only for very few...  From the same article:




When Armageddon hits....Tuckshop mum is well protected

I actually saw one of these on site a few weeks back. I thought it was an overly small storage shed. I lol when I was told it was a tuckshop.


----------



## Julia (14 October 2010)

moXJO said:


> They over spec'd on most of the material, just in case you want to land a plane on them. So at least they are built to last.



Oh, I see.  Thank you for that explanation moXJO.
So very reassuring.
I will now know where to go when disaster is imminent.
(just so long as not too many other people have the same idea, it would seem!)

Seriously, with a bit of insistence, we might still see a Royal Commission into the BER.  So far Gillard & Co have got away too lightly with this inestimable waste of taxpayer dollars.


----------



## sails (14 October 2010)

When my kids were primary school age, I did my bit to help in the tuckshop.  It's a busy place.  Preparing a variety of foods and having it ready to go for the masses when the bell rings is quite challenging.  The tuckshops I have been in have been quite large and, even then, space was a challenge with all varieties of food, including hot food coming out of warmers and being placed into the appropriate paper bags.  

How on earth a tiny little box like that could be classed as "standard design" for a tuckshop is unbelievable!  Maybe a dolls house?


----------



## Mofra (15 October 2010)

Julia said:


> Seriously, with a bit of insistence, we might still see a Royal Commission into the BER.  So far Gillard & Co have got away too lightly with this inestimable waste of taxpayer dollars.



You mean 7 Royal commissions - one for each state, and another for the terroitories. The States rolled the program out, Feds simply supplied the funding. NSW would be interesting, the majority of blatant waste occurred in NSW alone.


----------



## trainspotter (23 October 2010)

How come no one is attacking PM Joolyah Gizzard for the disgraceful way she has rubbed our faces in the carpet where we have just peed on?

1) What happened about the BER? Swept under the carpet? Billions Lost?
2) What about the asylum seeker fiasco? East Timor is still laughing at us!!
3) No carbon tax promise in election mode. Greens now get the carbon tax back on the agenda. Or is it because the miners say NO to the RSPT? Got to get the revenue from somewhere to pay back the debt.
4) Indigenous Health - *Abolished *the portfolio then reinstated Warren Snowdon??? WTF ???
5) Youth Allowance - Only 5,000 of the possible 300,000 eligible to receive assistance. Laughable !!!!!
6) Climate Change Committe - Like Grocery Watch - Didn't happen now did it?? Only 10 million wasted on this fiasco.
7) GP Super clinics - what a joke - all 3 are operational out of the 36 promised.
8) Hospital funding - no wait .... this was linked to the RSPT which is in tatters. So no hospitals have received extra funding? Next election brothers !
9) Cash for Clunkers programme. Only 3 cars are eligible in Australia to receive this funding when you trade up to a more fuel efficient car. The Holden Kruze, Toyota Hybrid Camry and the 4 cylinder Ford Falcon. Hahahhahahhahha ....... what a friggin joke. A 4 cylinder Ford Falcon.
10) Then there was the promise to save the Murray-Darling River system and the Great Barrier Reef. Ummmmmm .............. can a red headed female PM make it rain in the Murray Darling catchment area and stop the sun from bleaching the coral at the GBR? I think not !!!!!

This is just a small list of things that have come and gone on the political landscape and we sit back in our armchairs and do NOTHING about it !

WAKE UP AUSTRALIA !!!!!!! You are being duped again.


----------



## Logique (23 October 2010)

Nice post TS. You could add the years earlier 'Medicare Gold' to that list.

I've tried, I really have. I just can't warm to the woman. 

We saw this week the Adelaide Hills community screaming blue murder - their native SA daughter inserting refugees into their community, without even telling them! Gillard had visited the area earlier, and had said nothing about it.

Making an analogy, this lady lives in '..bank world..' like on that tv ad. 

ALP Minister Tony Burke (the one handling the Murray-Darling issues) seems a much more approachable and likeable person, pity the ALP doesn't have more like him.

Peter Garrett- sure he has a lot to learn, but the ALP (and his own department) have crucified him in my opinion.


----------



## sails (23 October 2010)

Yes TS, lots of money being spent on spin so they can "move forward" and distract from their failures:

Full article: *Spin out of control* 



> TAXPAYERS are forking out at least *a quarter of a billion dollars a year* to pay for an army of at least 3000 media advisers employed to "spin" political lines for state and federal governments.
> 
> The extraordinary figures reveal the dramatic rise in the number public servants hired to *craft messages and keep the secrets for governments* and their departments.


----------



## sails (23 October 2010)

Did anyone pick up on this? It looks like Windsor got $17M for a dam in his electorate three days BEFORE the election (when a hung parliament was a likely outcome).   Had Windsor already been in talks with Labor and given allegiance to them prior to the election should he be needed in return for the dam?  Was the whole 17 day thing just a show?  Guess we will never know the answers, but it certainly raises some questions.

Full PDF: *Media Release 18 August 2010*



> The Federal funding of nearly $17m for the augmentation of Chaffey Dam from 62 gigalitres to 100 gigalitres that has been announced today by the Minister for Water Senator Penny Wong has delighted the Independent Member for New England Tony Windsor.


----------



## noco (23 October 2010)

trainspotter said:


> How come no one is attacking PM Joolyah Gizzard for the disgraceful way she has rubbed our faces in the carpet where we have just peed on?
> 
> 1) What happened about the BER? Swept under the carpet? Billions Lost?
> 2) What about the asylum seeker fiasco? East Timor is still laughing at us!!
> ...




Good one TS.
I move we appoint TS Minister for the media and put a 'BOMB' under the lot of them.  They are soooo weak when it comes to criticism of our Prime Minister. They let her get away with 'murder'.


----------



## noco (23 October 2010)

Julia Gillard has no idea how to stop the boat people and they are relishing the weakness of our Prime Minister and Minister Bowen says the public are showing hysteria. OMG. Where are they going to house the armada next month??????????????????

http://www.scottmorrison.com.au/info/pressrelease.aspx?id=514


----------



## explod (23 October 2010)

noco said:


> Julia Gillard has no idea how to stop the boat people and they are relishing the weakness of our Prime Minister and Minister Bowen says the public are showing hysteria. OMG. Where are they going to house the armada next month??????????????????
> 
> http://www.scottmorrison.com.au/info/pressrelease.aspx?id=514




What is your recommendation noco ?

Short of shooting them down in the boats it seems like a bad problem to me.   I think, take them in, sort them out and send all the non-genuine ones back.  Sorting them out on the mainland seems a good option as it employs our own people in the task and less double handling of the geniuine ones who are granted asylum.


----------



## Julia (23 October 2010)

explod said:


> What is your recommendation noco ?
> 
> Short of shooting them down in the boats it seems like a bad problem to me.   I think, take them in, sort them out and send all the non-genuine ones back.  Sorting them out on the mainland seems a good option as it employs our own people in the task and less double handling of the geniuine ones who are granted asylum.



Have you given any consideration to the thousands of refugees who have actually made application via UNHCR to come to Australia legally?
Do you really think it's fair that those who have $10,000 or whatever to pay people smugglers should have first bite at being resident in Australia?

Just consider as an hypothesis:  you decide you'd be better off living in the USA.  (It's only an example:  don't get hysterical at the notion.)
So you make long winded application for entry, have to provide endless reams of documentation before you will even be considered, and then you are told 'well, maybe', and sent to wait in a camp in an intermediate country.

You stay there for several years, hearing nothing about the progress of your application to actually get to the USA where you will be given medical and dental treatment immediately on arrival, if proven to be genuine, you will receive social security benefits and assistance to find a job.

But amongst these years of waiting, there is boatload after boatload of people who have not bothered to make formal application but who have had a bit more money than you and can afford to pay people smugglers to take them into American
 waters where, whacko, an American customs vessel will kindly transport them to mainland USA where they will housed comfortably while their bona fides are being checked.

This process takes up time that could have otherwise been spent on progressing your oh so painstakingly offered application to come to the USA through official channels.

But hey, who cares?  You've stagnated in that camp for several years.  What are a few more?


----------



## trainspotter (23 October 2010)

Typical Labor Party Suporter.


----------



## noco (23 October 2010)

explod said:


> What is your recommendation noco ?
> 
> Short of shooting them down in the boats it seems like a bad problem to me.   I think, take them in, sort them out and send all the non-genuine ones back.  Sorting them out on the mainland seems a good option as it employs our own people in the task and less double handling of the geniuine ones who are granted asylum.




Open up Nauru and Manus, keep them there for 2-3 years or longer. That was certainly a deterrent to the people smugglers before. Why not do it again? The Rudd/ Gillard policy has been an absolute failure jusr like evrything else they have been involved in and they were told nearly 3 years ago thier policy would fail.
In the meantime it costing the bloody tax payers $millions. WASTE, WASTE, WASTE, SHAME,SHAME,SHAME. Of course the Labor/Green coalition don't know anything different.


----------



## sails (23 October 2010)

Looks like the boat people are being sent to Liberal electorates. Labor would not want to upset anyone in their own seats - very cunning indeed if this is true...


----------



## explod (24 October 2010)

Julia said:


> Have you given any consideration to the thousands of refugees who have actually made application via UNHCR to come to Australia legally?
> Do you really think it's fair that those who have $10,000 or whatever to pay people smugglers should have first bite at being resident in Australia?
> 
> Just consider as an hypothesis:  you decide you'd be better off living in the USA.  (It's only an example:  don't get hysterical at the notion.)
> ...




I have considered all of those matters Julia and of course I care.

But what is to be done, that is the question ?

The sheer numbers on population growth alone will continue to climb so what is to be done ?


----------



## explod (24 October 2010)

noco said:


> Open up Nauru and Manus, keep them there for 2-3 years or longer. That was certainly a deterrent to the people smugglers before. Why not do it again? The Rudd/ Gillard policy has been an absolute failure jusr like evrything else they have been involved in and they were told nearly 3 years ago thier policy would fail.
> In the meantime it costing the bloody tax payers $millions. WASTE, WASTE, WASTE, SHAME,SHAME,SHAME. Of course the Labor/Green coalition don't know anything different.




We are not going to be able to continue to dump our problem onto others and 3 years will not deter some of them from the horrifying conditions in which they have lived.


----------



## noco (24 October 2010)

explod said:


> We are not going to be able to continue to dump our problem onto others and 3 years will not deter some of them from the horrifying conditions in which they have lived.




explod, you hit the nail fair and square on the head. Yes, it is our problem created by the stupidity of Rudd LABOR Government's policy. Howard had it all under control in his latter years with I believe 3 boat arrivals in his last year in office. If you were detained on Nauru for three years or more would not the message get back to the people smugglers. 
The current message from the smugglers to the boat people is go to Australia and the Labor Government will put you up in first class accomodation, hence the armada of boats we currently observe.
There is no logic in your argument what so ever.


----------



## explod (24 October 2010)

noco said:


> The current message from the smugglers to the boat people is go to Australia and the Labor Government will put you up in first class accomodation, hence the armada of boats we currently observe.
> There is no logic in your argument what so ever.




How much longer can we continue to bludge off countries offshore and in the longer term it is only a band aid.

I dont care how tough you make it look, the situation with increasing populations, floods, poverty and drought are getting very much worse.  We need to do bigger things than we are now.

Through the UN we need to be influencing zero population, better education and influencing less selfish government regimes.  And I say *influence,* guns do not work they merely inflame and create more guns.

Unless the big issues are tackled then anything else is going to be a waste of time.  Gillard in creating better liason with places like Indonesia, as she is doing is the only way.  Improving relations and negotiation with follow up support the way forward.

Same with Afganistan, if the same amount of money and energy that has been wasted on that war effort, was spent on education and community support programs I would be sure we would not have a problem.   Bring back the Columbo plan ideas.

Trying to stop the individual boats will be like trying to empty the Indian Ocean into the pacific with a tin can. Your arguments are worse than mine.


----------



## Julia (24 October 2010)

explod said:


> We are not going to be able to continue to dump our problem onto others and 3 years will not deter some of them from the horrifying conditions in which they have lived.






explod said:


> How much longer can we continue to bludge off countries offshore and in the longer term it is only a band aid.



You are misrepresenting, or perhaps misunderstanding, how Nauru, eg, regards having the detention centre.  Nauru is broke.  Running the detention centre boosts their economy, provides jobs for their people.  Don't you remember how during the election campaign they were spruiking their desire to have the centre that has already been purpose built there put back into use?

No one is 'bludging' on these economically deprived countries.  Australia, where they have commissioned such facilities, more than adequately rewards the country concerned.

Under the Howard government, the arrangement with Nauru worked well for both countries.  It's purely political that Gillard et al are refusing to recommission the centre there.
They prefer to spend more gazillions of taxpayer funds in building new centres on mainland Australia, much to the dislike of many Australians in the proposed areas.



> Same with Afganistan, if the same amount of money and energy that has been wasted on that war effort, was spent on education and community support programs I would be sure we would not have a problem.



Completely agree about money spent on the war, but I understand funds and energy are also being applied to community support over there.  (For all the good it will do.)



> Trying to stop the individual boats will be like trying to empty the Indian Ocean into the pacific with a tin can. Your arguments are worse than mine.



As Noco has already pointed out, the boat arrivals during the Howard era were minimal.

You haven't responded to my concern about all those refugees who have gone the appropriate, official route and applied to come here being displaced by those who have $10,000 or whatever to offer the people smugglers.


----------



## explod (24 October 2010)

> You haven't responded to my concern about all those refugees who have gone the appropriate, official route and applied to come here being displaced by those who have $10,000 or whatever to offer the people smugglers




Was factored in my mind as the number of boat people is but a small percentage of refugees per se.  Admit these are jumping the que.

Also agree on the off mainland holding centres.  My point is down the track to when this problem becomes a flood, with the conditions araising, overpopulation et al., unless we have a whole new global approach they will be coming at us in the teaming millions.   Remember my Father talking of such scenarios 50 years ago, particularly in relation to China.  China is coming out in the world now and we are developing a good realtionship with them, they have also now a one child policy.

So these matters can be resolved on the scale required and we need to go that way too.

I like to think that the fresh young and new pollies flowering under Gillard and the Greens would have these things in mind.

Sure call me a dreamer if you will but for this world to survive we need big dreamers who start to do something to fix things at the seat of the problems *and* where they *breed* them.  The problems that is.


----------



## noco (24 October 2010)

explod said:


> How much longer can we continue to bludge off countries offshore and in the longer term it is only a band aid.
> 
> I dont care how tough you make it look, the situation with increasing populations, floods, poverty and drought are getting very much worse.  We need to do bigger things than we are now.
> 
> ...




Rudd and Gillard have been negotiating with Indonesia for over two years now or have you forgotten explod. They seem to be getting no where. The Indonesians are so corrupt, the prison officers are being paid to release them from the  detention centres to the people smugglers and the Indonesian authorities are turning a blind eye to it all and why, because the authorities are pleased to get them off their hands.
And, explod, with the hundreds of Afghans arriving, mainly young men, why in the hell ain't they at home fighting for the  freedom of their own people instead of 1580 of our Australians over there risking their lives for these idiots who want to live in Australia.

I say again, lock them up on Nauru and Manus for 2 or 3 years and they will think twice. The problem is, this stupid Gillard won't swallow her pride and do what the coalition has suggested.She would sooner waste the tax payers money on expanding detention centres on the mainland.


----------



## explod (24 October 2010)

> And, explod, with the hundreds of Afghans arriving, mainly young men, why in the hell ain't they at home fighting for the freedom of their own people instead of 1580 of our Australians over there risking their lives for these idiots who want to live in Australia.




They ascaping from the firepower of our troops over there.

As it said, we need to fight in a new way.   It may 10 or 20 years with Indonesia but in the end it will be either beatem or joinem.  The numbers are growing so great I know which way we have to go but it needs to have some of our terms and we will not get that by aggression or a locked door.


----------



## joea (24 October 2010)

Hi
www.indo.ausaid.gov.au
Will give you an idea where millions of dollars go. 

www.brisbanetimes.com.au/..nauruans, explains about, Where did $100m go.

Interesting read.

Australian taxpayers are great people.

Cheers


----------



## -Bevo- (24 October 2010)

And in news today

*Asylum seeker boat intercepted*
http://www.smh.com.au/national/asylum-seeker-boat-intercepted-20101024-16z5f.html

Media must have got sick of typing an article for everytime a boat arrives, I think they use a template now just change afew numbers around always the same "Authorities have intercepted a boat carrying blah blah blah".


----------



## IFocus (24 October 2010)

Most Afghans coming to Oz are Hazara 





> Afghans in Australia
> The Afghans who have been arriving in Australia by boat since late 1999 are largely of
> Hazara background, although some are former residents of Iran fleeing the threat of forced
> repatriation, and a small minority are anti-Taliban Pushtuns or members of other persecuted
> ...




This is quite a good article for any one really interested 

http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/docs/resources/reports/malley-afghan-2.pdf


----------



## Julia (24 October 2010)

explod said:


> They ascaping from the firepower of our troops over there.



Oh, for god's sake, explod.  Are you suggesting that, before the invasion of the coalition (which, for the record, I was totally against) these people were completely happy with their way of life?  Hardly likely, given the extremities of the Taliban rule.

Noco makes a reasonable point:  why should young Australians be dying in Afghanistan while their own young blokes of a similar age are refusing to fight the Taliban?

It's all very nice to attribute to human beings the best possible motives, but it seems this sentiment can blind you to basic reality.


----------



## noco (24 October 2010)

Julia said:


> Oh, for god's sake, explod.  Are you suggesting that, before the invasion of the coalition (which, for the record, I was totally against) these people were completely happy with their way of life?  Hardly likely, given the extremities of the Taliban rule.
> 
> Noco makes a reasonable point:  why should young Australians be dying in Afghanistan while their own young blokes of a similar age are refusing to fight the Taliban?
> 
> It's all very nice to attribute to human beings the best possible motives, but it seems this sentiment can blind you to basic reality.




Well spoken Julia. For explod to state the Afghans are escaping the fire power of the Australians is a load of 'CRAP'. I would call them cowards or in Australian terms 'DINGOS'. Send them home with a white feather tatooed on a prominent place on their body.


----------



## nioka (25 October 2010)

noco said:


> Well spoken Julia. For explod to state the Afghans are escaping the fire power of the Australians is a load of 'CRAP'. I would call them cowards or in Australian terms 'DINGOS'. Send them home with a white feather tatooed on a prominent place on their body.




I'll second the motion. Accept the children on a temp. basis. Send the men back to stand up for themselves. In reverse I'd expect to be in my home country doing what I could to rectify the situationr sent back for that reason. The fact that they are not means that they wouldnt make good Aussie citizens anyway.


----------



## Mofra (25 October 2010)

Julia said:


> Under the Howard government, the arrangement with Nauru worked well for both countries.  It's purely political that Gillard et al are refusing to recommission the centre there.



If Nauru signed the UNCHR they may be a rethink. 



Julia said:


> They prefer to spend more gazillions of taxpayer funds in building new centres on mainland Australia, much to the dislike of many Australians in the proposed areas.



Economically it benefits us more to have the processing centres on the Australian mainland than it does to build centres off shore and staff these centres with foreign nationals. I have heard of at least two communities that are trying to get processing/holding centres build within their municipality due to the economic benefits. 

Both sides of the political spectrum are merely grandstanding on the issue.


----------



## Mofra (25 October 2010)

nioka said:


> In reverse I'd expect to be in my home country doing what I could to rectify the situationr sent back for that reason. The fact that they are not means that they wouldnt make good Aussie citizens anyway.



.. and how'd that work out for the Jews in 1938?

If I had a choice between death and refugee status elsewhere, I wouldn't be choosing death.


----------



## nioka (25 October 2010)

Mofra said:


> .. and how'd that work out for the Jews in 1938?
> 
> If I had a choice between death and refugee status elsewhere, I wouldn't be choosing death.




You are comparing apples with oranges. Had Australian forces been operating in Germany alongside American troops I would have expected the jews to stay and fight along side them too. 

If you want to compare the jewish situation then maybe our new arrivals will end up treating us in the same way the jews are treating the Arabs in THEIR homeland.


----------



## todster (25 October 2010)

nioka said:


> I'll second the motion. Accept the children on a temp. basis. Send the men back to stand up for themselves. In reverse I'd expect to be in my home country doing what I could to rectify the situationr sent back for that reason. The fact that they are not means that they wouldnt make good Aussie citizens anyway.




It's pretty easy to sit in good old Oz and say this is what I would do but after the Russians the Taliban and the Yanks have poohed in your back yard you might think different.
Send them to Curtain if you can live there for 3 years without going nuts I would be surprised.
It's 40c up here today and still October bring on summer.


----------



## Julia (25 October 2010)

Mofra said:


> If Nauru signed the UNCHR they may be a rethink.



The Nauruan government clearly said they would be happy to sign if it meant they could have the detention centre functioning again.  Labor still found it politically unpalatable, presumably on the petty basis that they would be adopting the Coalition's solution.  They prefer to waste more taxpayer funds on new centres, while Nauru lies empty.

Didn't the Libs have another processing or detention centre as well? Some other Pacific island?


----------



## Mofra (25 October 2010)

nioka said:


> You are comparing apples with oranges. Had Australian forces been operating in Germany alongside American troops I would have expected the jews to stay and fight along side them too.



1938 was before the war - no allies were there in 1938. You really think they would have stood a chance? Wow.

I think a little more learning and a little less idealogical waffle might help with perspective.


----------



## nioka (25 October 2010)

Mofra said:


> 1938 was before the war - no allies were there in 1938. You really think they would have stood a chance? Wow.
> 
> I think a little more learning and a little less idealogical waffle might help with perspective.




I actually was around at the time. It was a time for the jews to depart, no doubt about that. 

That is exactly why I said that you are comparing apples with oranges. There ARE forces doing their fighting in Afghanistan. They SHOULD be there helping.


----------



## Mofra (25 October 2010)

nioka said:


> That is exactly why I said that you are comparing apples with oranges. There ARE forces doing their fighting in Afghanistan. They SHOULD be there helping.



Our mission is to train security forces in one province, not a seek & destroy role to weed out the Taliban. That of course is besides the point - you never specified Afganistan in your posts previously. 

In any case, do you think it's realistic to ask entire civilian populations to take up arms against a well-organised aggressor? Should we start arming the civilian population and flood the country with weapons? Does that also mean we should have a military presence in any country that have a refugee problem that involves some seeking asylum in Australia?


----------



## Julia (25 October 2010)

Labor continues to lose support to the Greens.
Coalition down one point but still ahead on 2pp and primary vote 43 to 34.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/10/25/3046900.htm


----------



## nioka (25 October 2010)

Mofra said:


> - you never specified Afganistan in your posts previously.




I was replying to a post that WAS talking about Afghans. Check back. I'm sure they would be found a job unless they are actually Taliban supporters. In that case we don't want them anyway.


----------



## Mofra (25 October 2010)

nioka said:


> I was replying to a post that WAS talking about Afghans. Check back. I'm sure they would be found a job unless they are actually Taliban supporters. In that case we don't want them anyway.



"Found a job" - you mind explaining what you mean by that? I hope you're still not hoping to press-gang civilians into armed service. 
Given the struggle Westren Forces have in trying not to appear like the enemy, I don't see how a foreign military force conscripting the male population into forced armed servitude will help the situation in Afganistan or abroad.

In any case, the Pashtuns (the only real sympathisers with the Taliban) are not the regional majority and even large numbers of them have to be forced/blackmailed into support for the Taliban.


----------



## noco (25 October 2010)

Julia said:


> Labor continues to lose support to the Greens.
> Coalition down one point but still ahead on 2pp and primary vote 43 to 34.
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/10/25/3046900.htm




Yes Julia, and the latest is, Labor is plotting to eliminate the Greens. They are terribly worried about the momentum the Greens are receiving. I stated some time ago, Labor would rue the day they got into bed with the Greens. As Tony Abbott commented recently,"Labor might be in Government but the Greens are in power.
Nevertheless, when the true colours of the Greens are exposed, I believe they will finish up like the Democrats; a party of the past.


----------



## nioka (25 October 2010)

Mofra said:


> "Found a job" - you mind explaining what you mean by that? I hope you're still not hoping to press-gang civilians into armed service. .




If they had to be forced into fighting to save their own country then we shouldn't want them here either. We have enough of the white feather brigade here now.


----------



## pedalofogus (25 October 2010)

noco said:


> Yes Julia, and the latest is, Labor is plotting to eliminate the Greens. They are terribly worried about the momentum the Greens are receiving. I stated some time ago, Labor would rue the day they got into bed with the Greens. As Tony Abbott commented recently,"Labor might be in Government but the Greens are in power.
> Nevertheless, when the true colours of the Greens are exposed, I believe they will finish up like the Democrats; a party of the past.




Totally agree.  The Greens will eventually become too cocky and will show their true colours.  I don't think the average Australian that voted for the Greens has actually been to their website and had a look at their outlandish policy positions, and that has worked in the Greens favour because the voters don't know their whole 'story'.  But once they get a bit of power, they will start introducing these silly policies and the voters of Australia will laugh them out of politics.

In the meantime, it wouldn't surprise me at all to see them form a sort-of coalition with Labor in an attempt to fight off the Liberal-National coalition.  But when the :fan watch Labor cut them (just like they did to Kevin07)


----------



## Julia (25 October 2010)

noco said:


> Yes Julia, and the latest is, Labor is plotting to eliminate the Greens. They are terribly worried about the momentum the Greens are receiving. I stated some time ago, Labor would rue the day they got into bed with the Greens. As Tony Abbott commented recently,"Labor might be in Government but the Greens are in power.



Much as I agree with that comment of Mr Abbott, I'm puzzled as to how Labor might 'eliminate the Greens'.
Given the Greens are on a rising tide at present, actually taking votes from Labor, probably the government (and the opposition) need to ask themselves why this is?

My suggestion would be that, despite some of the utterly wacky policies of the Greens, they are seen by some of the electorate as honest and able to stick with their beliefs.

This is in absolute contrast to both Labor and the Coalition whose flaky policies will be discarded in a minute if so doing will offer even temporary political advantage.

Bob Brown as leader (again putting aside his unacceptable ideas) seems to be a reasonable person, willing to engage in genuine exchange/discussion, never gets hysterical or particularly abusive.

It's just possible that Australians over all are damn sick of the hypocrisy of both of the main parties and will turn to what they see as the authenticity of the Greens, even if some of their policies are not to their liking.

I might be quite wrong, but would be interested in others' ideas about the rise and rise of the Greens.


----------



## pedalofogus (26 October 2010)

Julia said:


> Much as I agree with that comment of Mr Abbott, I'm puzzled as to how Labor might 'eliminate the Greens'.
> Given the Greens are on a rising tide at present, actually taking votes from Labor, probably the government (and the opposition) need to ask themselves why this is?
> 
> My suggestion would be that, despite some of the utterly wacky policies of the Greens, they are seen by some of the electorate as honest and able to stick with their beliefs.
> ...




I think that Australians are sick of the major parties in their current form.  The way the ALP and LNP are running at the moment is exactly as you say, they are willing to flip flop for the sake of votes.  Until they get back to their core values, they will continue to lose votes.

In relation to you question re 'rise and rise of the greens', i think that until now the Greens have been able to slip under the radar, and have managed to stay out of the way while the ALP and LNP sling crap at each other.  But now that they have become quite prominent, and are in a position to impact quite significantly on the running of parliament, you will see them get drawn into it a little more.  At the end of the day, i think we will see them go the same way as any other political party, and the 'deal-making' will become part of their party procedures.

I think the other factor that has seen them rise is just the 'Green' vote.  Some voters just assume that because the are called the Greens Party that they will save us from the inevitable climate shift that the media is telling us about.

But i think they will become a bigger 'player' before that happens, and as i said in an earlier post, i think we will see them steal votes from Labor and Labor will need to 'join forces' with the Greens to fight the LNP.


----------



## Mofra (26 October 2010)

nioka said:


> If they had to be forced into fighting to save their own country then we shouldn't want them here either. We have enough of the white feather brigade here now.



Simplifying thousands of years of regional history into a simple black vs white argument and expecting dirt-poor civilians to forgo food to buy arms and face certain death against a better armed, better organised force that refuse to recognise the Geneva convention. 

I'm sorry but this is the single most illogical argument anyone has raised on immigration yet.


----------



## bellenuit (26 October 2010)

Business group queries National Broadband Network

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...roadband-network/story-e6frg9hx-1225943476300


----------



## Mofra (26 October 2010)

pedalofogus said:


> I think that Australians are sick of the major parties in their current form.  The way the ALP and LNP are running at the moment is exactly as you say, they are willing to flip flop for the sake of votes.  Until they get back to their core values, they will continue to lose votes.



Absolutely spot on. Most people I know vote against a party, rather than for one. 



pedalofogus said:


> But now that they have become quite prominent, and are in a position to impact quite significantly on the running of parliament, you will see them get drawn into it a little more.  At the end of the day, i think we will see them go the same way as any other political party, and the 'deal-making' will become part of their party procedures.



The Greens are gaining some of their vote by default, simply because there is a vacuum of ideas amongst the major parties. Like or loathe their ideals, they actually have ideals to start with. 
The ALP is run by factions dominated by a union base that is struggling for relevence in many industries. 
The LNP is being seen as increasingly out of touch with a society that appears to be becoming more progressive.
Both seem to be political parties whose major aim is to win government first, provide proper governance second. 

Until the (for example) LDP in Australia gain any sort of foothold, I can't see the Greens losing their current levels of support without a major shift in thinking from one of the major parties.


----------



## noco (26 October 2010)

Julia said:


> Much as I agree with that comment of Mr Abbott, I'm puzzled as to how Labor might 'eliminate the Greens'.
> Given the Greens are on a rising tide at present, actually taking votes from Labor, probably the government (and the opposition) need to ask themselves why this is?
> 
> My suggestion would be that, despite some of the utterly wacky policies of the Greens, they are seen by some of the electorate as honest and able to stick with their beliefs.
> ...




Julia, Bob Brown is a smooth customer and knows how to push people's buttons, however, as the GREENS are getting bigger, dissension is starting to gain momentum in the party who also have their factions.
Sarah Hanson/Young is starting to stir the pot in seeking the Deputy Leadership from Chritine Milne. So the cracks are staring to appear.
Whilst many voters may be disillusioned by the two major parties and swung to the Greens in protest, a majority of those swingers would not have a clue what the Greens stand for.
The Greens have a enviromental skin and a MARIST heart. Beware of the Greens!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Mofra (26 October 2010)

noco said:


> Whilst many voters may be disillusioned by the two major parties and swung to the Greens in protest, a majority of those swingers would not have a clue what the Greens stand for.
> The Greens have a enviromental skin and a MARIST heart. Beware of the Greens!!!!!!!!!!!!



That may be the case, but I'd imagine Greens voters would be more informed of their party's choices than your average mainstream party voter. The Grens core constituency tend to be:
a. Far more likely to hold tertiary qualifications, and
b. Politically active

There was some research a while back thats showed the Nats tested quite highly too for their voters being aware of party policies.


----------



## Julia (26 October 2010)

Mofra said:


> That may be the case, but I'd imagine Greens voters would be more informed of their party's choices than your average mainstream party voter. The Grens core constituency tend to be:
> a. Far more likely to hold tertiary qualifications, and
> b. Politically active



You left out fairly affluent.  Therefore happy to advocate policies that result in e.g. increased electricity costs which would impact far more harshly on people with low incomes.

At the time of the election, though, anyone I spoke to who wasn't voting Labor or Coalition was voting Greens purely by default.  They just didn't want to vote for a main party but didn't have much idea about what the Greens were on about, simply perceived them as being "genuine".  If you'd brought up their socialist inclinations (too mild a word?) they'd have been either surprised or just not interested.


----------



## Logique (26 October 2010)

Australia has perhaps the most urban population of any nation? The Greens will continue to rise. Although once Bob Brown retires it will be a temporary setback.

Is it so far-fetched to imagine that the duopoly of the future might be the Greens on one side, and a coalition of fmr Lab-Lib-Nats on the other?  I think it will ultimately turn this way in parliament.


----------



## explod (26 October 2010)

noco said:


> Julia, Bob Brown is a smooth customer and knows how to push people's buttons, however, as the GREENS are getting bigger, dissension is starting to gain momentum in the party who also have their factions.
> Sarah Hanson/Young is starting to stir the pot in seeking the Deputy Leadership from Chritine Milne. So the cracks are staring to appear.
> Whilst many voters may be disillusioned by the two major parties and swung to the Greens in protest, a majority of those swingers would not have a clue what the Greens stand for.
> The Greens have a enviromental skin and a MARIST heart. Beware of the Greens!!!!!!!!!!!!




I believe you meant Marxist there noco.

The environmental skin is that distorted by the business press and bankrolled by interests attached to fossil fuel et al.

Marxism is distorted by the same lobbies for the same reasons.  Profits over the workers.

To bring youself up to date noco there is an excellent book on Karl Marx by Francis Wheen, 1999 and very readable.

The Greens are for fair play and equality at the base level and as times continue to bite the support will increase regardless.  So it is worth learning a bit more about what is really going on and what being a Green means.


----------



## Mofra (26 October 2010)

Julia said:


> You left out fairly affluent.  Therefore happy to advocate policies that result in e.g. increased electricity costs which would impact far more harshly on people with low incomes.
> 
> At the time of the election, though, anyone I spoke to who wasn't voting Labor or Coalition was voting Greens purely by default.  They just didn't want to vote for a main party but didn't have much idea about what the Greens were on about, simply perceived them as being "genuine".  If you'd brought up their socialist inclinations (too mild a word?) they'd have been either surprised or just not interested.



I was at a music festival on the weekend - the word "affluent" to describe them would have made most of them laugh.
I'd say idealistic is a better descriptor than affluent.

Do we get to stereotype the other parties now? If so, bags Family First


----------



## wayneL (26 October 2010)

explod said:


> The Greens are for fair play and equality at the base level and as times continue to bite the support will increase regardless.




Equality has been shown time and time again to be a false premise. It is a practical impossibility.

Equal opportunity is one thing (and difficult enough on its own), but equality is quite another.


----------



## explod (26 October 2010)

wayneL said:


> Equality has been shown time and time again to be a false premise. It is a practical impossibility.
> 
> Equal opportunity is one thing (and difficult enough on its own), but equality is quite another.




Of course, but there needs to be an aim for a base level, like the basic wage, a basic standard for the bottom end in education, shelter, welfare and schooling.   And in this we need to respect the achievers and allow entrepreinership (the billy gates) to do it too.   Some have not had the right  beginning because of parents et al., intelligence or schooling opportunities to make it, some will never with all the opportunities in the world but none of this should deter attempts.  

But of course its a pipe dream, the only one I assert in the bigger picture myself is the three big E's,,,  "education education edu..."

The greens however will try IMHO.


----------



## nioka (26 October 2010)

wayneL said:


> Equality has been shown time and time again to be a false premise. It is a practical impossibility.
> 
> Equal opportunity is one thing (and difficult enough on its own), but equality is quite another.




Very true. The greens are more likely to make us equal than any other party. But equal to what. Equal to a flying fox maybe. I don't want to have to come down to equal Bob Brown either.


----------



## Julia (26 October 2010)

Mofra said:


> I was at a music festival on the weekend - the word "affluent" to describe them would have made most of them laugh.
> I'd say idealistic is a better descriptor than affluent.



The music festival Greens supporters is just one anecdote.  Most political commentators seem to agree with your earlier typecasting, and add that many in the inner urban areas (eg Melbourne seat of Adam Bandt) are professional people, not short of a dollar.



> Do we get to stereotype the other parties now? If so, bags Family First



By all means.  I'm interested in how you'd stereotype Family First.  Will they actually exist when the Senate changes next July?  Did Senator Fielding keep his seat?



explod said:


> Of course, but there needs to be an aim for a base level, like the basic wage, a basic standard for the bottom end in education, shelter, welfare and schooling.



I think most people will agree about this, explod, and to some extent it does exist.  Education to year 12 is available, but if the family has no interest in supporting a kid and placing a value on education, you can't expect the State to do much about it, can you?

We don't do 'shelter' well at all, especially for people with a mental illness, or who have become unemployed.   Ditto the broad term of 'welfare'.
With the rise in rents and general cost of living, I have no idea how thousands of Australians survive.  Many don't, hence the increasing number of homeless.

It's a difficult line for governments.  If they make the dole too generous it will genuinely deter people from seeking work, and will cause screams of outrage from people seeing their taxes rise to pay for it.

I haven't heard the Greens espousing any particular policies for overcoming the above problems, so I'm not sure why you seem to assume that if they had more influence they'd necessarily be able to create this magical equality.

Wayne is right.  You can provide equal opportunity but it's just not logical to imagine this necessarily translates into the sort of utopian society you dream about


----------



## explod (26 October 2010)

> I think most people will agree about this, explod, and to some extent it does exist. Education to year 12 is available, but if the family has no interest in supporting a kid and placing a value on education, you can't expect the State to do much about it, can you?




The state could do more about direct family support and family planning at the base level too.  Some attempt at pruning the vine must take place for us to improve.



> It's a difficult line for governments. If they make the dole too generous it will genuinely deter people from seeking work, and will cause screams of outrage from people seeing their taxes rise to pay for it.




There are some strings attached to the dole in indigenous communties why not extensions to wider social groups.  In Sweeden (socialist) two years military traning which is meshed in with higher education is compulsory.  If you are against the military the service is focused on some type of supervised community service.



> I haven't heard the Greens espousing any particular policies for overcoming the above problems, so I'm not sure why you seem to assume that if they had more influence they'd necessarily be able to create this magical equality.




As a Green member we actively discuss such new propositions, the greens are growing and changing to reflect the new members input and a fast changing world.   In my years I have found Greens to be very democratic.   Too many on ASF judge by looking back at the past, get over it, all have made mistakes but lets be positive about the future.



> Wayne is right. You can provide equal opportunity but it's just not logical to imagine this necessarily translates into the sort of utopian society you dream about




The three big "E's" would do that.   Very few with a university education do not do well.   Some of course want to use a hammer and others want to be mum's but you get the idea, I hope.

If we are going to make a difference we do have to dream and get others on board too.

Back to topic, picked up a biography on Gillard published in 2008, just in the opening paragraphs but will keep you informed, a great read so far and she is from good working stock.


----------



## Logique (26 October 2010)

Nothing to do with any previous posts, but I was just thinking, where's Calliope?


----------



## noco (26 October 2010)

explod said:


> I believe you meant Marxist there noco.
> 
> The environmental skin is that distorted by the business press and bankrolled by interests attached to fossil fuel et al.
> 
> ...




Apology for the typographical error. Marxist was the intended word.


----------



## IFocus (26 October 2010)

Mofra said:


> Absolutely spot on. Most people I know vote against a party, rather than for one.
> 
> 
> The Greens are gaining some of their vote by default, simply because there is a vacuum of ideas amongst the major parties. Like or loathe their ideals, they actually have ideals to start with.
> ...




The greens picked up seats due to the LNP giving them preferences Melbourne being a good example expect more so during the NSW state election.

Nick Michin  blushed when picked up on the fact


----------



## nioka (26 October 2010)

Logique said:


> Nothing to do with any previous posts, but I was just thinking, where's Calliope?



Worn out from overactivity during the election. Probably on R & R.


----------



## Julia (26 October 2010)

explod said:


> The state could do more about direct family support and family planning at the base level too.  Some attempt at pruning the vine must take place for us to improve.



I'm assuming your reference to 'pruning the vine' is a suggestion to limit reproduction in families that are not pulling their weight in society?
If I have this wrong, could you explain what you mean here?
(Gee, explod, wouldn't it be simpler for the sake of clear communication to just say what you mean in the first place???)

There's plenty of family support in terms of financial payments, and all sorts of counselling, advice etc is available also.  What you're ignoring, or preferring not to acknowledge, is that there is a sector of our society which is perfectly happy not to make any contribution, but to just sit back, whine, and take, endlessly.
That's where your socialist ideals fall over imo.



> There are some strings attached to the dole in indigenous communties why not extensions to wider social groups.



This is already happening.  Jenny Macklin (one of the governments least seen but more effective members) has extended this programme into general communities in some areas.  I expect they have to go on tiptoe with this.



> In Sweeden (socialist) two years military traning which is meshed in with higher education is compulsory.  If you are against the military the service is focused on some type of supervised community service.



Sounds good, though I don't see our revered Labor government getting too keen about this.  And would we necessarily wish some of the disaffected youth on the defence forces?  Wouldn't they be more nuisance than they are worth?
In principle, though, good idea.



> As a Green member we actively discuss such new propositions, the greens are growing and changing to reflect the new members input and a fast changing world.   In my years I have found Greens to be very democratic.   Too many on ASF judge by looking back at the past, get over it, all have made mistakes but lets be positive about the future.



OK, and they have some excellent progressive social policies, e.g. voluntary euthanasia.

Explod, I suppose you've read George Orwell's "Animal Farm"?


----------



## noco (27 October 2010)

It appears very evident, even with the Prime Ministers smooth talk on economic reform, she is headed for troubled waters as per article in the Australian News Paper today.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-hard-to-believe/story-e6frg9if-1225943916433


----------



## noco (27 October 2010)

Lies, lies and more damn lies by our PrimeMinister. How can she get up with a stupid smile and a school girl giggle and look the voters in the eye after being caught out. OMG......

http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...couriermail/comments/gillards_three_big_lies/


----------



## nukz (27 October 2010)

Gillard is a Obama puppet, If we have a housing collapse here or a collapse in the mining sector due to China slowdown(the two things that i think are most likely here) i cannot for one minute imagine how she could handle the situation.

I assume she would print money and bail everything out and nationalise all the industry's since she's a fabian society member.


----------



## explod (27 October 2010)

Julia said:


> I'm assuming your reference to 'pruning the vine' is a suggestion to limit reproduction in families that are not pulling their weight in society?
> If I have this wrong, could you explain what you mean here?
> (Gee, explod, wouldn't it be simpler for the sake of clear communication to just say what you mean in the first place???)
> 
> Explod, I suppose you've read George Orwell's "Animal Farm"?




We need to identify those that can be helped who are being pulled down by those who cannot.  (I do not mean lopping off.)  In my days at work I saw very many people with huge potential who were just dragged down.  My family in this work still see it.

Yes loved Orwell's take, particularly the "...but some are more equal than others." in fact have quoted the full line a number of times on ASF over the years.


----------



## Logique (29 October 2010)

nioka said:


> Worn out from overactivity during the election. Probably on R & R.



He he, yes must have worn himself out. I guess he'll be back when he's ready.


----------



## Logique (29 October 2010)

The PM can content herself that it's at least not as bad as this in NSW: 

From: http://bigpondnews.com/articles/Top...ally_govt_hits_new_low_-_Newspoll_532018.html

Friday, October 29, 2010 

*The Keneally government is the most unpopular Labor government ever*, the latest Newspoll shows.

Labor's primary support in NSW has sunk to 23 per cent of voters, the poll reported in The Australian newspaper said. 

The only lower figure ever recorded was the 22 per cent in 1989 for the Nationals under Mike Ahern in Queensland after the Fitzgerald inquiry into police corruption. 

The NSW coalition has twice Labor's support at 46 per cent. The Greens are on 17 per cent, Newspoll has found

Opposition Leader Barry O'Farrell has opened up a clear lead on Kristina Keneally as preferred premier, by 42 per cent to 35 per cent, the largest lead any NSW opposition leader has enjoyed. 

Labor's primary support in the state is down two points from the July/August Newspoll. 

In two-party-preferred terms, the *coalition leads Labor by 63 to 37 per cent*. The only larger split ever recorded was federal Labor's lead over the coalition at the height of Kevin Rudd's popularity early in 2008. 

Half of NSW voters are dissatisfied with Ms Keneally, while her satisfaction rating is steady on 38 per cent. 

Mr O'Farrell's satisfaction rating has risen five points to 48 per cent, while his dissatisfaction rating is also steady, on 32 per cent. 

The poll was conducted over two months for The Australian.


----------



## Calliope (29 October 2010)

Logique said:


> He he, yes must have worn himself out. I guess he'll be back when he's ready.




Yes, Logique, I am suffering post-election withdrawal symptoms in a political vacuum. On another note, it is interesting to see that the Howard haters after three years of withdrawal have now taken on a new lease on life.

Hockey is a fool.


----------



## Mofra (29 October 2010)

Logique said:


> From: http://bigpondnews.com/articles/Top...ally_govt_hits_new_low_-_Newspoll_532018.html
> 
> Friday, October 29, 2010
> 
> ...



I would expect Queensland and Victoria to change governments as well - both are stale governments, although Vic Labour has a chance of forming minority government. Ballieu's ministers seem intent on giving everyone else a free kick, even yesterday attacking the Greens on largely Federal issues and missing the mark on their state policies.


----------



## noco (1 November 2010)

Candidly speaking I don't believe Tim Matherson should be travelling with the Prime Minister and let alone attending official functions with overseas leaders as it does not create a good impression. It is also the view of many Australian voters.


http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...several_steps_behind_and_probably_a_lot_more/


----------



## todster (1 November 2010)

noco said:


> Candidly speaking I don't believe Tim Matherson should be travelling with the Prime Minister and let alone attending official functions with overseas leaders as it does not create a good impression. It is also the view of many Australian voters.
> 
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...several_steps_behind_and_probably_a_lot_more/




Have a kerosene bath and a lie down it's 2010 for god sake!


----------



## noco (1 November 2010)

todster said:


> Have a kerosene bath and a lie down it's 2010 for god sake!




Well todster, judging by the adverse comments on Andrew Bolts blog, I would say you would be in the minority. Perhaps you should take a cold shower to cool off from the heat being applied to your beloved Prime Minister.


----------



## todster (1 November 2010)

noco said:


> Well todster, judging by the adverse comments on Andrew Bolts blog, I would say you would be in the minority. Perhaps you should take a cold shower to cool off from the heat being applied to your beloved Prime Minister.




Mate the only people that read that garbage are Your family and the 10 other Lib voting sheep on here baaaaabaaaa


----------



## Julia (1 November 2010)

noco said:


> Candidly speaking I don't believe Tim Matherson should be travelling with the Prime Minister and let alone attending official functions with overseas leaders as it does not create a good impression. It is also the view of many Australian voters.
> 
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...several_steps_behind_and_probably_a_lot_more/



That's a pretty 'out there' comment by Andrew Bolt, but I'm finding it hard to disagree with him.

On "PM" this evening I listened to Ms Gillard describing her meeting with the Malaysian Deputy PM (the PM apparently being afflicted with chicken pox of all things), and she just sounded strained and frankly just not up to the situation.  

Her personal relationship is her own affair, but I agree that taking him along on international forays, where she is herself less than at ease, just further detracts from her international standing.

I'd be interested to know what ASF members think about how much of the public discomfort about Mr Mathieson has to do with him not being married to the Prime Minister, and how much simply to do with him not seeming to be, um, the right sort of bloke?

i.e. if she were still in a relationship with the well qualified and competent Craig Emerson, would there be this groundswell of feeling against her partner?


----------



## wayneL (1 November 2010)

todster said:


> Mate the only people that read that garbage are Your family and the 10 other Lib voting sheep on here baaaaabaaaa





Perhaps you could explain why Liberal voters (and there are a few more than ten ) are sheep, and Labor voters aren't?

Then perhaps you could explain why the level of your debating skills haven't progressed since kindergarten.


----------



## todster (1 November 2010)

wayneL said:


> Perhaps you could explain why Liberal voters (and there are a few more than ten ) are sheep, and Labor voters aren't?
> 
> Then perhaps you could explain why the level of your debating skills haven't progressed since kindergarten.




I think the second part of your questions explains the first.
Mention sheep after the rugby and you always get a bite.


----------



## sails (1 November 2010)

wayneL said:


> Perhaps you could explain why Liberal voters (and there are a few more than ten ) are sheep, and Labor voters aren't?
> 
> Then perhaps you could explain why the level of your debating skills haven't progressed since kindergarten.




Haha - maybe labor voters are the goats that are separated from the sheep.  Goats eat everything in sight and butt when they are annoyed.  Sounds about right...

I am sure Todster posts to stir with his one liners...


----------



## Alex Barton (1 November 2010)

Julia said:


> I'd be interested to know what ASF members think about how much of the public discomfort about Mr Mathieson has to do with him not being married to the Prime Minister, and how much simply to do with him not seeming to be, um, the right sort of bloke?





A lot of people were unhappy with his ties to property development!


----------



## nunthewiser (1 November 2010)

todster said:


> Mention sheep after the rugby and you always get a bite.






post of the week


----------



## sails (1 November 2010)

Julia said:


> ....I'd be interested to know what ASF members think about how much of the public discomfort about Mr Mathieson has to do with him not being married to the Prime Minister, and how much simply to do with him not seeming to be, um, the right sort of bloke?
> 
> i.e. if she were still in a relationship with the well qualified and competent Craig Emerson, would there be this groundswell of feeling against her partner?




Yes Julia, perhaps it would be an improvement as some like Craig would be more familiar with general proceedings and protocol on the world stage. Could it also be the relatively short term relationships that give rise to the question of commitment or even lack of stability?

When we think of the more recent PMs on both sides, they have had their wives of many years who most likely grew into their roles prior to their husbands being elected as PM.  Hawke felt it would spoil his chances of re-election if he divorced Hazel while in the job, so he obviously felt it was of importance.

In this day and age, I doubt there is actually any right or wrong in it, but it will come down to perception of what might or might not be expected of someone in the top job.


----------



## bellenuit (2 November 2010)

Julia said:


> Her personal relationship is her own affair, but I agree that taking him along on international forays, where she is herself less than at ease, just further detracts from her international standing.




I don't have an issue with him accompanying her if she needs someone to unload on when she gets back to her hotel at night. That's what friends are for and if it makes her less stressed then all the better.

If he attending formal functions makes things awkward, perhaps he should just stay away from those events, as would be  the case if she were single and not in a de facto relationship.

However I think it is a decision for her to make. If they believe their relationship is akin to marriage, then it would be wrong for us to deem it otherwise, just because some legalities haven't been completed.


----------



## nulla nulla (2 November 2010)

Now she has joined the "Bring Corby home" campaign. Is this just another diversion from the day to day incompetence? I can't say this inspires me with confidence.


----------



## noco (6 November 2010)

After reading comments by the media today, Juila Gillard's slogan 'MOOOVING FOOORWARD' seems to have back fired on her. Perhaps she should change her slogan to 'MOOOOVING BACKWARDS'. 
After claiming Kevin Rudd's government had lost it's way, she really needs a GPS to find her way. She is completely lost and out of deepth as a Prime Minister. She is a total embarrassment to this great nation of ours.

http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...nts/gillard_flounders_and_gllery_now_notices/


----------



## Julia (6 November 2010)

Excellent article by Paul Kelly in today's "Weekend Australian" on this subject.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...sis-of-authority/story-e6frg6zo-1225948547720

Extract: 







> FEDERAL Labor appears weak, unconvincing and hostage to its many dilemmas.
> 
> THE Gillard government, deft at tactics, is losing its policy authority in the nation and facing a relentless haemorrhage in political support with repeated exposures of its inability to shape events or outcomes.
> 
> ...


----------



## sails (7 November 2010)

noco said:


> After reading comments by the media today, Juila Gillard's slogan 'MOOOVING FOOORWARD' seems to have back fired on her. Perhaps she should change her slogan to 'MOOOOVING BACKWARDS'...




Noco, looks like the latest buzz word is "dialogue".  38 sec youtube clip:  
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G85IPsaR708


----------



## Julia (7 November 2010)

sails said:


> Noco, looks like the latest buzz word is "dialogue".  38 sec youtube clip:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G85IPsaR708



Haven't watched the Utube clip but have already noticed that this is her latest buzzword.  It's what she says when she cannot make a clear response to a question.  Just assures the questioner that she is having an ongoing dialogue.

So reassuring.

She is simply way, way out of her depth and the whole government is floundering woefully.


----------



## Logique (8 November 2010)

Love to be a fly on the wall at the Ausmin talks today, 
as the gradual '..OMG..', and '..how isn't Rudd or Stephen Smith the PM..' looks creep across the faces of Clinton, Gates and the US aides. 

Would like to be more charitable to the PM, but have given up waiting for a straight answer to a straight question. As they probably will too.


----------



## noco (8 November 2010)

Julia said:


> Haven't watched the Utube clip but have already noticed that this is her latest buzzword.  It's what she says when she cannot make a clear response to a question.  Just assures the questioner that she is having an ongoing dialogue.
> 
> So reassuring.
> 
> She is simply way, way out of her depth and the whole government is floundering woefully.




From Andrew Bolts blog.

Andrew Bolt asked Julia about the veracity of her promise to return the budget to surplus by 2012/13 and this was her reply: 

(giggle) “Well Andrew, me and Wayne are carefully and methodically having dialogue with each other, conversations, dialogue, carefully and methodically, as we plan to return the budget to 2012/13, in 3 years time, 3 years early. We’re not just cobbling together some plan, like Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey, we’re talking to the Australian people, we’re facilitating, we’re putting together a plan, it’s no secret. We’re looking at measures, having dialogue, conversations and Wayne will announce our ideas and strategies to the Australian people in good time. We won’t be rushed by Tony Abbott’s populist slogans, we’re determined to work in a methodical and responsible way, talking to the Australian peole, having dialogue, talking to the treasury, carefully and methodically. That’s my vision for Australia, I love this country, I am passionate about education. My parents are immigrants. Tim and I care very much. Methodical and responsible Andrew. No slogans, no Tony Abbott, no delays, no idea. Sorry, wha was the question”?


----------



## Calliope (8 November 2010)

Logique said:


> Would like to be more charitable to the PM, but have given up waiting for a straight answer to a straight question. As they probably will too.




This woman is not deserving of any charity. She must have known that she was ill-equipped to assume the responsibility of being PM. It is depressing that the Labor Party and the electors would ever conceive that Gillard could be a successful leader of this country. She is obviously not leadership material.

The country will now be stumbling about in the dark for three years, courtesy of a few bitter and twisted independents.


----------



## IFocus (8 November 2010)

The Gillard government has reaffirmed its commitment to returning the budget to surplus 2012/13.

This is despite falling revenues (projected) from the rising AUD

On this issue Labor sinks or swims and / or the conservatives for ever bite their tongues (unlikely)


----------



## noco (8 November 2010)

IFocus said:


> The Gillard government has reaffirmed its commitment to returning the budget to surplus 2012/13.
> 
> This is despite falling revenues (projected) from the rising AUD
> 
> On this issue Labor sinks or swims and / or the conservatives for ever bite their tongues (unlikely)




IFocus, I'm sure you still believe in Santa Clause and the fairy God Mother if you believe anything Joolya says.


----------



## Julia (8 November 2010)

noco said:


> From Andrew Bolts blog.
> 
> Andrew Bolt asked Julia about the veracity of her promise to return the budget to surplus by 2012/13 and this was her reply:
> 
> (giggle) “Well Andrew, me and Wayne are carefully and methodically having dialogue with each other, conversations, dialogue, carefully and methodically, as we plan to return the budget to 2012/13, in 3 years time, 3 years early. We’re not just cobbling together some plan, like Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey, we’re talking to the Australian people, we’re facilitating, we’re putting together a plan, it’s no secret. We’re looking at measures, having dialogue, conversations and Wayne will announce our ideas and strategies to the Australian people in good time. We won’t be rushed by Tony Abbott’s populist slogans, we’re determined to work in a methodical and responsible way, talking to the Australian peole, having dialogue, talking to the treasury, carefully and methodically. That’s my vision for Australia, I love this country, I am passionate about education. My parents are immigrants. Tim and I care very much. Methodical and responsible Andrew. No slogans, no Tony Abbott, no delays, no idea. Sorry, what was the question”?



"Me and Wayne"???  Could we get the PM some lessons in grammar just for a start?

Did she really say that?   Andrew Bolt hasn't, um, paraphrased her comments?
If she did, then we are in even more dire straits than I'd imagined.




IFocus said:


> The Gillard government has reaffirmed its commitment to returning the budget to surplus 2012/13.
> 
> This is despite falling revenues (projected) from the rising AUD
> 
> On this issue Labor sinks or swims and / or the conservatives for ever bite their tongues (unlikely)



Do you think they can do it, IFocus?

A decent start would be to cease the stimulus remaining in the BER program.
So crazy that they are continuing to stimulate the economy, while the Reserve is obliged to increase rates to rein it in, and even worse, while the government is sticking it to the banks for raising rates!!!

Can't they, fergawdsake, see how utterly illogical their overall position is!


----------



## nioka (9 November 2010)

noco said:


> IFocus, I'm sure you still believe in Santa Clause and the fairy God Mother if you believe anything Joolya says.




Silly me I thought Julia WAS the fairy godmother and what would Christmas be like without a santa.


----------



## Logique (9 November 2010)

I'll probably fall foul of the Mods with this suggestion.

I was thinking a Poll on this thread could resolve the issue once and for all?

Q. Who do you think would make the best PM?

- Julia Gillard
- Lady Gaga
- Leigh Sales
- Bob Katter

All cool choices, and with cult followings. I think the result would be unpredictable.
Fortunately for me, I don't know how to do create polls.


----------



## Macquack (9 November 2010)

Julia said:


> "Me and Wayne"???  Could we get the PM some lessons in grammar just for a start?
> 
> *Did she really say that?*   Andrew Bolt hasn't, um, paraphrased her comments?
> If she did, then we are in even more dire straits than I'd imagined.




Noco should stick to the facts instead of reciting some infantile cult member of the Andrew Bolt fan club (probably "boy lightning" himself).


----------



## Duckman#72 (9 November 2010)

Macquack said:


> Noco should stick to the facts instead of reciting some infantile cult member of the Andrew Bolt fan club (probably "boy lightning" himself).




The scary thing Macquack is that the question had to be asked - "Did she actually say that?"

Unfortunately it sounds exactly like an answer she would have given!!  

Duckman


----------



## IFocus (9 November 2010)

Julia said:


> Do you think they can do it, IFocus?




Its a case of they have to not if



> A decent start would be to cease the stimulus remaining in the BER program.




I hear this often but to do so will seriously hurt a number of business's / people. Projects have a certain lead time to completion once started contracts signed etc its not quite like just turning off a tap.




> So crazy that they are continuing to stimulate the economy, while the Reserve is obliged to increase rates to rein it in, and even worse, while the government is sticking it to the banks for raising rates!!!




I suspect the biggest impact is commodity prices / exports and the BER actually helps the bottom end of the 2 speed economy that we currently have unlike the mining boom


----------



## Julia (9 November 2010)

IFocus said:


> I hear this often but to do so will seriously hurt a number of business's / people. Projects have a certain lead time to completion once started contracts signed etc its not quite like just turning off a tap.



I understand that, but I gather they have many millions still not spent.
Are you saying it would be impossible for this amount not to go ahead?
Surely if construction hasn't begun, perhaps it would be unfortunate for that building company, but in the overall scheme of things, more sensible?



> I suspect the biggest impact is commodity prices / exports and the BER actually helps the bottom end of the 2 speed economy that we currently have unlike the mining boom



Did you see Wayne Swan being questioned about this on the 7.30 Report this evening?  He was his usual shrill, frenetic self, ignoring the actual substance of Kerry O'Brien's questions, and refusing to acknowledge that some sectors of the Australian society are absolutely not sharing in any economic boom.


----------



## Logique (10 November 2010)

Duckman#72 said:


> ...Unfortunately it sounds exactly like an answer she would have given!!
> Duckman



To a tee I'd have thought. It's the answer to every question, regardless of subject.

BTW congrats to the Vics on winning Channel Eddie's National IQ Test last night. Only a point in it though, from NSW and ACT. Sorry Smurf but Tassie might have done better. Hilarious that the Sports Fans team in the studio (with Joffa in the gold jacket) streaked home to win.


----------



## trainspotter (11 November 2010)

The federal government is confident that the jobless rate will continue to fall over the next 18 months, despite the surprise spike to 5.4 per cent in October.

"If the labour market tightens too rapidly, this can lead to a wages breakout and higher inflation," NAB Capital chief economist Rob Henderson explained.

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-new...ll-will-resume-says-evans-20101111-17oq4.html

Yeah right ...... have they got anything right so far?? Name one thing. Just one.


----------



## nulla nulla (11 November 2010)

trainspotter said:


> The federal government is confident that the jobless rate will continue to fall over the next 18 months, despite the surprise spike to 5.4 per cent in October.
> 
> "If the labour market tightens too rapidly, this can lead to a wages breakout and higher inflation," NAB Capital chief economist Rob Henderson explained.
> 
> ...




Uhmm.....Interest rates will go up?


----------



## Mofra (12 November 2010)

trainspotter said:


> "If the labour market tightens too rapidly, this can lead to a wages breakout and higher inflation," NAB Capital chief economist Rob Henderson explained.



Given the US solution to their current financial problems echo that of 1930s Germany (yeehar, print more cash woohoo!), we will have worldwide inflation (not just loacl pressures) to contend with.

I'd trust Henderson over the ex-AMP guy Shane Oliver anyday.


----------



## noco (12 November 2010)

The question is being asked, "Is Julia Gillard finished?" Her head counters are getting nervous. Many say, "she has no vision" and has lost her way. The Greens are counting their blessings without having to do anything but watch and wait?????????????


http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...uriermail/comments/is_julia_gillard_finished/


----------



## joea (12 November 2010)

"NOBODY IS DEFEATED UNTIL THEY START BLAMING SOMEBODY ELSE"

Sit back, have a glass of red or white at night, and watch her implode.

Cheers


----------



## IFocus (12 November 2010)

NSW right is about to get an absolute flogging in the coming state poll unless of course  Barry O'Farrell blows it which is still surprisingly entirely possible.

NSW state Labor of course needs punishment but god why cant the Liberals find some one who is fit to lead.

So tensions are high but Gillard still has the numbers and the current federal  Labor power base strength comes from Victoria more so than NSW. 

Where has the human headline Abbott been lately?


----------



## Julia (12 November 2010)

IFocus said:


> NSW right is about to get an absolute flogging in the coming state poll unless of course  Barry O'Farrell blows it which is still surprisingly entirely possible.
> 
> NSW state Labor of course needs punishment but god why cant the Liberals find some one who is fit to lead.



You could say exactly the same in Queensland.  The Opposition here is simply pathetic, reflecting the woeful performance of the leader.
It seems Mal Brough is seeking to return to the scene, this time in Qld State politics.  He is about the conservatives' only hope.



> Where has the human headline Abbott been lately?



Well, given that his popularity rating has increased by 2 points during the recent period during which he has said virtually nothing, he is perhaps wisely deciding that the less he says the more popular he will be.

How ***** sad all round.


----------



## nulla nulla (13 November 2010)

Mofra said:


> Given the US solution to their current financial problems echo that of 1930s Germany (yeehar, print more cash woohoo!), we will have worldwide inflation (not just loacl pressures) to contend with.
> 
> I'd trust Henderson over the ex-AMP guy Shane Oliver anyday.




Germany's post war economic policies appear to have worked to their long term benefit. They lost the war, had to pay for it, and now they have one of the strongest economies in Europe. Not sure what this has to do with Julia though, is she still prime minister?


----------



## noco (13 November 2010)

Can somebody please give Julia Gillard some lessons in international behaviour.
Her overseas performance leaves a lot to be desired amongst world leaders.
Julia Gillard is an absolute embarrassment to Australia. OMG, what must other countries think of her????? 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...formances-abroad/story-e6frg6zo-1225952905669


----------



## Julia (13 November 2010)

Yes, I read Greg Sheridan's article this morning.  He's quite right.
To be using the international stage to continue bagging Australian banks is completely inappropriate and demonstrates her naivete on foreign affairs.
As Mr Sheridan remarks, her behaviour is 'provincial'.


----------



## Mofra (15 November 2010)

nulla nulla said:


> Germany's post war economic policies appear to have worked to their long term benefit. They lost the war, had to pay for it, and now they have one of the strongest economies in Europe. Not sure what this has to do with Julia though, is she still prime minister?



I was responding to TS's post about inflation which was discussing the economy in the context of the current government, and was referencing the post WW1 period (30s) as opposed to the post WW2 period.

This government (and presumably the next) does need to have plans in place to tackle global inflation.


----------



## Logique (15 November 2010)

Mofra said:


> ...This government (and presumably the next) does need to have plans in place to tackle global inflation.



Yes I think so. 

It's ok, foreign affairs can be not her thing, and economics can be not the Opposition leader's thing = fair trade.

The ALP govt's (selectively applied) bank guarantee knocked out much of the secondary securitization market, the secondary lenders, giving the big 4  an enhanced market position post GFC.

So the big 4 shouldn't squeal about the govt now.


----------



## nulla nulla (15 November 2010)

Julia said:


> Yes, I read Greg Sheridan's article this morning.  He's quite right.
> To be using the international stage to continue bagging Australian banks is completely inappropriate and demonstrates her naivete on foreign affairs.
> As Mr Sheridan remarks, her behaviour is 'provincial'.




I thought "Sheridan" made footballs for the AFL?


----------



## derty (15 November 2010)

nulla nulla said:


> I thought "Sheridan" made footballs for the AFL?



He is also one of The Australian's resident NeoCons.


----------



## wayneL (15 November 2010)

derty said:


> He is also one of The Australian's resident NeoCons.




Oh brother this is ridiculous. Anyone to the right of Pol Pot is a neo-con or "far right".

Get a grip.


----------



## derty (15 November 2010)

wayneL said:


> Oh brother this is ridiculous. Anyone to the right of Pol Pot is a neo-con or "far right".
> 
> Get a grip.



While my paltry understanding of politics pales in the light of your omniscience in the matter, Sheridan fits the wiki definition of a neo-conservative quite well, particularly a Bush-era one.


> Neoconservatism is a political philosophy that supports using economic and military power to bring liberalism, democracy, and human rights to other countries. In economics, unlike paleoconservatives and libertarians, neoconservatives are generally comfortable with a limited welfare state; and, while rhetorically supportive of free markets, they are willing to interfere for overriding social purposes.



If he looks like one, smells like one and tastes like one, isn't he one? In what ways isn't he a neocon? He was pro pre-emptive action in Iraq, he was one of the WMD cheerleaders. He is still in favour of military action on Iran. He was virtually in lock-step with all that was sprouted from Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld.
I mean the man even tries to argue that history will see G.W.Bush held up as one of the USA's great presidents.


----------



## wayneL (15 November 2010)

Conceded.

But that doesn't detract from my general point.

Nor does it detract from Sheridan's comments in this instance.

BTW - It is often remarked that sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.


----------



## drsmith (15 November 2010)

Sheridan's piece has certainly served it's purpose here.


----------



## Julia (15 November 2010)

We probably mostly tend to read and report that which aligns with our already established views.

I enjoy Mr Sheridan's vitriole, but at the same time acknowledge that he is less than unbiased in his view of the world, and Australian politics in particular.

To be fair, I've not seen him champion Tony Abbott as the saviour Australia is waiting for as PM, so conclude he's still capable of delivering reasonable criticism all round.

As Wayne says, neocon or not (and do we really need the labels?), it doesn't make him wrong in his criticism about our current Prime Minister.


----------



## Duckman#72 (15 November 2010)

Julia said:


> To be fair, I've not seen him champion Tony Abbott as the saviour Australia is waiting for as PM, so conclude he's still capable of delivering reasonable criticism all round.
> 
> As Wayne says, neocon or not (and do we really need the labels?), it doesn't make him wrong in his criticism about our current Prime Minister.




I agree - when Sheriden came out over 12months ago and stated his "history" with Abbott I was expecting some favourable articles in Tony's favour. But like you Julia, I have found him to be restrained.

As for comments about GW Bush - Sheriden's only problem in my opinion was that he was 12months ahead of his time with his comparatives between Bush and Obama. Sheriden has been questioning Obama's results, policies and political nouse for over 12-18months. As the latest round of US elections have shown - maybe a few more mainstream commentators and media outlets should have done the same.

Duckman

(PS I don't believe that Sheriden has ever called GW Bush one of the "great" Presidents - however he has consistently maintained that his achievements should, over time, place him higher on the ladder than Obama fanatics would like.)


----------



## derty (16 November 2010)

wayneL said:


> Conceded.



Even when I'm right I'm wrong. You're good 

Contrary to perceptions I do find myself agreeing with Greg on occasion and do agree largely with his article on Julia. It is unfortunate that when we have to look back we will always have Julia as our 1st female Prime Minster. And regardless of titles, if Greg Sheridan were a bird he would fly in very small anticlockwise circles. 

Duckman: A great president for these terrible times


----------



## Logique (16 November 2010)

derty said:


> While my paltry understanding of politics pales in the light of your omniscience in the matter, Sheridan fits the wiki definition of a neo-conservative quite well, particularly a Bush-era one.



Not buying into this one, but that's an interesting definition of a neocon, it would capture a good chunk of the parliament, across all parties, even a Green or two.


----------



## Mofra (16 November 2010)

Logique said:


> The ALP govt's (selectively applied) bank guarantee knocked out much of the secondary securitization market, the secondary lenders, giving the big 4  an enhanced market position post GFC.



I was working for a securitised lender as the GFC hit, and they shut up shop before the bank guarantee was announced - nonetheless, I disagree with any further fiddling with bank regulation, especially right now when it is such a political football and the temptation of all politicians will be to try and score some short term polling brownie points when they may be doing long term damage to the health of our banking system (which shielded us from many of the worst aspects of the GFC IMO).


----------



## Julia (16 November 2010)

Mofra said:


> nonetheless, I disagree with any further fiddling with bank regulation, especially right now when it is such a political football and the temptation of all politicians will be to try and score some short term polling brownie points when they may be doing long term damage to the health of our banking system (which shielded us from many of the worst aspects of the GFC IMO).



Excellent point.  They are so focused on short term populist rhetoric, each party trying to exceed the other's outrage, there's a real danger they could actually seriously stuff things up.


----------



## bellenuit (16 November 2010)

Julia said:


> Excellent point.  They are so focused on short term populist rhetoric, each party trying to exceed the other's outrage, there's a real danger they could actually seriously stuff things up.




What really bugs me is that even if they could force banks to only raise and lower in line with the RBA or even if they could actually get banks to raise less than the RBA, the effect on mortgage interest rates would be negligible. 

When the RBA lifted cash rates last week, it was because they wanted 'market" interest rates to rise 25 basis points, from about 7.4% to 7.65%, to keep inflation in check. The banks on average raised their interest rates by a further 15 basis points. It is this latter 15 basis points that one could expect to be saved by regulating the banks, but then only temporarily. That will hardly impact borrowers in any way. What's more, if the average market rate is sitting at 7.8% at the next meeting and the RBA thinks they should be at 7.65% (what they originally wanted), they will reduce cash rates by 15 basis points to get there on the assumption the banks will follow suit. So the effect of regulation is negligible and only temporary.

Let's say the banks not only had not increased their rates more than the RBA increase, but didn't move rates at all and fully absorbed the 25 basis point increase by the RBA. The RBA would have responded to this by increasing the cash rate by a further 25 basis points at their next meeting, assuming nothing else has changed in between. In fact the RBA would continue to increase cash rates until the banks market rates get to where the RBA wants them to be.

The next question is what about the 0.5% or so difference between the major four's rates and the other financial institutions. Couldn't borrowers save by moving their loans to these, assuming there are no costs involved with moving. This only works so long as a small portion of borrowers move. Since the majors hold the vast majority of mortgages, the RBA looks at their market rates in determining what to set cash rates to. Even though the other institutions have lower rates, they don't count in the scheme of things when it comes to the effect on inflation. But if borrowers en masse migrate then the RBA will look at the other institutions' rates as now having the greatest effect on inflation. So the RBA will simply increase the cash rate by the average differential between the big four's rates and the others. So borrowers are back to where they were. 

Over the past 30 years, mortgage interest rated have been between about 5% and 19%. Such wild fluctuations have nothing to do with the banks. They are just tinkering at the edges. 

If people/politicians genuinely want to reduce interest rates than they should be looking at government policies that effect economic parameters that the RBA is mandated to control. The NBN is a good example.


----------



## trainspotter (18 November 2010)

*Gillard defies Senate order on NBN and refuses to deliver business case*

Senate MPs have rebuked Prime Minister Julia Gillard after she deliberately ignored a Senate order mandating the Government turn over the business case for the National Broadband Network before Parliament votes on critical telco legislation. 
The attack comes as the opposition, independent senators and minority parties have attacked a new proposal from communications minister Stephen Conroy to offer private briefings of the business case, saying the material must be released to the public immediately.

http://www.smartcompany.com.au/info...nbn-and-refuses-to-deliver-business-case.html

This morning, Greens communications spokesman Scott Ludlum told the ABC that it is *unacceptable for the Government* to be holding onto critical material while debating two pieces of legislation: the Telstra Separation Bill and the NBN legislation.

Hahahha haha haha  ah aaa *cough sputter* ahahahahhahahahahaaaa


----------



## sails (29 November 2010)

Is this another of Ms Gillard's pre-election promises likely to be broken? 

Gillard brings forward decision on carbon price



> Reuters/AAP CANBERRA - The federal government intends to wrap up an agreement next year on pricing carbon, Prime Minister Julia Gillard has said, testing the strength of her minority rule and pressing the accelerator on Canberra's climate change fight.




With the way she and Rudd are happy to be flitting around the world frequently in jet aeroplanes, I have trouble believing that they care anything about their carbon footprints - it's just about more taxes, IMO.

And Malcolm Turnbull is showing his colours again in this same article.


----------



## noco (30 November 2010)

Senator Cory Bernardi spells out why we should have no confidence in Julia Gillard. Her broken promises and NBN stupidity is enough.


http://www.corybernardi.com/2010/11...m_campaign=Feed:+CoryBernardi+(Cory+Bernardi)


----------



## Logique (30 November 2010)

I'm a fan of Sen Bernardi.


> While Miss Gillard may be ideologically dedicated to higher taxes and the desire to impose more government control on every Australian, her commitment to a carbon price defies common sense and the latest scientific evidence regarding climate change.
> 
> Every day, new evidence emerges that the climate alarmists have got it wrong. The earth is no longer warming and the alarmist camp has been exposed as riddled with scoundrels, shysters and snake oil salesmen.



Yep.


----------



## zzaaxxss3401 (3 February 2011)

*Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*

I've just listened to a press conference on the telly by Julia Gillard. Has anyone else thought that JG sounds a lot like a Dalek in her pronunciation of words and phrases? 

Julia: "We will rebuild. We must rebuild!"
A Dalek: "Seek. Locate. Exterminate!"

Of any of the politicians, I think Anna Bligh comes across the most natural, confident and very easy to listen to (if it's of interest).


----------



## sails (3 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*

lol - had to look up the meaning of Dalek:



> A member of a fictitious race of extraterrestrial mutants regularly appearing in the television programme _Doctor Who_, known primarily for their lack of compassion and their bent on domination through extermination of other beings.



http://www.allwords.com/word-Dalek.html



> a strange and frightening creature from the British television programme Dr Who that has a metal body and talks like a machine. Daleks show no emotions, always follow orders....




http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/Dalek


----------



## glenn_r (3 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



zzaaxxss3401 said:


> I've just listened to a press conference on the telly by Julia Gillard. Has anyone else thought that JG sounds a lot like a Dalek in her pronunciation of words and phrases?
> 
> Julia: "We will rebuild. We must rebuild!"
> A Dalek: "Seek. Locate. Exterminate!"
> ...





If Dalek = Bogan, then the answer is yes.


----------



## Knobby22 (3 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*

I have heard Julia's sister talk and she has none of the drone of her sister, in fact speaks quite well.


----------



## outback (3 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*

HHMMM, Julia, the love child of Davros and Bob Hawke, certainly food for thought.


----------



## Calliope (3 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*

Well they do have big butts.


----------



## nunthewiser (3 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*

dalek/not dalek........i,d still do her.....


good thread


----------



## zzaaxxss3401 (3 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



nunthewiser said:


> dalek/not dalek........i,d still do her.....
> 
> 
> good thread



Nun - you are certainly living up to your name.


----------



## c-unit (3 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



nunthewiser said:


> dalek/not dalek........i,d still do her.....
> 
> 
> good thread


----------



## robusta (3 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*

I clearly remember as a kid hiding behind the couch watching Dr Who around the corner scared out of my mind by the Dalek's. Now I am 41 and scared by Julia Gillard so maybe.........just maybe that bastard Davros has learnt to disguise them better.


----------



## Solly (3 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



nunthewiser said:


> dalek/not dalek........i,d still do her.....
> 
> 
> good thread





nun, OMG, Like The Fist of An Angry God ?


----------



## todster (3 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



nunthewiser said:


> dalek/not dalek........i,d still do her.....
> 
> 
> good thread




Bahahaha you know what they say about redheads


----------



## Julia (3 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



zzaaxxss3401 said:


> I've just listened to a press conference on the telly by Julia Gillard. Has anyone else thought that JG sounds a lot like a Dalek in her pronunciation of words and phrases?
> 
> Julia: "We will rebuild. We must rebuild!"
> A Dalek: "Seek. Locate. Exterminate!"
> ...



 I only heard this on "PM" radio this evening.  You're quite right.  Her robotic, wooden delivery is becoming worse.  It's just horrible.  Doesn't she ever listen to a recording of herself????


----------



## trainspotter (3 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



Julia said:


> I only heard this on "PM" radio this evening.  You're quite right.  Her robotic, wooden delivery is becoming worse.  It's just horrible.  Doesn't she ever listen to a recording of herself????




LOLOLOLOL........... She will obey !!!!!!! Run up a flight of stairs .......... she can't get you !@#*()_@#$%^&*

Mind control at it's best. Trot out the lines that the populace require and retain power. Ask TrotskYfor the information. Ooooopssssssssss....... Lenin is waiting

"The bureaucratization of the party apparatus has developed to unheard-of proportions by means of the method of secretarial selection. There has been created a very broad stratum of party workers, entering into the apparatus of the government of the party, who completely renounce their own party opinion, at least the open expression of it, as though assuming that the secretarial hierarchy is the apparatus which creates party opinion and party decisions. Beneath this stratum, abstaining from their own opinions, there lays the broad mass of the party, before whom every decision stands in the form of a summons or a command."

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm ........ and we needed a catastrophic disaster to see this unfold.

Ahem !!!!!!


----------



## frankie_boy (4 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*

Moving forward.. Moving Forward.. Moving Forward...

The way she has carried herself as such a show pony thru all this crisis we are having in Qld... Straight out of Kath & Kim..

Look at mwe Kevy.... Loook at mwee.. Loook at mweeeeeee..

LOOK AT ME LINK

an embarrassment to our nation


----------



## Logique (4 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*

Leftists and chardey chatterers, this is how you treated John Howard.


----------



## nomore4s (4 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



Julia said:


> I only heard this on "PM" radio this evening.  You're quite right.  Her robotic, wooden delivery is becoming worse.  It's just horrible.  Doesn't she ever listen to a recording of herself????




It is getting worse. I'm not sure what happened but she used to actually have a little bit of personality when she used to make Abbot look foolish on the Today show but now she is just painful to listen too.


----------



## zzaaxxss3401 (4 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



nomore4s said:


> It is getting worse. I'm not sure what happened but she used to actually have a little bit of personality when she used to make Abbot look foolish on the Today show but now she is just painful to listen too.



I think I was a little too tolerant of her constantly condescending tones, but she longer even gets my attention anymore. I tune out.

Can we get hold of the "faceless men" somehow, to remove her? Or should we just all ignore her and live in hope that she shuts up because no one is listening anymore?


----------



## noco (4 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*

Please don't be soooo cruel to our beloved Joolya. She is up here in Townsville in gum boots soooper visin' our Army Solegers cleaning up after Cyclone 'Yaris'.
 She was last seen scavenge thru the rubble lookin' for votes.


----------



## trainspotter (5 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*





Julia went to Mars and found the Daleks lurking on the far side of Uranus.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (5 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



trainspotter said:


> View attachment 41217
> 
> 
> Julia went to Mars and found the Daleks lurking on the far side of Uranus.




Leaf Uralone.

Sheezbin ova X pozid to Marn Fergsinz Inglsh. 

gg


----------



## Calliope (5 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Leaf Uralone.
> 
> Sheezbin ova X pozid to Marn Fergsinz Inglsh.
> 
> gg




Marn speaks beautiful Strine. I heard on the ABC radio the other that Julia Gillard was visiting the "hardestit" areas. I imagine Daleks would have hard mammaries.  I suppose she bypassed your neck of the woods except to pose with the troops.


----------



## IFocus (5 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



Logique said:


> Leftists and chardey chatterers, this is how you treated John Howard.




The thread is certainly lowbrow and I don't recall it getting quite as nasty towards the liaring little rodent  

But all politicians are fair game


----------



## nunthewiser (5 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



Logique said:


> Leftists and chardey chatterers, this is how you treated John Howard.




Well in the interests of political correctness and equal rights.........

yes i would do Jonny howard also


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (5 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



Logique said:


> Leftists and chardey chatterers, this is how you treated John Howard.




Perhaps there is a case for going easy on the Dalek, I mean Jools , because she is a Laaaydeeeee.

Poor Little Johnnie was fair game for every insult known to rat and man.

gg


----------



## Logique (6 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*

The latest posts on this thread provided a good laugh this morning. 

Scrupulously fair on equal rights Nun, but you don't have to go that far.


----------



## Sean K (8 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*

Those turned on crocodile tears might have earned her some short term support from Labour die hards clinging to hope but to me, James Cameron is lining her up to play a Dalek in Avatar 2.


----------



## IFocus (8 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*

Abbott to co-star as Davros


----------



## Julia (8 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



kennas said:


> Those turned on crocodile tears might have earned her some short term support from Labour die hards clinging to hope but to me, James Cameron is lining her up to play a Dalek in Avatar 2.




Really, the crocodile tears were a bit much.   She walked woodenly through all the visits to flood affected areas, clutched voters in the obligatory hugs of sympathy, and gave zero impression of being remotely affected.

Since then there has been much media comment about how poorly her performance contrasted with the empathy shown by Anna Bligh, how robotic and unsympathetic she was, and now suddenly today, voila, she is moved to uncontrollable sadness and tears.

What utter bull****.  She has realised, belatedly, that she needs to do something to show she has some feeling.
Left me completely cold and I hope the population will not be deluded.
She's not even a decent actress.  Her choking voice didn't at all sound like someone gripped by real emotion.

And then we apparently have Mr Abbott who, when asked about the most recent death of a soldier in the Middle East, is reported to have said "**** happens".
If he did say that (and it was reported on ABC Radio), then there is no hope for him.

What a miserable choice we are offered.


----------



## Sean K (8 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



Julia said:


> What a miserable choice we are offered.



Yep, thought the same thing today. The cupboard is bare. 

Too much money in the corporate field and more satisfaction working for the UN or Red Cross. We're left with the dregs. 

Limit corporate pay, increase politicians base salaries, take away their life time golden retirement parachutes, and stop the 'i' political trend!


----------



## trainspotter (8 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



kennas said:


> Those turned on crocodile tears might have earned her some short term support from Labour die hards clinging to hope but to me, James Cameron is lining her up to play a Dalek in Avatar 2.




I believe her role will be a Whinging Left Wing Ding Bat in his next feature.


----------



## trainspotter (8 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



IFocus said:


> Abbott to co-star as Davros




Nope ......... he is guest starring as "The Master"


----------



## Calliope (9 February 2011)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



Julia said:


> What utter bull****.  She has realised, belatedly, that she needs to do something to show she has some feeling.
> Left me completely cold and I hope the population will not be deluded.
> She's not even a decent actress.  Her choking voice didn't at all sound like someone gripped by real emotion.




*Fake  Fake   Fake. * Labor politicians only start blubbering when they feel sorry for themselves, not for others. Natural emotions do not figure in Labor's indoctrination manual. You would be more likely to see a Dalek cry than Gillard.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 February 2011)

*Re: trivia*

*Just a bit of trivia*, Philip K Dick the Sci fi writer wrote a story called The Simulacra in which the leader of a country is an android. Fiction can be entertaining at times.


----------



## sinner (1 April 2011)

*Gillard's Speech*

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/thestump/2011/04/01/gillard-we-are-a-party-of-ideas/

Has me spewing on my monitor. 

I tried to intersperse some commentary between these snippets, but I just kept spewing over and over again onto my computer, made it very difficult.



> I am absolutely clear what Labor stands for, what we aspire to achieve, what our culture is and our role as a party of government.






> Friends, if Australian politics has a grand old party, it is ours.
> 
> Before there was a Parliament of Australia our Party had known great victories and great defeats.
> 
> ...






> The historic mission of our political party is to ensure the fair distribution of opportunity. From the moment of our inception our mission has been to enable the son of the labourer, the daughter of the cleaner, to have access to same the opportunities in life as the son of the millionaire, the daughter of the lawyer.






> Labor culture values the strength that comes from working as a team






> The differences between Labor and the Greens take many forms but at the bottom of it are two vital ones.
> 
> The Greens wrongly reject the moral imperative to a strong economy.
> 
> ...






> To shape the future by pricing carbon, rolling out the NBN, and delivering a better health care system and to see our mission through in Afghanistan.
> 
> That is what I was elected for and that is what I will do.






> One single project – the $43 billion Gorgon gas project – is worth about the same as two years of output in agriculture.
> 
> Or to take a more domestic analogy, five years ago the money earned from exporting 10,000 tonnes of iron ore would buy about 280 dishwashers.
> 
> ...






> This budget will be about making the right decisions for the country; the right decisions for families and the right decisions for jobs.
> 
> I will never risk the economy and people’s jobs for the soft political option of putting off hard decisions to next time.




Comments appreciated, while I sit here hosing down my workstation.


----------



## sails (1 April 2011)

*Re: Gillards Speech*



sinner said:


> http://blogs.crikey.com.au/thestump/2011/04/01/gillard-we-are-a-party-of-ideas/
> 
> Has me spewing on my monitor.
> 
> ...





Maybe that's Ms Gillard's view of the world, but very far from reality, IMO.  

 I sometimes wonder if she has some sort of delusional mental health issues. With a couple of family members with mental health problems, there are some astounding similarities.


----------



## Logique (1 April 2011)

*Re: Gillards Speech*



sails said:


> ...I sometimes wonder if she has some sort of delusional mental health issues. With a couple of family members with mental health problems, there are some astounding similarities.



I hear you Sails. But she's fighting for her career, some leeway can be given. Minority government, an awful position for any PM to be in. 

If there is blame to be apportioned, it's to the caucus -what were they thinking. Blinded by ideology and genderism.

Lindsay Tanner read the tea leaves and bailed, one of the the government's best money men. He's looking like a genius now.


----------



## noco (1 April 2011)

*Re: Gillards Speech*

Is the 'HONEYMOON' over between she and the Greens or is it a 'put-up job? 

Is Gillard starting to realize how the Greens are pulling Labor down or is it a front to try to distant herself from the Green's radical policies? 

Either way I would say they are shooting each other in the left foot.

As Abbott says, "Labor is in Government, but the Greens hold the power".


----------



## Calliope (1 April 2011)

*Re: Gillards Speech*

It's just a lover's tiff. No marriage is perfect.  Bob Brown holds all the aces and he knows it. He is the dominant partner.



> Senator Brown yesterday said Ms Gillard's comments were an "unfortunate, unwarranted, gratuitous insult".
> 
> "I think, for some reason, the Prime Minister has turned her fire on the very people who have supported her in government," he said.
> 
> ...



http://www.couriermail.com.au/ipad/pm-feeling-green-about-bob/story-fn6ck45n-1226032162504


----------



## medicowallet (1 April 2011)

*Re: Gillards Speech*



noco said:


> Either way I would say they are shooting each other in the left foot.




Except Wayne Swann, he doesn't know which one is the left foot.


----------



## IFocus (1 April 2011)

*Re: Gillards Speech*

Thought it was a reasonable effort


----------



## noco (1 April 2011)

*Re: Gillards Speech*



medicowallet said:


> Except Wayne Swann, he doesn't know which one is the left foot.




I reckon the 'GOOSE' has two left feet.


----------



## noco (1 April 2011)

*Re: Gillards Speech*



IFocus said:


> Thought it was a reasonable effort




Yeah, a very good effort with her usual SPIN, RHETORIC AND NO SUBSTANCE.


----------



## Julia (1 April 2011)

*Re: Gillard's Speech*



Logique said:


> I hear you Sails. But she's fighting for her career, some leeway can be given. Minority government, an awful position for any PM to be in.
> 
> If there is blame to be apportioned, it's to the caucus -what were they thinking. Blinded by ideology and genderism.
> 
> Lindsay Tanner read the tea leaves and bailed, one of the the government's best money men. He's looking like a genius now.



Now doesn't Lindsay Tanner look good!   If they'd overcome their petty infighting and put Mr Tanner in as leader they'd not be suffering the ignominy they are at present.
He was capable, politically astute, and eminently reasonable, labels which cannot be applied to any of the present bunch on all sides of politics.

Mr Tanner was the only dissenter about the stupid stimulus payments, foreseeing that the ultimate result would be the Reserve having to raise rates further.
He was right, of course.





noco said:


> Is the 'HONEYMOON' over between she and the Greens or is it a 'put-up job?
> 
> Is Gillard starting to realize how the Greens are pulling Labor down or is it a front to try to distant herself from the Green's radical policies?
> 
> ...



I don't think it's a put up job, noco, though understand why you would suggest that.
I've been a bit surprised at how she put the boot into the Greens, given how much she needs them.  I suppose it demonstrates that their polling says she needs to not appear to be driven by the Greens' agenda.

What a nightmare her position is.  I almost feel a bit sorry for her.  (no, strike that!)

Bob Brown was prepared to glide over her previous dig at the Greens a couple of weeks ago, but it seems she has pushed him a bit far this time.
Should be quite fun to watch.

And Sinner, shame on you.  Where is all your patriotism, that innate quality which was supposed to be stirred beyond measure by your Leader's emotional utterings.


----------



## sails (1 April 2011)

*Re: Gillards Speech*



Calliope said:


> It's just a lover's tiff. No marriage is perfect.  Bob Brown holds all the aces and he knows it. He is the dominant partner.




They need each other - how sweet...

She loses government without him...

And he loses his short lived power base without her...

But it's not looking so romantic for the country to have a government which is  dancing to the tune of a minor party.


----------



## sails (1 April 2011)

*Re: Gillard's Speech*



Julia said:


> Now doesn't Lindsay Tanner look good!  ...




Maybe it's our turn to keep calling for Lindsay Tanner to return as labor leader in return for labor supporters continual calling for Turnbul to return...lol

I suspect that Tanner is much too sensible to be wanted as a labor PM.


----------



## medicowallet (2 April 2011)

*Re: Gillard's Speech*



sails said:


> Maybe it's our turn to keep calling for Lindsay Tanner to return as labor leader in return for labor supporters continual calling for Turnbul to return...lol
> 
> I suspect that Tanner is much too sensible to be wanted as a labor PM.




Nah, I want to call on Tanner to be leader of the Liberal party..


----------



## sails (2 April 2011)

*Re: Gillard's Speech*



medicowallet said:


> Nah, I want to call on Tanner to be leader of the Liberal party..




Sounds fair... Turnbull and Tanner could switch sides?  

I don't know a lot about Tanner, but he certainly appeared to stand out as being the better of the four eggs in the kitchen....


----------



## joea (2 April 2011)

*Re: Gillard's Speech*



sails said:


> Sounds fair... Turnbull and Tanner could switch sides?
> 
> I don't know a lot about Tanner, but he certainly appeared to stand out as being the better of the four eggs in the kitchen....




I do not know much about him, but would suggest he is a man of vision and integrity.
I base that on the fact that he saw right through Gillard and her tactics.

So it was see you later Juliar.

Cheers.


----------



## sinner (5 April 2011)

*Re: Gillard's Speech*



Julia said:


> And Sinner, shame on you.  Where is all your patriotism, that innate quality which was supposed to be stirred beyond measure by your Leader's emotional utterings.




She stirred it right out of my gut and onto the keyboard.


----------



## Purple XS2 (5 April 2011)

*Re: Gillard's Speech*



joea said:


> I do not know much about him (Lindsay Tanner), but would suggest he is a man of vision and integrity.
> I base that on the fact that he saw right through Gillard and her tactics.
> 
> So it was see you later Juliar.
> ...




If I can be forgiven for name-dropping from behind my internet anonymity: I knew Tanner from his student days, with the odd renewal of acquaintance since: he is in fact a very decent and intelligent chap. I never have caught up with any inside gossip on why he left parliament: what little I've heard is that he was simply exhausted (which is basically the same as the official line).

So I don't hold out any hopes of his return, which really is a pity, because the ALP cabinet is 30% poorer for his absence.

As for Prime Minister Gillard (with whom I am entirely unacquainted), there's been the rare glimmer of humanity and intelligence behind the veneer, but too little. She needs to sack every last one of her personal advisors, shoot the speechwriter (who the hell is that jerk?) dismiss the spivs from cabinet - hmm, as Rowan Williams would say "my god: there are a lot of you ..." and try being, dare I say, the real Julia ...


----------



## Happy (6 April 2011)

*Re: Gillard's Speech*

Fork tongue, back-stabber, and liar: are qualities too, unfortunately they do not enhance that person’s reputation,


----------



## joea (6 April 2011)

*Re: Gillard's Speech*



Purple XS2 said:


> If I can be forgiven for name-dropping from behind my internet anonymity: I knew Tanner from his student days, with the odd renewal of acquaintance since: he is in fact a very decent and intelligent chap. I never have caught up with any inside gossip on why he left parliament: what little I've heard is that he was simply exhausted (which is basically the same as the official line).
> 
> So I don't hold out any hopes of his return, which really is a pity, because the ALP cabinet is 30% poorer for his absence.
> 
> As for Prime Minister Gillard (with whom I am entirely unacquainted), there's been the rare glimmer of humanity and intelligence behind the veneer, but too little. She needs to sack every last one of her personal advisors, shoot the speechwriter (who the hell is that jerk?) dismiss the spivs from cabinet - hmm, as Rowan Williams would say "my god: there are a lot of you ..." and try being, dare I say, the real Julia ...




Following Q & A on Monday night, minutes from Caucus  reveal that Lindsay Tanner and Penny Wong argued against dropping the ETS plan. Swan and Gillard gave strong advice that the ETS plan should be abandoned.( to Rudd)

If I remember correctly when Juliar took over as PM, on the day of the vote, Lindsay Tanner resigned  for family or personal reasons within a few hours of the overthrow.
My suggestion is it he did not want to involved with these devious tactics displayed by Gillard and Swan.

Brown suggests that Gillard worded the majority of the speach.

We do not know the real Julia, and never will because her crediblity is "shot",
and she does not even understand what she stands for. 
Julia Gillard is a " CHAMELEON " of Australian politics.
Because she does have political ability, it will be interesting to watch the next two weeks of politics.

I will stanby my statement on this forum " she will implode".

Cheers


----------



## timkot (6 April 2011)

*Re: Gillard's Speech*

I voted liberal for the first time in my life with this government.  I tell you what sort of idiot  and ignoramus GILLARD is.  She is a founding member of Emily's list which is a group dedicated to the butchering of babies via abortion.  Now whist I am genrally against abortion I have no problems in accepting that abortion should be available in certain circumstances,  but how anyone n their right mind can think its their right to abort a baby up till  birth is an indication of the total lack of decency she possesses. 

When someone has that sort of thinking it tells you that she has lost her way.

I can tell you now that labour is no longer what it was and it is suffering for it and it will be many many years before they ever have a chance of regaining my vote as it will take many years for labour to revert back to the everyday person party that it once was.


----------



## joea (7 April 2011)

*Re: Gillard's Speech*



timkot said:


> I voted liberal for the first time in my life with this government.  I tell you what sort of idiot  and ignoramus GILLARD is.  She is a founding member of Emily's list which is a group dedicated to the butchering of babies via abortion.  Now whist I am genrally against abortion I have no problems in accepting that abortion should be available in certain circumstances,  but how anyone n their right mind can think its their right to abort a baby up till  birth is an indication of the total lack of decency she possesses.
> 
> When someone has that sort of thinking it tells you that she has lost her way.
> 
> I can tell you now that labour is no longer what it was and it is suffering for it and it will be many many years before they ever have a chance of regaining my vote as it will take many years for labour to revert back to the everyday person party that it once was.




Could not agree more.

I think Julia Gillards Labor Party is heading for a bigger "MELTDOWN" than what's happening in Japan.

At least we have plenty of cooling water at the moment.

Cheers


----------



## Logique (7 April 2011)

*Re: Gillard's Speech*

Hyperbowl? Please explain? Negosiate. Taliband. 

There's a new language paradigm at work here.


----------



## noco (25 April 2011)

Whilst I agree that it is tradition for an Australian Prime Minister to attend a Royal Wedding, one could not be forgiven in declaring our current Prime Minister a hypocrite in the first degree for the following reasons:-

a) She is a self confessed athiest who will be attending a church royal wedding.

b) She does not believe in marriage.

c) She does not believe in the monarchy as head of Australia.

d) She is a devout Republican.  

If she had any principles at all, I believe she should have sent a replacement to attend this all important occassion. The Govenor General or even the Foreign Minister would have been better suited.


----------



## Mr Z (25 April 2011)

Yeah... but it is a FREE lunch!


----------



## Mr Z (25 April 2011)

Ms Gillard and the patch work goobermint are certainly not inspiring the confidence of foreign capital, that much is certain!


----------



## Calliope (25 April 2011)

She certainly inspired *Interest* from the North Korean guards. They were fascinated by her long nose and red hair.


----------



## warrenatk (27 April 2011)

Should really be, Does her dress sense inspire any confidence, guess its not as rudd's wife.


----------



## noco (14 May 2011)

One just cannot believe Julia Gillard, and for that matter Swan, has the gall to continue in office after a poll showing only 28% of voters consder the Governments budget is good in the National interest.

The waste and the blowout cost on every project undertaken by the Labor Government does not inspire the majority of voters in this country and Tony Abbott is right in demanding a fresh election. Gillard and Swan should seek a mandate for their crazy carbon dioxide tax at the next election before it is implimented on a Gillard lie.



http://www.skynews.com.au/politics/article.aspx?id=612694&vId=


----------



## drsmith (14 May 2011)

Some interesting budget stats.

http://www.budget.gov.au/2011-12/content/overview/html/overview_48.htm

Projected surpluses for 2012/13, 2013/14 and 2014-15 are all wafer thin.

http://www.budget.gov.au/2011-12/content/overview/html/overview_43.htm

The tax cuts in the three prior budgets were all Coalition, literally.


----------



## IFocus (15 May 2011)

drsmith said:


> Some interesting budget stats.
> 
> http://www.budget.gov.au/2011-12/content/overview/html/overview_48.htm
> 
> ...




Abbott attacks the budget "cuts" which are not cuts but deferrals (Abbottliar) then calls for tougher measures..............and he will let the budget go though?


----------



## drsmith (15 May 2011)

IF,

I hope you enjoyed those Coalition income tax cuts, because under Labor you won't get any at least before 2015/16, even with China booming.


----------



## moXJO (15 May 2011)

Calliope said:


> She certainly inspired *Interest* from the North Korean guards. They were fascinated by her long nose and red hair.




They had only heard rumours of the fabled Aussie Bogan


----------



## IFocus (15 May 2011)

drsmith said:


> IF,
> 
> I hope you enjoyed those Coalition income tax cuts, because under Labor you won't get any at least before 2015/16, even with China booming.




The last tax cuts were......well stupid.


----------



## sptrawler (15 May 2011)

Have to agree with you Ifocus, seems stupid for the labor government to give tax cuts when running a deficit. Then scream poverty and tough budgets when the economy is supposedly booming.
Thats what is so disappointing after having years of a government that runs a tight ship and reduces taxes as surpluses kick in. Now we have a government that wastes ridiculous amounts of money and don't have any fiscal nous to turn it around.


----------



## tothemax6 (15 May 2011)

sptrawler said:


> Have to agree with you Ifocus, seems stupid for the labor government to give tax cuts when running a deficit. Then scream poverty and tough budgets when the economy is supposedly booming.
> Thats what is so disappointing after having years of a government that runs a tight ship and reduces taxes as surpluses kick in. Now we have a government that wastes ridiculous amounts of money and don't have any fiscal nous to turn it around.



Aye, this is the 'change' people wanted when they voted out Howard. Pretty much every awefull thing that I assumed the new labor mob would do - they have actually done.
Sure, Australia can vote in a good government again. The government could have the best economic policies and most capable management of the country.
And next election they will be voted out. It will be 'time for a change'. And the labor government will wreck things beautifully again.
And the cycle will repeat.

The world is a piece of ----


----------



## drsmith (15 May 2011)

IFocus said:


> The last tax cuts were.......



Which party did I hear saying..........



IFocus said:


> well stupid.



me too ?


----------



## sptrawler (15 May 2011)

drsmith said:


> Which party did I hear saying..........
> 
> 
> me too ?




I thought so dr smith, touche, IFocus

It's not often you get a leg up from IFocus (obviously you weren't focusing) LOL


----------



## drsmith (15 May 2011)

OK. 

I'll explain it in a little more detail.

The tax cuts during the 3 budgets of the Rudd government originated from Peter Costello as part of the 2007 election campaign. Labor adopted them as part of their "me too" campaign strategy to get elected in 2007.

If those tax cuts were stupid as Coalition policy, they were equally stupid as Labor policy.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (15 May 2011)

Gillard is a bit like Billy McMahon.

A joke.

And she has her Sonia, First Bloke.

gg


----------



## sptrawler (15 May 2011)

drsmith said:


> OK.
> 
> I'll explain it in a little more detail.
> 
> ...




I was following the same line of thought drsmith, I just thought IFocus had dropped the ball. LOL


----------



## sptrawler (15 May 2011)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Gillard is a bit like Billy McMahon.
> 
> A joke.
> 
> ...




Jeez GG they both lack the legs.


----------



## noco (16 May 2011)

After today's news poll, Gillard does not seem to be inspiring too many voters. Abbott almost level and gaining ground week by week.


----------



## noco (16 May 2011)

Both Michael Costa and Peter Costello maintain Gillard is politically dead. My prediction is she won't be spending Xmas 2011 in the Lodge. 


http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...dget-thumbs-down/story-e6freooo-1226056451806


----------



## IFocus (16 May 2011)

drsmith said:


> OK.
> 
> I'll explain it in a little more detail.
> 
> ...




Yes agree that's what I said or at least meant wasn't trying to be partisan about the issue.

Howard / Costello's ridiculous middle class welfare give always will be a major if not the major barrier to any further possible tax cuts. You cannot have both IMHO

Look at the liars going on now from a minor adjustment not just from Abbottliar but backed right across the media.


----------



## drsmith (16 May 2011)

IFocus said:


> Yes agree that's what I said or at least meant wasn't trying to be partisan about the issue.



You not being partisan ?

It's too early in the day to be on the turps.



IFocus said:


> Howard / Costello's ridiculous middle class welfare give always will be a major if not the major barrier to any further possible tax cuts. You cannot have both IMHO



Tax cuts which Labor endorsed to get into power. Add grossly wasteful and mismanaged spending programs and that maks tax cuts (or reform) even harder.



IFocus said:


> Look at the liars going on now from a minor adjustment not just from Abbottliar but backed right across the media.



The media smell the death of the Gillard government.


----------



## dutchie (16 May 2011)

noco said:


> Both Michael Costa and Peter Costello maintain Gillard is politically dead. My prediction is she won't be spending Xmas 2011 in the Lodge.
> 
> 
> http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...dget-thumbs-down/story-e6freooo-1226056451806




If she was smart she would marry Tim soon so that we can pay for the wedding reception!


----------



## IFocus (16 May 2011)

drsmith said:


> Tax cuts which Labor endorsed to get into power. Add grossly wasteful and mismanaged spending programs and that maks tax cuts (or reform) even harder.




DR you know as well as me that deficits come and go but its the structural issues within the federal budget that is the killer.

i.e. Howards middle class welfare


----------



## trainspotter (16 May 2011)

RON BOSWELL (in Parliament): In my 71 years Labor has only ever delivered six budget surpluses, an average of one every 12 years. 

PENNY WONG (in Parliament): I acknowledge your longevity in this place.

(Excerpt from press conference):

REPORTER: I was just wondering if perhaps you were able to tell us the last time Labor delivered a surplus?

JULIA GILLARD: Yes I can, it's 1989-90.

22 years ago Labor delivered a surplus???


----------



## drsmith (16 May 2011)

IFocus said:


> DR you know as well as me that deficits come and go but its the structural issues within the federal budget that is the killer.



What are Labor's grossly wasteful and mismanaged spending programs doing for underlying structural issues within the federal budget ?


----------



## sptrawler (20 May 2011)

*Gillard abandons mining towns*

During the last election Julia was telling everyone how disgraceful fly in fly out was and how it was breaking down Australian family structures.
Also how much pollution is created with the planes ferrying people in and out constantly.
How long will it be before a major incident happens.
Obviously the rhetoric was to get the fly in fly outs to vote for them also the voters in disadvantaged remote areas thinking that Julia was going to improve their situation.
Don't forget these remote country towns that now have more people living in, fly in fly out accomodation than permanent housing. 
The local councils are going broke because they don't get rates to reflect the population therefore the towns infrastructure falls into disrepair.
No the election is over, lets move on, its only some poxy town in W.A or Queensland anyway, why worry?
New conversation probably goes like this. 
How is the mining tax going Wayne, I had a great idea last night when Tim and I were out for dinner and all we need is more money. Tourism Australia can run tours through the mining ghost towns, for the Chinese that own them.

Why can't we go back to the previous norm of if there is a town near the resource the company must use it. 
The companies say "we can't get workers to move there". So the government says o.k use fly in fly out.
Then the government say they are going to get tough on the unemployed who won't move to where the work is.
JEEZ Someone is talking crap somewhere.


----------



## sptrawler (20 May 2011)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*

Actually I would like to find out if there is any plans to roll out N.B.N fibre to these towns in outback W.A and Queensland. I wouldn't be suprised if they are the ones to be covered by the satellites. 
Meanwhile the state governments and locals have to pay through the nose to support local infrastructure for the mining companies. 
While the federal government tax the company and spend the money anywhere but the local areas.
The only people that the government are sending to live in mining towns are illegal asylum seekers. They don't even tell the W.A goverment where or when they are putting them. But the state government and locals have to pay for them.


----------



## Smurf1976 (20 May 2011)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*

It's not just the mining towns themselves. There's recently been a serious suggestion that we do the exact opposite in Tasmania. That is, live in one state (Tas) but work in another (specifically SA). 

I can see it now. Drive from Burnie (an industrial town that no longer has any industry thanks to the Greens and federal Labor) to Launceston. Fly to Melbourne. Change planes and fly to Adelaide. Then get to the job site (which just happens to be nowhere near Adelaide therefore another flight or a car / bus ride). Revese to go home.

I know of one person who does it. Lives in Hobart, works at a mine in SA. Apparently they make a fortune doing it such that the cost of flights isn't an issue.

Whatever happened to the idea that there could be jobs near where people live and vice versa? You know, you work in a mine so live in a nearby town. And you don't turn an entire state into an economic wasteland then suggest people fly interstate for work.

We constantly hear complaints about the environmental effects of commuting 10, 20 or 50 km from the suburbs of a city each day. Commuting 1000+ km adds an entirely new dimension to it and it's the height of madness when you really think about it.


----------



## todster (20 May 2011)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*



sptrawler said:


> During the last election Julia was telling everyone how disgraceful fly in fly out was and how it was breaking down Australian family structures.
> Also how much pollution is created with the planes ferrying people in and out constantly.
> How long will it be before a major incident happens.
> Obviously the rhetoric was to get the fly in fly outs to vote for them also the voters in disadvantaged remote areas thinking that Julia was going to improve their situation.
> ...




BHP Ravensthorpe great example


----------



## sptrawler (20 May 2011)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*

Actualy todster, Ravensthorpe is re opening and Galaxy lithium is starting up.
But getting back to the original theme if B.H.P had supplied the housing at Ravensthorpe and Hopetoun there wouldn't have been a problem for the workers. Also there would be some infrastructure that they supplied rather than the taxpayer.
If B.H.P had to upgrade Ravensthorpe and Hopetouns sewage, electricity and supply housing they may have costed the mine on a more sustainable model. 
Rather than saying it's a capital outlay of x for the mine and concentrate plant and if we can write off the cost who gives a rats


----------



## todster (21 May 2011)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*



sptrawler said:


> Actualy todster, Ravensthorpe is re opening and Galaxy lithium is starting up.
> But getting back to the original theme if B.H.P had supplied the housing at Ravensthorpe and Hopetoun there wouldn't have been a problem for the workers. Also there would be some infrastructure that they supplied rather than the taxpayer.
> If B.H.P had to upgrade Ravensthorpe and Hopetouns sewage, electricity and supply housing they may have costed the mine on a more sustainable model.
> Rather than saying it's a capital outlay of x for the mine and concentrate plant and if we can write off the cost who gives a rats




Can't actually think of any mining town i have worked in the last 20years that i would want to live in.
Quite happy FIFO thanks.
This being a stockforum one would imagine shareholders chasing a better profit rather than building towns aswell as mines


----------



## medicowallet (21 May 2011)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*



todster said:


> Can't actually think of any mining town i have worked in the last 20years that i would want to live in.
> Quite happy FIFO thanks.
> This being a stockforum one would imagine shareholders chasing a better profit rather than building towns aswell as mines




I have some friends who own "hotels" in mining towns.

Charge $120 per night for a room with basic facilities and have all rooms booked all the time (one of the hotels has 50 rooms)

Sounds to me like the mining companies have not done their sums, and should build portable townships, instead of paying millions per year for overpriced "hotels"'

I'm sure that the taxpayer would benefit from this.


----------



## sails (21 May 2011)

Looks like Gillard is losing the confidence of Queenslanders.  Not sure that Rudd being so popular is because he is actually wanted back as leader, but given the dismal (imo) choice between Rudd, Gillard and Swan, I think it may mean Rudd is disliked the least of the three.  Interesting that even labor supporters put him well above Gillard.

And perhaps the "uncommitted"  should read "none of the above"...








The picture above is taken from this article from the Courier Mail:
Galaxy poll shows Queenslanders prefer Kevin Rudd as ALP leader and Julia Gillard's support sinking


----------



## todster (21 May 2011)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*



medicowallet said:


> I have some friends who own "hotels" in mining towns.
> 
> Charge $120 per night for a room with basic facilities and have all rooms booked all the time (one of the hotels has 50 rooms)
> 
> ...




I did a 2 week job in Port Hedland a while back and they had to fly me back to Perth for one night as they had no room for me,flew back the next morning.
$120 a night in the Pilbara be lucky to get a caravan
Who wants to live 7-8 months a year in  40 degree + temperature,QLD might be different but WA most mines are miles from anywhere.
Most young guys with families are taking the cheap rent getting ahead and talking moving on.
Not long ago the iron ore spot price was $165/T putting it on the ship for $15 not hard to figure.


----------



## sptrawler (21 May 2011)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*



todster said:


> I did a 2 week job in Port Hedland a while back and they had to fly me back to Perth for one night as they had no room for me,flew back the next morning.
> $120 a night in the Pilbara be lucky to get a caravan
> Who wants to live 7-8 months a year in  40 degree + temperature,QLD might be different but WA most mines are miles from anywhere.
> Most young guys with families are taking the cheap rent getting ahead and talking moving on.
> Not long ago the iron ore spot price was $165/T putting it on the ship for $15 not hard to figure.



 What I am getting at todster is they say there will be 50,000 people working in the Pilbara within 20 years. That is a lot of planes and polution, if the mines want the workers they should be supplying housing and infrastucture to develop the area. It is much healtheir for people to work reasonable hours and come home to a family every day.


----------



## Julia (21 May 2011)

Thanks, Sails.  Interesting result.  I don't quite get why support for Mr Rudd is so high in Qld.  I detest Gillard, Swan and Rudd, but probably Rudd most of all.

Results like this must be making the Party machine regret their ousting of Mr Rudd.


----------



## todster (21 May 2011)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*



sptrawler said:


> What I am getting at todster is they say there will be 50,000 people working in the Pilbara within 20 years. That is a lot of planes and polution, if the mines want the workers they should be supplying housing and infrastucture to develop the area. It is much healtheir for people to work reasonable hours and come home to a family every day.




Fair enough mate but would think it more of a state job but being a Barnett Lover like yourself wont fit your agenda so blame the feds.


----------



## noco (21 May 2011)

Julia said:


> Thanks, Sails.  Interesting result.  I don't quite get why support for Mr Rudd is so high in Qld.  I detest Gillard, Swan and Rudd, but probably Rudd most of all.
> 
> Results like this must be making the Party machine regret their ousting of Mr Rudd.




Julia, the reason Rudd looks so popular is the way the question was asked at the poll. 

Pollsters were given three choices and whether you are Labor, Green or Liberal, Rudd was the lesser of three evils, hence the apperance of his popularity.

What I can't understand is why Labor has lowered itself into this postion.

Are they deliberatly trying to send us down the 'GURGLER' in order to nationionlise our mines, our banks and industry. Now that is what I call COMMUNISM. After all Gillard WAS  origionally a member of the Fabian Society.




http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...ail/comments/gillard_as_popular_as_nsw_labor/


----------



## Smurf1976 (21 May 2011)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*



medicowallet said:


> Sounds to me like the mining companies have not done their sums, and should build portable townships, instead of paying millions per year for overpriced "hotels"



That's much like what used to happen with hydro power construction sites. Build a town, build the scheme, then relocate the town to the next project. The later ones used moveable buildings but the earlier towns were effectively permanent with "normal" houses some of which remain in place today (though quite a few were sold to private owners who cut them in half and relocated them).

It sort-of worked, but as early as the 1960's there was serious consideration to a bus in, bus out model with the new "town" being simply an addition to an established town or city remote from the work site. 

Having an entire town where literally everyone works for the same employer, and where the vast majority of workers are male, has its problems. Apart from the more obvious ones, there's the reality that the employer ends up being literally everything from landlord to policeman (given that such towns tend not to have an actual police officer) to running grocery stores and so on. You work for the company, and they end up deciding just about everything - even down to what you'll have for lunch today.

In 1950 people were happy to be safe (from war) and were willing to put up with just about any living conditions. But in 2011 most people want to live in a city or at least a large town with the concept of "single mens quarters" being very much a relic from the past. Unless you literally do join the defence forces, most people don't expect to live like that these days - hence FIFO.


----------



## Smurf1976 (21 May 2011)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*



medicowallet said:


> Sounds to me like the mining companies have not done their sums, and should build portable townships, instead of paying millions per year for overpriced "hotels"



That's much like what used to happen with hydro power construction sites. Build a town, build the scheme, then relocate the town to the next project.

It sort-of worked, but having an entire town where literally everyone works for the same employer, and where the vast majority of workers are male, has its problems. Apart from the more obvious ones, there's the reality that the employer ends up being literally everything from landlord to policeman (given that such towns tend not to have an actual police officer) to running grocery stores and so on. You work for the company, and they end up deciding just about everything - even down to what you'll have for lunch today.

In 1950 people were happy to be safe (from war) and were willing to put up with just about any living conditions. But in 2011 most people want to live in a city or at least a large town with the concept of "single mens quarters" being very much a relic from the past. Unless you literally do join the defence forces, most people don't expect to live like that these days - hence FIFO.


----------



## prawn_86 (21 May 2011)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*

Smurf makes a good point (as usual).

If the governemnt, state or federal, was to create (or enlarge) towns near mining areas, who would want to live there? Pretty much onyl the people working there, plus a small minority looking to profit. Meaning the population would be mostly single males working for the mines, without much to entice anyone else out there. Why would anyone not in the mines want to live out there? Certainly not for the location, and if they start their own business there are the normal risks associated with that.

Towns need to reach a critical mass, or have a relatively diverse main category of employemnt (such as agriculture) in order to thrive imo.


----------



## Intrinsic Value (21 May 2011)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*



todster said:


> I did a 2 week job in Port Hedland a while back and they had to fly me back to Perth for one night as they had no room for me,flew back the next morning.
> $120 a night in the Pilbara be lucky to get a caravan
> Who wants to live 7-8 months a year in  40 degree + temperature,QLD might be different but WA most mines are miles from anywhere.
> Most young guys with families are taking the cheap rent getting ahead and talking moving on.
> Not long ago the iron ore spot price was $165/T putting it on the ship for $15 not hard to figure.





Have to agree here. FIFO is the only way to keep your sanity as there is nothing in these remote WA locations.

I have had the pleasure of going to such places as Leinster, Mount Keith, Port Hedland, Tom Price, Karrath plus a host of others. 
Fortunately I usually only have to stay a week or less but it is still too long believe me.

Saudi Arabia where I worked for a long time was more fun than working in remote WA locations.


----------



## DB008 (21 May 2011)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*

l've done my fair share of FIFO in WA and l tell ya what, I don't know how people move out (from a normal town) to some of those townships, you'd have be MAD! Seriously, l don't know how people live in such isolation. Crazy. FIFO from a capital city is the only way.


----------



## todster (21 May 2011)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*



DB008 said:


> l've done my fair share of FIFO in WA and l tell ya what, I don't know how people move out (from a normal town) to some of those townships, you'd have be MAD! Seriously, l don't know how people live in such isolation. Crazy. FIFO from a capital city is the only way.




Yep get on a 9&5 or 8&6 roster get the $$$$ and the time off.


----------



## Julia (21 May 2011)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*



Intrinsic Value said:


> Saudi Arabia where I worked for a long time was more fun than working in remote WA locations.



Interesting comment, IV.  Can you tell us a bit more about working in Saudi Arabia?
How was it 'more fun'.  Were you unaffected by the religious mores of the country?


----------



## Julia (21 May 2011)

noco said:


> Julia, the reason Rudd looks so popular is the way the question was asked at the poll.
> 
> Pollsters were given three choices and whether you are Labor, Green or Liberal, Rudd was the lesser of three evils, hence the apperance of his popularity.



Well, yes, of course I know that, noco.  I'm simply expressing my surprise that Mr Rudd was the most popular of the three.  
Perhaps it's still some sort of sympathy thing.


----------



## noco (21 May 2011)

Julia said:


> Well, yes, of course I know that, noco.  I'm simply expressing my surprise that Mr Rudd was the most popular of the three.
> Perhaps it's still some sort of sympathy thing.




I guess it's like asking someone, would prefer measles. mumps or whooping cough. 

None really seems appealing.


----------



## noco (22 May 2011)

Good to see Quenslanders know a DUD when they see one.

A pity the rest of Australia can't think like a Queenslander.

Quensland is the smart state!


http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...-over-carbon-tax/story-e6freoof-1226060290154


----------



## wayneL (22 May 2011)

noco said:


> Quensland is the smart state!




::


----------



## Logique (22 May 2011)

noco said:


> ..Quensland is the smart state!..http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...-over-carbon-tax/story-e6freoof-1226060290154



Yes it is. Blasted Cane Toads. Although expecting to cop the usual State of Origin shellacking on Wed night, we Cockroaches will give a good account of ourselves, if only to silence (albeit temporarily) the front bar of the Ross Island Hotel.


----------



## noco (22 May 2011)

Logique said:


> Yes it is. Blasted Cane Toads. Although expecting to cop the usual State of Origin shellacking on Wed night, we Cockroaches will give a good account of ourselves, if only to silence (albeit temporarily) the front bar of the Ross Island Hotel.




Off the beaten track a bit, but the Blues might just have chance this year.


----------



## IFocus (22 May 2011)

How long was Joh Bjelke-Petersen QLD premier ?


----------



## Julia (22 May 2011)

IFocus said:


> How long was Joh Bjelke-Petersen QLD premier ?



From 1968 to 1987.
I'm reading a book about that time (it's a novel but factually based) "Last Drinks" by Andrew McGahan.  Quite an insight and revelation to me as I wasn't living in Australia at that time.  Unbelievable level of corruption.


----------



## sptrawler (22 May 2011)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*



todster said:


> Fair enough mate but would think it more of a state job but being a Barnett Lover like yourself wont fit your agenda so blame the feds.




Well todster I'm no brain surgeon, however I do remember when in my early 20,s working as a shift sparky on the Kwinana strip. We use to say, this is crazy only refining to pig iron, alumina and nickel sulphate, why can't the bosses see they should be value adding.
Well 30 years on we are still doing the same thing, digging holes shipping the base resource overseas and going nowhere.
We need to think about what happens when the pitt is empty. We still have to eat and we still need water.
Maybe it is time to think about using the north of the country as a food bowl and invest some of the mining money into developing it. It seems as though overseas countries have worked it out and are buying our agricultural land at an unbelievable rate.
It's called thinking about tomorrow, rather than your next meal or ss commodore.


----------



## Caveman (23 May 2011)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*

I was talking to a painter the other week on a site.And he said his nephew went up to Port hedland or Karatha or something as soon as he finnished his apprentiship.
He has been there for a few years now,had a fly in fly out job but got the company to credit his airline ticket and he stayed up there,just put the money on his mortgage.
Madness if you ask me but some people like this sort of thing.


----------



## sptrawler (23 May 2011)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*

It's O.K everyone wanting to live in the cities, and I do, but when the resources end. The cities will become slums when there is no money to support them, we need to diversify while we have the opportunity.
Food is the logical product to develop as we need more as populations increase. Also the north is very rich soil just requires consistant water it will grow anything. 
The Americans and Israelies had an experimental farm project going at Camballin 40years ago. The problem they had was the Fitroy used to take it out every couple of years. But they still perservered as they knew the potential was there.


----------



## breaker (23 May 2011)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*

when Rio came to central highland in Joh,s day the mine built sports grounds ,pool ,sale yards ,dam ,housing ect
Now new mines fly in fly out road s are a disgrace and dont buy anything localy


----------



## sptrawler (23 May 2011)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*



breaker said:


> when Rio came to central highland in Joh,s day the mine built sports grounds ,pool ,sale yards ,dam ,housing ect
> Now new mines fly in fly out road s are a disgrace and dont buy anything localy




Don't worry breaker, you won't need to use the road when you get your high speed broadband.lol
But as you were saying, nothing gets pumped into the local towns, except illegal refugees. We may as well give them the towns obviously australians and the government don't want them.


----------



## sails (24 May 2011)

Spending is no object to the Gillard for the things she wants. She has employed a specialist adviser for her partner and it appears that no other PM spouse has ever needed such an adviser:

Julia Gillard pays for partner Tim Mathieson's adviser


----------



## noco (24 May 2011)

Gillard now has a direct line to Barry O'Farrell (NSW) on infrastructure.

Poor old Albo (Albanese) must have his nose pushed out with the PM by-passing him.


----------



## noco (29 May 2011)

How can one have confidence in this ignoramus of a Prime Minister of ours. What else is she hiding from the Australian voters? She should come clean. 

So much for her care about "WORKING FAMILIES AND PENSIONERS".


http://www.news.com.au/money/money-...cret-tax-plan/comments-e6frfmd9-1226064873533


----------



## Gringotts Bank (29 May 2011)

Does she inspire confidence?  No.  Rudd was even worse.  Remember up in the Queensland floods?  He was helping people move stuff out of their flooding houses.  That's right, instead of being a leader, he was more concerned with trying to look like a "good Aussie knock around bloke", wasting time on tasks that would be far better left to others.

Obama is _even worse again!_  When he went to Ireland, for example, he was too busy cracking jokes and trying to have everyone think he's cool, like some angst-ridden teenager.  When will he grow up into an adult?  Confidence is not created by speaking confident-sounding words and smirking at the camera.  It is created (or destroyed) by *who you are*.  And when he behaves like a teenager, he's making everyone very nervous.  What's the result?  We're seeing it now.  

Then you have Jintao, probably one of the most corrupt, despotic, cruel bast.ards in the "wannabe wetern" world. 

Most leaders have no clue about leadership.  Most of them speak confidence while quaking in their boots, hoping desperately that no one is noticing how desperate to hang onto control.  ****, where the hell are the real leaders??????


----------



## joea (29 May 2011)

Gringotts Bank said:


> Does she inspire confidence?  No.  Rudd was even worse.  Remember up in the Queensland floods?  He was helping people move stuff out of their flooding houses.  That's right, instead of being a leader, he was more concerned with trying to look like a "good Aussie knock around bloke", wasting time on tasks that would be far better left to others.
> 
> Obama is _even worse again!_  When he went to Ireland, for example, he was too busy cracking jokes and trying to have everyone think he's cool, like some angst-ridden teenager.  When will he grow up into an adult?  Confidence is not created by speaking confident-sounding words and smirking at the camera.  It is created (or destroyed) by *who you are*.  And when he behaves like a teenager, he's making everyone very nervous.  What's the result?  We're seeing it now.
> 
> ...




On last question!

Coaching the Dragons and Qld State of Origin side.

Cheers


----------



## Gringotts Bank (29 May 2011)

Well I don't follow league, but thanks, I'll look him up!


----------



## Julia (29 May 2011)

Gringotts Bank said:


> Does she inspire confidence?  No.  Rudd was even worse.  Remember up in the Queensland floods?  He was helping people move stuff out of their flooding houses.  That's right, instead of being a leader, he was more concerned with trying to look like a "good Aussie knock around bloke", wasting time on tasks that would be far better left to others.



Yes, that vision of Mr Rudd bravely wading through the flood waters with a suitcase on his head, camera crews at the ready, will live forever in my mind as amongst the most nauseating stunts ever.



> Most leaders have no clue about leadership.  Most of them speak confidence while quaking in their boots, hoping desperately that no one is noticing how desperate to hang onto control.  ****, where the hell are the real leaders??????



 Agree.  I'd be happy to see either Paul Keating or John Howard back in charge.
At least it was clear who they were.


----------



## IFocus (30 May 2011)

We need to have faith in the government's sums 

From Graham Bradley  president of the Business Council of Australia.



> THE recent federal budget should be applauded on two counts: for its first steps towards spending restraint and for its investment in productive capacity, especially skills development, which will help us take full benefit from our lucky position as a major supplier to developing Asia.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...governments-sums/story-fn59niix-1226065153933


----------



## sails (30 May 2011)

IFocus said:


> We need to have faith in the government's sums
> 
> From Graham Bradley  president of the Business Council of Australia...





Graham Bradley is entitled to his own opinions.  Many Aussies wouldn't agree with him.  This government has told more lies than I can ever remember from either side of politics.  Nothing can be trusted, imo.


----------



## trainspotter (30 May 2011)

"DO I have to put up with this?" he squealed like the pig that got it's snout caught in the trough.


----------



## sptrawler (30 May 2011)

IFocus said:


> We need to have faith in the government's sums
> 
> From Graham Bradley  president of the Business Council of Australia.
> 
> ...




Thats a terrific Quote when the outgoing CEO of Woodside says Ferguson has a clue. But inferes Swan is an idiot, not that we needed any convincing, he is the best ventriloquist dummy I have ever seen.
He is an absolute f     . No how does the saying go, if you can't say something good don't say anything. OK OK OK.


----------



## bellenuit (1 June 2011)

Just listened to SBS world news and Gillard was speaking about the Taliban in relation to the death of the Aussie soldier. She said: "The Taliban*D* are very canny....."

Don't you think after all this time one of her minders would tell her that their name doesn't have a D at the end. She has been adding the D now for months.


----------



## Logique (2 June 2011)

Does Gillard inspire confidence?  Clearly not in these two Labor MPs.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...launch-an-attack/story-e6freuzr-1226067528488
*Julia Gillard's own MPs launch an attack on her ability to be Prime Minister*
(Simon Benson from: The Daily Telegraph June 02, 2011)
"Two senior Labor MPs have unloaded on Julia Gillard, openly admitting to Coalition MPs at a function that she did "not have what it takes to be Prime Minister". 
The alleged conversation, which shocked several Liberal frontbenchers, took place on Tuesday night at a party in the office of the Deputy Speaker Peter Slipper.
The MPs were angry at the PM for not showing enough support for the Labor Speaker Harry Jenkins, who was almost forced to resign when Labor lost a vote in parliament to uphold the Speaker's ruling..."

But never fear. It won't receive the same media prominence as 'Malcolm-gate'. Probably won't even rate a mention on 7:30 Report or Lateline.


----------



## noco (2 June 2011)

Logique said:


> Does Gillard inspire confidence?  Clearly not in these two Labor MPs.
> 
> http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...launch-an-attack/story-e6freuzr-1226067528488
> *Julia Gillard's own MPs launch an attack on her ability to be Prime Minister*
> ...




Logique, you beat me to the punch,for I was about to connect to the same link.

Yes you are so right, it will barely receive the attention from the media.

I think we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg within the Labor Party's internal problems.

It will interesting hear what I-Focus has to say on LABOR'S INTERNAL PROBLEMS whiich are certainly more imploding than what we have recently seen on the Liberal side of politics.

It is now very obvious, Gillard's authority is waning fast. Just a matter of time before she has to go.


----------



## moXJO (2 June 2011)

Was the source the libs though?
Normally the rest of the media jump all over stuff like this, and the tele is the only one with it running.


----------



## Julia (2 June 2011)

noco said:


> It is now very obvious, Gillard's authority is waning fast. Just a matter of time before she has to go.



 They can't dump her, can they?   It will make them look totally ridiculous.  The rhetoric from the Coalition if they tossed her out would be intolerable to the government.

And who would you suggest would take her place?

Sadly, I think she - and the government - are there up until the next election, two years away, because they certainly won't accede to any calls for an early election and the Independents have too much at stake personally to desert Labor, however disturbed they may be at the confusion that is the government.


----------



## noco (2 June 2011)

moXJO said:


> Was the source the libs though?
> Normally the rest of the media jump all over stuff like this, and the tele is the only one with it running.




You would expect the Labor MPS to come forth?

They would not have the balls to speak out in public for fear of being ostracised by the Labor Party hench men. They are like puppets. They must toe the line or get kicked out on their ears.


----------



## moXJO (2 June 2011)

noco said:


> You would expect the Labor MPS to come forth?
> 
> They would not have the balls to speak out in public for fear of being ostracised by the Labor Party hench men. They are like puppets. They must toe the line or get kicked out on their ears.




No just waiting on confirmation from the other rags
I know local unions in my area are p*ssed at labor and Gillard and there is a lot of heated discussion going on. I have not talked to one person locally that supports labor. Even the owner of the service station down the road blasted me with how much he hated Gillard.
Personally I hope it is the beginning of the end but don't want to get my hopes up.


----------



## Logique (2 June 2011)

If the ALP's % approval rating hits the 20's, the backbenchers will get very nervous, especially if that % goes across to the Coalition. The backbenchers are the ones out there hearing what Joe and Jill Public are saying. 

Another two years of this, and with the Greens calling the shots in the Senate? I now have real doubts that this will last the full journey. It will come from within.


----------



## trainspotter (2 June 2011)

I can see the papers screaming this headline now


----------



## noco (2 June 2011)

moXJO said:


> No just waiting on confirmation from the other rags
> I know local unions in my area are p*ssed at labor and Gillard and there is a lot of heated discussion going on. I have not talked to one person locally that supports labor. Even the owner of the service station down the road blasted me with how much he hated Gillard.
> Personally I hope it is the beginning of the end but don't want to get my hopes up.




Does anyone believe in miracles? Because that is what we need to happen.

An Indy defection maybe!!

A by-election created by a resignation or death.

Yes, miracles do happen.


----------



## noco (2 June 2011)

Julia said:


> They can't dump her, can they?   It will make them look totally ridiculous.  The rhetoric from the Coalition if they tossed her out would be intolerable to the government.
> 
> And who would you suggest would take her place?
> 
> Sadly, I think she - and the government - are there up until the next election, two years away, because they certainly won't accede to any calls for an early election and the Independents have too much at stake personally to desert Labor, however disturbed they may be at the confusion that is the government.




Gawd they are getting really desperate. Gillard just bought Hawkie in to back her up on TV tonight.. Remember Hawkie. No child will live in poverty by 1990.


----------



## sails (2 June 2011)

bellenuit said:


> Just listened to SBS world news and Gillard was speaking about the Taliban in relation to the death of the Aussie soldier. She said: "The Taliban*D* are very canny....."
> 
> Don't you think after all this time one of her minders would tell her that their name doesn't have a D at the end. She has been adding the D now for months.




Maybe it's part of her "brand" to add the "d" like her dyed red hair (apparently in Lindsay Tanner's book) - and maybe "hyperbowl" too...


----------



## noco (2 June 2011)

I tuned into Parliament question time today and I can truthfully say Gillard could not and would not answer any question with relevance. She always waffled on about Tony Abbott always aying no and how Abbott keeps mounting a scare campaign.
Even when it was pointed out to the speaker on numerous occassions, she did not answer any question which made any sense what so ever.
Swan was no better.


----------



## Logique (3 June 2011)

noco said:


> I tuned into Parliament question time today and I can truthfully say Gillard could not and would not answer any question with relevance. She always waffled on about Tony Abbott always aying no and how Abbott keeps mounting a scare campaign.
> Even when it was pointed out to the speaker on numerous occassions, she did not answer any question which made any sense what so ever.
> Swan was no better.



Correct Noco, Question Time is 'Bizarro World' these days. Truly awful. The impression made on the overseas delegations may scarcely be imagined. You can almost hear them thinking, '..this is what we should aspire to?..'.


----------



## drsmith (3 June 2011)

Rare agreement between the Opposition and the Greens, and Alan Jones.



> Opposition Leader Tony Abbott accused Ms Gillard of telling "fibs" while Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young accused Ms Gillard and Immigration Minister Chris Bowen of not telling the truth over the deal.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/06/03/3234623.htm


----------



## sails (3 June 2011)

drsmith said:


> Rare agreement between the Opposition and the Greens, and Alan Jones.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/06/03/3234623.htm




The agreement doesn't last long with the greens.  Seems like they will just go along with labor. From the article you posted (bold is mine):



> But despite criticising the Government, Senator Hanson-Young said the *Greens would continue to support it*.




and



> "She (the PM) also said the human rights of these people would be respected and *yet the two words that Malaysia wants to take out of the agreement, two minor little words, [are] 'human rights'.*"




unbelievable...


----------



## drsmith (3 June 2011)

sails said:


> unbelievable...



GetUp too are scampering to the Labor bunker on this.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...laysian-solution/story-fn59niix-1226068547223


----------



## Julia (3 June 2011)

drsmith said:


> GetUp too are scampering to the Labor bunker on this.



 Thus exposing their hypocrisy.


----------



## drsmith (3 June 2011)

Cracks are becoming obvious amongst the faithful.



> Labor MPs voice opposition to Malaysian deal




http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/06/03/3235319.htm



> A number of West Australian Labor MPs have signed a letter opposing plans by the Federal Government to send unaccompanied children to Malaysia under an asylum seeker deal.




Specific comments from WA state Labor MP's include,



> That has outraged a number of West Australian Labor MPs, including Martin Whitely, who says it is a ridiculous concept.
> 
> "On this issue I think they have lost their moral compass, and I think the Prime Minister should intervene immediately," he said.




and,



> Fellow MP Ben Wyatt also lashed out at his federal colleagues over the Malaysian deal.
> 
> "I'm embarrassed and hugely disappointed that we now see a federal Labor government penalising, brutalising children in an effort to assuage their fears about the ghosts of John Howard," he said.




One wonders whether this could be the downfall of Julia Gillard as Labor leader and hence PM. Julia herself, minus makeup, looks a little under the weather.


----------



## sails (4 June 2011)

Interesting editorial from the Australian: 



> AS Julia Gillard approaches the first anniversary of her prime ministership, she is mired in a series of paradoxes of her own making.
> 
> Constantly trying to outline what she stands for, Ms Gillard has failed to demonstrate her beliefs and leaves the nation nonplussed. When she can utter the words, "It's time for me to make sure the real Julia is well and truly on display", or break a core election promise, she displays an alarming lack of authenticity. It is possible the nation has stopped listening because she has shown more pretence than conviction.




Full article: After almost a year, the Real Julia is a mystery


----------



## noco (4 June 2011)

sails said:


> Interesting editorial from the Australian:
> 
> 
> 
> Full article: After almost a year, the Real Julia is a mystery




Sails, somehow I don't think Gillard even believes in a major part of what she is preaching. She does not seem to bring reality into debate on any subject she is involved in,  so someone behind her must be a major influence on her decisions. No doubt the Greens and the Indies will be her stumbling block, resulting  in her downfall.

Does she really believe that a carbon dioxide tax will make one atom of difference to climate change or global warming?


----------



## sails (4 June 2011)

noco said:


> Sails, somehow I don't think Gillard even believes in a major part of what she is preaching. She does not seem to bring reality into debate on any subject she is involved in,  so someone behind her must be a major influence on her decisions. No doubt the Greens and the Indies will be her stumbling block, resulting  in her downfall.
> 
> Does she really believe that a carbon dioxide tax will make one atom of difference to climate change or global warming?




I think she wants the money...lol


----------



## joea (4 June 2011)

I think Labor is going to make  an historical statement of "having the most number of 
PM's while in a period of continuous government." e.g. at least 3 in this period.

I think Gillard is fighting to stay a term to pick up the perks.

She must be starting to get lonely, as most of the establishment is against her.
She has lost the meaning of "We labor" and has substituted "I labor", and from that position, the direction is down, down,......down & out.

Cheers


----------



## drsmith (4 June 2011)

joea said:


> I think Gillard is fighting to stay a term to pick up the perks.
> 
> She must be starting to get lonely, as most of the establishment is against her.



Will she last the month ?

Wheels are going everywhere.


----------



## moXJO (4 June 2011)

drsmith said:


> Will she last the month ?
> 
> Wheels are going everywhere.




Members of the party are worried about brand labor being damaged beyond repair and the greens gaining more of their share of votes. They really need to reconnect with their base.
 I doubt they will cast Gillard aside as PM. They need a visible clean out and call an election to save face from any further stuff ups and voter hate.
Liberals are not much better at the moment and make me just as sick at times. Are they even ready to govern?

On a side note I went to my son’s school to attend an award he was getting. The teachers and parents had to sit outside the back door as the hall is too small to fit everyone in, awesome


----------



## Julia (4 June 2011)

moXJO said:


> On a side note I went to my son’s school to attend an award he was getting. The teachers and parents had to sit outside the back door as the hall is too small to fit everyone in, awesome



Is this one of the new supa dupa BER school halls that came with the extraordinary price tag?


----------



## joea (4 June 2011)

drsmith said:


> Will she last the month ?
> 
> Wheels are going everywhere.




Julia Gillard has only got to do two things to stay in power.

1 Take a deep swallow and see if she can swallow some self importance.

2 Start to repair her mistakes by," a "admitting them, then allow the other two parties
   to help contribute some ideas.( the good ones). Start with boat people.

It is that simple!!!

Cheers.


----------



## noco (4 June 2011)

joea said:


> Julia Gillard has only got to do two things to stay in power.
> 
> 1 Take a deep swallow and see if she can swallow some self importance.
> 
> ...




I really don't think it matters a hoot which way Gillard goes, she is so hamstrung with the bloody Greens, the independants and the lefties in her own party. Each unit is trying to pull her in different directions and in doing so she is attempting to appease them all and look where it has got her.

It is of her own making for the situation she has found herself in ATM.

Tony Abbott may have been one step ahead of her after the last election, for if he had negotiated the same deal with the indies, he may have found himself in a similar predicament. 

A good one  for Abbott to have lost IMHO..

It is unfortunate, in the mean time, that the voters have had tp put up with the 'crap' that is going today.


----------



## drsmith (4 June 2011)

She's allready taken a deep swallow in the form of Bob Brown's carbon tax.

Meanwhile, on the high seas.........

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/br...be-sent-overseas/story-e6frf7kf-1226069271994


----------



## Julia (4 June 2011)

noco said:


> I really don't think it matters a hoot which way Gillard goes, she is so hamstrung with the bloody Greens, the independants and the lefties in her own party. Each unit is trying to pull her in different directions and in doing so she is attempting to appease them all and look where it has got her.
> 
> It is of her own making for the situation she has found herself in ATM.



Agree entirely.  She really can't win.
She should have considered all the ramifications before she did the deal with the Greens.


----------



## noco (6 June 2011)

Looks an "earthquake" is about to hit Canberra. 

Will somebody please tell JU-LIAR to leave now!!!!!!!!!!!!


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...er-of-discontent/story-fn59niix-1226069670669


----------



## Logique (6 June 2011)

A fair assessment from Milne. 

Interesting his canvassing of Stephen Smith as a possible successor, they could do worse, notwithstanding recent scandals, which hopefully he has learned something from. 

Be alright having a PM from WA, in context of mining and carbon taxes he might have a more enlightened view?


----------



## joea (6 June 2011)

Logique said:


> A fair assessment from Milne.
> 
> Interesting his canvassing of Stephen Smith as a possible successor, they could do worse, notwithstanding recent scandals, which hopefully he has learned something from.
> 
> Be alright having a PM from WA, in context of mining and carbon taxes he might have a more enlightened view?




If Stephen Smith became PM, I believe Parliment would emerge out of the gutter that it has fallen into.
The pollies might even have a sensible debate.
I have never heard Smith attack anyone like Gillard and Combet.
I believe Smith could turn the pols, but would he take the job.?
On his media releases, he certainly conveys, confidence and integrity.
Cheers


----------



## sails (6 June 2011)

I guess we don't know a lot about Stephen Smith, but agree with others here that he could be the best to bring things back into line for labor.  I don't think we would see his true colours until he got into that very powerful position in the ALP where no consultation with MPs is necessary.  Labor MPs have to toe the line - except at the moment when no ALP leader would dare to suspend a member.

Is it possible that Gillard herself could threaten to resign if her leadership is challenged?  Perhaps she has labor with a gun to it's head - figuratively, of course!


----------



## Julia (6 June 2011)

Stephen Smith is one of the few Labor ministers for whom I have respect.
But I don't really see the point of the discussion because dumping Ms Gillard would make them even more of an object of ridicule than they are now.

Sometimes I suspect they wish they'd never rushed in with the declaration that we will have a carbon tax in an impulsive decision to accommodate the Greens.  Now that global interest in any carbon abatement measures is apparently diminishing, and especially that the US, China, Japan et al are clearly not going to be participating in any sort of ETS, the utter pointlessness of Australia going ahead is second only to the potential damage to our economic competitiveness.

Tony Windsor has done a bit of muttering to this effect, so perhaps it's just possible that he will refuse to back the legislation.  If this were to happen, the government would be able to say "well, we did our best, but we just couldn't control the outcome" and secretly feel immensely relieved.

I might be quite wrong in this line of thinking.


----------



## joea (6 June 2011)

Julia
Somewhere in a paper I read on the weekend, there was a hint that Gillard will be given 
to Christmas, and Combet was on the exercise bike warming up for the job. But then that's the media.
I am a bit worried about Combet, because he reminds of someone from the 'Munsters".
Cheers


----------



## noco (6 June 2011)

joea said:


> Julia
> Somewhere in a paper I read on the weekend, there was a hint that Gillard will be given
> to Christmas, and Combet was on the exercise bike warming up for the job. But then that's the media.
> I am a bit worried about Combet, because he reminds of someone from the 'Munsters".
> Cheers




joea, I believe this the link you are looking for in relation to Gillard's demise by Xams2011.


http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...ouriermail/comments/gillard_gone_by_december/


----------



## Julia (6 June 2011)

noco said:


> joea, I believe this the link you are looking for in relation to Gillard's demise by Xams2011.
> 
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...ouriermail/comments/gillard_gone_by_december/



 Ah, a prediction by Bolt and Milne.
Hardly a complete reflection of intra-Labor politics!


----------



## moXJO (7 June 2011)

Julia said:


> Is this one of the new supa dupa BER school halls that came with the extraordinary price tag?




Yep, absolute joke


----------



## awg (7 June 2011)

my 

I have grown weary of her legalise slipperry talk that means nothing.

Suppose that should have been expected considering her work background.

Given that what she says seems to be meaningless, I cant really see how she would command sufficient authority in her party or respect in the electorate to get the job done.

I actually dont even bother listening to what she says anymore, cause I feel likely it will just be a bunch of listless poli-speak.

Compared to Bob Hawke, Paul Keating, John Howard or Mal Fraser, she is uninspirational ( to me anyway )


----------



## joea (7 June 2011)

noco said:


> joea, I believe this the link you are looking for in relation to Gillard's demise by Xams2011.
> 
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...ouriermail/comments/gillard_gone_by_december/




Thanks!
You know I think I am reading too much.

I think Labor is starting to look like" as Jerry Seinfield said"
A SHOW ABOUT NOTHING.
cheers


----------



## noco (7 June 2011)

Julia said:


> Ah, a prediction by Bolt and Milne.
> Hardly a complete reflection of intra-Labor politics!




Julia, if you read into that link a little more closely, you will note Bolt and Milne were reflecting on another link from the Australian National Affairs with the headlines :-

JULIA GILLARD'S WINTER OF DISCOMFORT.

Hardly a prediction by Bolt and Milne.


----------



## noco (7 June 2011)

noco said:


> Julia, if you read into that link a little more closely, you will note Bolt and Milne were reflecting on another link from the Australian National Affairs with the headlines :-
> 
> JULIA GILLARD'S WINTER OF DISCOMFORT.
> 
> Hardly a prediction by Bolt and Milne.




Just read in the weekend Australian where even Bob Hawke believes Gillard will be replaced within 3 months.


----------



## Intrinsic Value (7 June 2011)

The title should read does Abbott inspire more confidence than Gillard?

The sad fact is that as bad as Gillard is going Abbott is not travelling any better.

Bad for Australia because we have no choice. The opposition is a joke. They operate in a policy free vacuum with nothing positive to offer those seeking an alternative government.


----------



## Julia (7 June 2011)

noco said:


> Julia, if you read into that link a little more closely, you will note Bolt and Milne were reflecting on another link from the Australian National Affairs with the headlines :-
> 
> JULIA GILLARD'S WINTER OF DISCOMFORT.
> 
> Hardly a prediction by Bolt and Milne.



I've had another look at your earlier link and don't see anything about "Winter of Discomfort".  Perhaps you could post a link to this?
Meanwhile, my earlier comment about the blog article representing Bolt's and Milne's take on how they see things stands.  They are, to be quite fair, less than objective.





Intrinsic Value said:


> Bad for Australia because we have no choice. The opposition is a joke. They operate in a policy free vacuum with nothing positive to offer those seeking an alternative government.



I agree.  They would definitely get my vote if an election were held tomorrow.  But that's a measure of how disgusted I am with Labor, rather than a strong belief the Coalition is about to be Australia's salvation.


----------



## Logique (7 June 2011)

noco said:


> Just read in the weekend Australian where even Bob Hawke believes Gillard will be replaced within 3 months.



Would appreciate a link or article title if avail Noco.


----------



## Logique (7 June 2011)

Julia said:


> ...I agree. They would definitely get my vote if an election were held tomorrow.  But that's a measure of how disgusted I am with Labor, rather than a strong belief the Coalition is about to be Australia's salvation.



I think the Coalition's political strategy is reasonable. When a government is so far off the rails, '..lost it's way..' as it were (now truly entered 'Bizarro World'), why as an opposition cause distractions.

Also why feed them free policies, to be, after a suitable period, re-introduced as Labor's own?  The Coalition are playing the long game. Every day that goes by, Labor and the Greens dig themselves into a deeper hole.


----------



## Intrinsic Value (7 June 2011)

Logique said:


> I think the Coalition's political strategy is reasonable. When a government is so far off the rails, '..lost it's way..' as it were (now truly entered 'Bizarro World'), why as an opposition cause distractions.
> 
> Also why feed them free policies, to be, after a suitable period, re-introduced as Labor's own?  The Coalition are playing the long game. Every day that goes by, Labor and the Greens dig themselves into a deeper hole.




That is fair enough up to a point.

But you have to show you have something in the kitbag.

Running a negative line is all well and good and it may well be enough to win an election but it does nothing to inspire me that they have a better grip on managing the country.


----------



## Julia (7 June 2011)

Intrinsic Value said:


> That is fair enough up to a point.
> 
> But you have to show you have something in the kitbag.
> 
> Running a negative line is all well and good and it may well be enough to win an election but it does nothing to inspire me that they have a better grip on managing the country.



Thank you, IV.  That's what I was trying to say.

I'm personally becoming irritated at Tony Abbott's superficial sloganeering.  It's somewhat insulting to those in the electorate who are looking for something of greater substance.
Both sides at present, imo, are giving considerable credence to Lindsay Tanner's suggestion that politics has become largely a sideshow.


----------



## noco (7 June 2011)

Julia said:


> I've had another look at your earlier link and don't see anything about "Winter of Discomfort".  Perhaps you could post a link to this?
> Meanwhile, my earlier comment about the blog article representing Bolt's and Milne's take on how they see things stands.  They are, to be quite fair, less than objective.
> 
> 
> ...




No doubt this is what you are looking for Julia.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...er-of-discontent/story-fn59niix-1226069670669


----------



## noco (8 June 2011)

Logique said:


> Would appreciate a link or article title if avail Noco.




Sorry I took so long to find this link. I had to read through the Weekend Australian page 14 dated 4-5 June 2011 and then find the article on the net.

Apparently Hawkie had been quoting this to guests at various business dinners. He may deny his quotes if confronted by the media though.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ront-against-tax/story-e6frgd0x-1226068917285


----------



## IFocus (8 June 2011)

Logique said:


> I think the Coalition's political strategy is reasonable. When a government is so far off the rails, '..lost it's way..' as it were (now truly entered 'Bizarro World'), why as an opposition cause distractions.
> 
> Also why feed them free policies, to be, after a suitable period, re-introduced as Labor's own?  The Coalition are playing the long game. Every day that goes by, Labor and the Greens dig themselves into a deeper hole.




Agree the Coalitions current strategy *to gain power* is the absolute correct game. The danger for Abbott is that the election if we go full term is a long way off in political time.

I do get the feeling that if Labor gets the tax's over the line and a regional boat people policy that works / nothing to controversial with the NBN (all big ifs at this stage but do able) then the focus will come back to haunt the Coalition and they are fragile and vulnerable in many areas after so many 3 worded slogans. 

Another factor / wild card (unknown at this stage) that tends to define governments more so than the current squabbles is world events that impact at home. Should the sovereign dept problems facing Europe / Japan blow up before the next election then Abbott will be likely toasted.


----------



## drsmith (8 June 2011)

IFocus said:


> I do get the feeling that if Labor gets the tax's over the line and a regional boat people policy that works / nothing to controversial with the NBN (all big ifs at this stage but do able) then the focus will come back to haunt the Coalition and they are fragile and vulnerable in many areas after so many 3 worded slogans.



Big if's ??

Very big if's if track record is anything to go by.

If Malaysia fails as as an asylum seeker option, what's next ?, the dark side of the moon.

All Tony Abbott has to do is sit back and watch the Labor boat sink in its own stormy seas. Politically, no one can blame him for doing that.


----------



## Ruby (8 June 2011)

IFocus said:


> I do get the feeling that if Labor gets the tax's over the line and a regional boat people policy that works......




Those 'ifs' don't look very promising to me at present.  Gillard seems to be floundering more and more with each step she takes.  She certainly might get the tax over the line but it will do nothing for her popularity.  The boat people plan is a huge fiasco.

My thought is that she will hang on as long as she can, keep getting deeper in the mire of her own ineptitude, because if she were to call an election she would be finished.

I don't detect much confidence in her at all.


----------



## IFocus (8 June 2011)

drsmith said:


> Big if's ??
> 
> Very big if's if track record is anything to go by.
> 
> ...





Very true about the track record and as a trend following trader I would'nt put money on Labor at this point.

But the stakes are very high for both sides not just Gillard.

 I still think that not a lot has to improve for Gillard for the pressure and spot light to fall back onto Abbott.

One thing that Abbott is not addressing is the large amount of deadwood on his front bench while there is real talented new blood on the back bench apparently getting impatient.


----------



## drsmith (8 June 2011)

IFocus said:


> I still think that not a lot has to improve for Gillard for the pressure and spot light to fall back onto Abbott.



Very thin gruel though in this thread.


----------



## Logique (8 June 2011)

IFocus said:


> ..One thing that Abbott is not addressing is the large amount of deadwood on his front bench while there is real talented new blood on the back bench apparently getting impatient.



I can think of one Coalition front bencher I'd be demoting. Or possibly two. And I don't mean the manager of opposition business. 

Bring it on.


----------



## Julia (8 June 2011)

noco said:


> No doubt this is what you are looking for Julia.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...er-of-discontent/story-fn59niix-1226069670669



Good, thanks noco.



IFocus said:


> I do get the feeling that if Labor gets the tax's over the line and a regional boat people policy that works / nothing to controversial with the NBN (all big ifs at this stage but do able) then the focus will come back to haunt the Coalition and they are fragile and vulnerable in many areas after so many 3 worded slogans.



Agree.



> Another factor / wild card (unknown at this stage) that tends to define governments more so than the current squabbles is world events that impact at home. Should the sovereign dept problems facing Europe / Japan blow up before the next election then Abbott will be likely toasted.



Can you say why you think the Coalition would be more affected by something like this than the government?




Ruby said:


> Those 'ifs' don't look very promising to me at present.  Gillard seems to be floundering more and more with each step she takes.  She certainly might get the tax over the line but it will do nothing for her popularity.  The boat people plan is a huge fiasco.
> 
> My thought is that she will hang on as long as she can, keep getting deeper in the mire of her own ineptitude, because if she were to call an election she would be finished.
> 
> I don't detect much confidence in her at all.



All true enough, Ruby, but let's remember that repeated polls are still showing her as preferred PM over Tony Abbott.  Many people will vote according to whom they want as PM rather than policies.

Much as I can't stand Ms Gillard, I don't think the crux of Labor's problem is the PM.
Rather their utter incompetence as a party with haphazard policies pretty much all on the run.  Changing the PM won't alter this and would have the downside of leaving them open to ridicule for yet again changing leaders.




IFocus said:


> Very true about the track record and as a trend following trader I would'nt put money on Labor at this point.
> 
> But the stakes are very high for both sides not just Gillard.
> 
> I still think that not a lot has to improve for Gillard for the pressure and spot light to fall back onto Abbott.



Agree on this.  If the Malaysian solution works, then that's one of Abbott's main bullets gone.  Then if the carbon tax is legislated and the electorate is well compensated, the "big new tax" slogan loses its impact.



> One thing that Abbott is not addressing is the large amount of deadwood on his front bench while there is real talented new blood on the back bench apparently getting impatient.



Who do you have in mind here, i.e. both the deadwood and the new talent?
Scott Morrison stands out for me in terms of good performance.  Greg Hunt, on the other hand, who did look promising, is imo not fulfilling that early promise.





Logique said:


> I can think of one Coalition front bencher I'd be demoting. Or possibly two. And I don't mean the manager of opposition business.
> 
> Bring it on.



Why are you being coy about naming whom you mean Logique?


----------



## joea (8 June 2011)

A survey of 150 CEO'S  of $100 million plus companies have rated Julia Gillard 3.3 out of 10. 
This is down on 4.8 at the end of last year.
By coincidence her polls show 35%.

This can be found on Business Speculator under "Giving up the Gillard Ghost"
It is called Accenture CEO Pulse Survey.

Not much hope here!!! 
Cheers ( but then there's not much to cheer about)


----------



## sails (8 June 2011)

Julia said:


> ...Scott Morrison stands out for me in terms of good performance...




Actually, I agree, Julia.  Saw him recently on TV (might have been Bolt's show) and he articulates very well.  Could be a contender down the track.  However, at this point in time, I agree with Logique's post below:



Logique said:


> I think the Coalition's political strategy is reasonable. When a government is so far off the rails, '..lost it's way..' as it were (now truly entered 'Bizarro World'), why as an opposition cause distractions.
> 
> Also why feed them free policies, to be, after a suitable period, re-introduced as Labor's own?  The Coalition are playing the long game. Every day that goes by, Labor and the Greens dig themselves into a deeper hole.




The lefties seem desperate for anything for which they can criticise Abbott. And labor are not beyond pinching coalition policies (with the exception of Pacific Solution unfortunately), regurgitating them somewhat, and then presenting them as their own.

Personally, I think the coalition may not be aware just how much damage labor has done financially.  It would be difficult to make promises when you don't know if those promises can be kept.

I also think the coalition's first priority in government will be to sort out these massive messes created by labor, get the Pacific Solution back up and running and give the co2 issues more time.  Carbon tax seems indecent haste with claims being made by the PM that the science is settled (or so I understand) when it is still very much controversial.


----------



## trainspotter (8 June 2011)

I wonder if Juliar Gizzard will ask Pinko Peter Garrett to use the song "Beds are Burning" as her next campaign song?

_*‘The time has come to say fair’s fair, to pay the rent, to do our share,
How do we sleep while our beds are burning?'*_


----------



## noco (8 June 2011)

Time for Gillard to go. She is not only a laughing stock in Australia but overseas as well.

She is just not suited for the job. If she were a CEO of a large organisation she would have been booted out long ago.

Hawkie might right when he is telling people at dinner meetings, she will be gone in 3 months. But, will we then have a replacement worse than her?

Where's Kevin 11 while all these debacles are in progress. He seems to be gone up in smoke leaving his carbon foot print where ever he goes.

FOOT NOTE : Rudd's bid for UN Secretary General's job looks going up in smoke as well. Ki-Moon is applying for another 5 year term in office.



http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai..._no_whitlam_not_even_a_fraser_or_gasp_a_rudd/


----------



## noco (9 June 2011)

Gillard's credibility in foreign policy and diplomacy appears to be getting worse day by day. She has become the laughing stock of the world. Kevin Rudd and Stephen Smith noteably are steering clear of the whole fiasco and probably laughing their heads off in the background.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...aging-the-nation/story-fn59niix-1226071961248


----------



## noco (15 June 2011)

The link below sums up Juliar Gillard to a tee..

She is NOT suited for the job and must go.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...d-is-out-of-step/story-e6frgd0x-1226075230299


----------



## trainspotter (15 June 2011)

The knives are out for Juliar Gizzard. 



> *NEXT week marks a year since Julia Gillard became Prime Minister -- and first made the promises that have killed her. *
> 
> What's unfolded since has been one of the most incredible self-destructions in Australian politics.
> 
> It's Shakespearean, how this feminist hero and darling of even conservatives such as Alan Jones became the hapless joke we saw on 60 Minutes on Sunday, giggling awkwardly outside her boyfriend's shed at The Lodge as she meekly obeyed his ban on women.




http://www.heraldsun.com.au/ipad/gillard-fails-every-test-in-first-year/story-fn6bn88w-1226075198950


----------



## Logique (16 June 2011)

noco said:


> The link below sums up Juliar Gillard to a tee....http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...d-is-out-of-step/story-e6frgd0x-1226075230299



With surgical precision from Janet Albrechtsen. December is the political 'killing season', interesting times lie ahead. Stunning that 82% of Fairfax readers (SMH today - see Gillard Govt thread) think PM Gillard can't recover. 

Jeez, just take the (very attractive) perks and resign. But the hard Left and the Sisterhood won't give up that easily.  Nor the 'limelight' Two Amigos.


----------



## noco (21 June 2011)

Does anyone on ASF feel sorry for Julia Gillard?

How can one have confidence in a Prime Minister who is so deceitful?


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...one-and-thats-ok/story-e6frgd0x-1226078779875


----------



## Julia (21 June 2011)

noco said:


> Does anyone on ASF feel sorry for Julia Gillard?
> 
> How can one have confidence in a Prime Minister who is so deceitful?
> 
> ...



The following is an extract from the above article:



> Their secret hope is that the carbon tax falls over before it fries them all. Tony Abbott's plebiscite bill is unlikely to achieve that, but it will keep the spotlight burning on the Prime Minister's broken promise. Right now at least three cabinet ministers hope the tax collapses. They can't dump it without dumping Gillard, so the next best option would be if the Greens and or the independents did their dirty work for them. You could be forgiven for thinking the government was trying to engineer this, first by infuriating the Greens and independents in prematurely announcing a $12 million advertising campaign, and then by offering the same compensation package which the Greens rejected when it was part of Rudd's scheme.




I've suggested this before and no one here has agreed.  Interesting to see Nikki Saava raising it.  If the Multiparty Committee on Climate Change were unable to agree on the terms of the tax and the compensation, Gillard & Co. could simply say:  "Well, we did our best.  We really, truly wanted to do something about climate change but the intransigence of the other parties on the Committee prevented this."  Thus they could save face and quite possibly restore some of their credibility and popularity in the electorate.

However, it's doubtful that the Greens and the Independents, both of whom have a huge stake in getting this legislation up, will not bend in whatever direction they need to, and it will go ahead.


----------



## noco (21 June 2011)

Julia said:


> The following is an extract from the above article:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Nikki Savva was interviewed by Andrew Bolt on MTR this morning. She knows who the three Labor Ministers are who would like to see the carbon dioxide tax fail and one is most likely to be Martin Ferguson.

You can link the interview via the Courier Mail Breaking News. Click on opinion and then blogs to Andrew Bolt.


----------



## todster (21 June 2011)

noco said:


> Nikki Savva was interviewed by Andrew Bolt on MTR this morning. She knows who the three Labor Ministers are who would like to see the carbon dioxide tax fail and one is most likely to be Martin Ferguson.
> 
> You can link the interview via the Courier Mail Breaking News. Click on opinion and then blogs to Andrew Bolt.




What about a link to your sad little existence


----------



## sails (21 June 2011)

todster said:


> What about a link to your sad little existence




Here you go, Todster.  It was quite easy to find using Noco's instructions:
http://www.mtr1377.com.au/index2.php?option=com_newsmanager&task=view&id=9055


And when I went looking for the link you couldn't find, I found this on Bolt's blog...
*ABC paints a dark cloud over Gillard*



> This week marks the first anniversary of Julia Gillard replacing Kevin Rudd as Prime Minister, and we asked you to send three words to describe your views on how Ms Gillard's minority Government has performed.
> The following word cloud shows the 100 most submitted words via this page and the Twitter hashtag #gillardin3.









http://www.abc.net.au/news/events/julia-gillard-first-year/


----------



## drsmith (21 June 2011)

noco said:


> Nikki Savva was interviewed by Andrew Bolt on MTR this morning. She knows who the three Labor Ministers are who would like to see the carbon dioxide tax fail and one is most likely to be Martin Ferguson.



That interview with Nikki Savva got more interesting as it went on.

Nikki commented that Julia is as tough as old boots, has an incredible amount of self belief and that nothing is beyond her. This is negative where that level of self belief becomes asssociated with poor judgement. This I suspect is what has happened with Julis Gillard judging by outcomes, with their ongoing asylum seeker policy being one example.

http://www.mtr1377.com.au/index2.php?option=com_newsmanager&task=view&id=9055


----------



## sptrawler (22 June 2011)

drsmith said:


> That interview with Nikki Savva got more interesting as it went on.
> 
> Nikki commented that Julia is as tough as old boots, has an incredible amount of self belief and that nothing is beyond her. This is negative where that level of self belief becomes asssociated with poor judgement. This I suspect is what has happened with Julis Gillard judging by outcomes, with their ongoing asylum seeker policy being one example.
> 
> http://www.mtr1377.com.au/index2.php?option=com_newsmanager&task=view&id=9055




Jeez dr smith, I think I married her sister. LOL.


----------



## IFocus (22 June 2011)

drsmith said:


> That interview with Nikki Savva got more interesting as it went on.
> 
> Nikki commented that Julia is as tough as old boots, has an incredible amount of self belief and that nothing is beyond her. This is negative where that level of self belief becomes asssociated with poor judgement. This I suspect is what has happened with Julis Gillard judging by outcomes, with their ongoing asylum seeker policy being one example.
> 
> http://www.mtr1377.com.au/index2.php?option=com_newsmanager&task=view&id=9055





At least you guys are finally quoting some one of worth Nikki is Coalition through and through but she is thought full and writes well.


----------



## Wysiwyg (22 June 2011)

drsmith said:


> Nikki commented that Julia is as tough as old boots, has an incredible amount of self belief and that nothing is beyond her. This is negative where that level of self belief becomes associated with poor judgement.



There are many decisions where the government suggests they're doing what is right for the general populace. Weighing up where they can take with one hand and give back a little less with the other. There are limitless ways this can be done.


----------



## drsmith (22 June 2011)

IFocus said:


> At least you guys are finally quoting some one of worth Nikki is Coalition through and through but she is thought full and writes well.



Gee.....

Thanks.

I have a warm fuzzy felling inside knowing that it at least, in part, meets with your approval.


----------



## noco (25 June 2011)

Does anyone really know what this Prime Minister of ours stands for?

I do know one thing, and that is, she does not appear to know what she is doing or does she?

I still believe she has a hidden agenda and it's not good.




http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...or-julia-gillard/story-e6frerdf-1226081562543


----------



## sails (25 June 2011)

noco said:


> Does anyone really know what this Prime Minister of ours stands for?
> 
> I do know one thing, and that is, she does not appear to know what she is doing or does she?
> 
> ...





Is it a distainful pout or is she boring holes through Abbott?





Photo from link posted by Noco above.


----------



## noco (25 June 2011)

sails said:


> Is it a distainful pout or is she boring holes through Abbott?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I wonder how JU-LIAR sleeps at night. She might have to pop one of Kevies mogadoms before she goes to bed.


----------



## noco (26 June 2011)

Anyone watch Gillard being interviewed on MEET THE PRESS this afternoon or this morning.

Every time Paul Bonjourno tried to ask her a question, she just continued to talk over him like a broken record.

Gillard says she has a long term vision and a plan for Australia and the 'WORKING FAMILIES', but when you open the book it is full of blank pages. She never elaborates; just full of spin and damned rhetoric.


----------



## joea (26 June 2011)

noco said:


> Does anyone really know what this Prime Minister of ours stands for?
> 
> I do know one thing, and that is, she does not appear to know what she is doing or does she?
> 
> ...




Noco
I believe you are so close to the mark it is not funny.
I think the hidden agenda maybe (i do not know what to do next)i.e. there is no agenda!
I think she has Spielberg writing her scripts on spin.

Well she certainly knows how to spook the Chinese investment!
Then I am wondering  if thats not a good thing.
Cheers.


----------



## noco (28 June 2011)

According to the Australian News Paper this morning, Juliar's goose is cooked. I would say it is more like burnt to frizzle.
Joe Hockey quoted on Q & A last night that he did not want to see Julia go. She must be the Liberals best asset I guess.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...s-looking-cooked/story-e6frgd0x-1226083044841


----------



## noco (2 July 2011)

How can Gillard inspire confidence in voters when she can't even gain confidence from her own party.
How LOOOWWW can she go under the limbo rock?


http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai..._shows_labor_she_cannot_be_trusted_with_time/


----------



## Julia (2 July 2011)

It's all very well for Andrew Bolt to demand a substitute for Ms Gillard when he has zero influence over the matter.

And to suggest either Mr Rudd or Mr Crean would be better than Ms Gillard is facile.
Both had their chances and both totally fluffed it.
Simon Crean is a decent enough bloke but not PM material.
Our Kev would be even worse than he was before if he were begged to come back.
Besides, on what basis would anyone want him back?  It seems simply because a bunch of Qld voters are still annoyed about his dismissal.

However bad Ms Gillard's polls become, I can't see Labor dumping her.  They simply have no one who could do better, with the possible exception, imo, of Stephen Smith, though he lacks substance.

Labor's situation mirrors that of the Coalition, in that Tony Abbott is widely still not liked, but they don't have anyone who would do better.


----------



## noco (2 July 2011)

Julia said:


> It's all very well for Andrew Bolt to demand a substitute for Ms Gillard when he has zero influence over the matter.
> 
> And to suggest either Mr Rudd or Mr Crean would be better than Ms Gillard is facile.
> Both had their chances and both totally fluffed it.
> ...




Julia, lets hope for a bye election or an Indy defection.

The Labor Party are in a catch 22 situation. If they dump Gillard, the Party will lose support from Wlikie which will bring on an election.

If they let her stay, the Labor Party will sink further into the hole she is digging for herself and the party!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

Labor has a real prolem.


----------



## sails (2 July 2011)

noco said:


> ...The Labor Party are in a catch 22 situation. If they dump Gillard, the Party will lose support from Wlikie which will bring on an election....




IMO, there is a possibility that it's all bluff from Wilke and the indies.  I wouldn't think they would ruin their day in the sun just because leadership changes.  I think they would continue to prop labor up for as long as possible - they would have limited choices otherwise.


----------



## noco (3 July 2011)

sails said:


> IMO, there is a possibility that it's all bluff from Wilke and the indies.  I wouldn't think they would ruin their day in the sun just because leadership changes.  I think they would continue to prop labor up for as long as possible - they would have limited choices otherwise.




Wilke's has a personal agreement with Gillard, not the Labor Party.


----------



## Logique (3 July 2011)

Wilkie is bluffing. Where else is he going to go. And his pokie reforms will have alienated some key supporters.

I'd say the long term plan is this: these are unpopular reforms, someone has to take the fall on this. That will be PM Julia Gillard. Coming up to the next election, say 3 to 6 months, she will be dumped for Bill Shorten, with Nicola Roxon (who is being groomed) as deputy. Accompanying this, a slew of '..there there, never mind, we'll make it all better..' promises. 

Failure is an orphan. In future years, watch them all go to ground on this carbon tax. 

I don't see Greg Combet as saleable to the electorate, too left wing, too much unionized '..bosses are the enemy..' in his makeup, and tainted by his climate change ministry, as with Chris Bowen in immigration.

The kids will remember that they could have had a job for a couple of hours after school, but the unions wouldn't let them. And the coal miners will remember that the union bosses sat idly by as miners jobs were exported to Brazil and China.


----------



## Calliope (3 July 2011)

noco said:


> Wilke's has a personal agreement with Gillard, not the Labor Party.




Wilkie takes his orders from Bob Brown.  He was an unsuccessful Australian Greens candidate for both the federal Division of Bennelong in the 2004 federal election and for the Senate in Tasmania at the 2007 federal election.

His main motivation is hatred for the Liberals, on whose preferences he was elected. An election is the last thing he wants.


----------



## sails (3 July 2011)

noco said:


> Wilke's has a personal agreement with Gillard, not the Labor Party.




Maybe so, but he seems to hate the coalition, so what other choice does he have than to continue to support the labor machine regardless of leaders? To do otherwise would force an early election and his day in the sun and whatever else is in it for him is over.

I would think any incoming labor leader would be just as keen to keep up the money handouts or personal bribes (IF that is what is happening)  to keep him on side.  

Personally, I think there should be a royal inquiry somewhere down the track to find out just how Gillard has managed to get most things she wants even though the indies have often gone against the majority of their consitiuents wishes and even against some pretty strong opinion polls.  Something doesn't add add up, imo.

And, how can the two rural based indies possibly allow the shut down of our live export trade is beyond belief.  Sure, there were some serious problems to be sorted out for animal care, but this was a clearly knee jerk reaction without seeming thought. Why didn't the indies suggest a better approach? They should be standing up for the farmers or are they so in fear of losing some of their handouts that they are now simply puppets for Gillard.  So, one can only assume that they are well paid off with tax payer funds - nothing else makes any sense...


----------



## Calliope (3 July 2011)

Gillard was happy this morning on the Insiders. Barrie Cassidy gave her a dream run. She has now again latched on to linking Tony "Abbert" and Work Choices. I'm afraid we are going to hear this every time she opens her mouth for the next two years. The panel (one pro-Abbott and two anti-Abbott) latched on to it too.

Abbott has only himself to blame. There  are plenty of reasons why he should stand up to the imbalances of Fair Work Australia. Gillard and her union cabinet mates have given the unions a free rein, with productivity being the loser.

I am aware that Abbott is trying to remain a small target, but he will have to step up to the plate sooner or later. He has to be seen to stand for something. At the moment he is gagging his frontbenchers who want to raise the subject.


----------



## sails (3 July 2011)

Work Choices is always going to be on the nose, imo.  Howard thumbed his nose at a hurting electorate.  I know friends and even some in my own family whose employers took advantage of work choices and conditions for workers were more adversely affected than I think they should have been.  I feel the pendulum was sent too far the other way.

And, yet the bizarre thing is that these conditions still seem to apply even though labor have now been in power for four years and in cohorts with unions.  It seems this is one thing labor have not fixed.  To bring it into balance would be a better thing, but I doubt labor is capable of anything remotely  balanced.

I also think carbon tax and anything AGW will be treated by Aussie voters with the same disdain as Howard's Work Choices in the future.  Even IF there is any truth mixed up in AGW, I think it will be a laughing stock for many years to come.

I think Abbott has a problem with any sort of policies on IR.  I know of one young guy who is still bitter and will never vote for coalition again because of it.  Unfortunately, that's all he can see - he doesn't realise that this labor government could eventually make it difficult to find work anywhere, imo.


----------



## Julia (3 July 2011)

Calliope said:


> Abbott has only himself to blame. There  are plenty of reasons why he should stand up to the imbalances of Fair Work Australia. Gillard and her union cabinet mates have given the unions a free rein, with productivity being the loser.



Couldn't agree more.   He needs to produce some alternative to (a) the government's IR position which most business organisations are complaining about as being unfair and stifling productivity, and (b) to have something positive as a come back to the incessant charges of him wanting to bring back workchoices.  As long as he simply denies any affection for workchoices, he is less than credible.  He needs to cut off his critics with a clear policy for the Coalition.

(And, please, devoted Abbott supporters, don't trot out the line that he has to keep all his brilliant ideas secret until close to the election.  His "nothing but opposition" is wearing thin, imo.)




> I am aware that Abbott is trying to remain a small target, but he will have to step up to the plate sooner or later. He has to be seen to stand for something. At the moment he is gagging his frontbenchers who want to raise the subject.



 True.  The point is made in The Weekend Australian that Malcolm Turnbull was forbidden to speak about the NBN.  Why, for heaven's sake?  Mr Turnbull is articulate and logical on this topic and his appearance in the media on this can only be positive for the party.

I'm as keen as most here to see the end of the current woefully incompetent government, but I've yet to be convinced that Mr Abbott offers much of a replacement.  I'm ready to be convinced otherwise, but it's going to take more than the repeated utterings of a 'great big new tax' to do that.


----------



## Calliope (3 July 2011)

Julia said:


> I'm as keen as most here to see the end of the current woefully incompetent government, but I've yet to be convinced that Mr Abbott offers much of a replacement.  I'm ready to be convinced otherwise, but it's going to take more than the repeated utterings of a 'great big new tax' to do that.




Yes Julia, a large majority of the population are also not convinced that he is PM material yet. The fact that the polls have him on a par in the PM stakes with Australia's worst ever PM should indicate to him that he has been found wanting.


----------



## joea (4 July 2011)

I am wondering if Turnbull has been muzzled because he maybe suggesting better ways to roll out the NBN.
Gillard would soon jump on a good idea and call it her own.

I just saw some of the economic news, and it ain't good.
People keep talking about interest rate rises.
Well I think the rate should be reduced at least 0.25% and the dollar should be devalued somewhat.

joea


----------



## noco (5 July 2011)

Gillard is DUD MARK 2. At least DUD MARK 1 had the courage of his convictions.

DUD MARK 2 changes her mind as often as she changes her n<^kers.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...es-like-the-wind/story-e6frg6zo-1226087525764


----------



## Calliope (5 July 2011)

No.The effect of her carbon tax on temperatures will be diddly squat. The woman is as crazy as a loon. All her brains are in her butt.




> JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, you said that you want the debate to be informed by facts, but twice there Lenore asked you what your advice was on the net effect of our action, taking into account action or lack of action in the rest of the world. Will you provide that fact?
> 
> PM: We’re one of the 20 biggest polluters on the planet. Per head of population, we are the biggest generator of carbon pollution per head of population in the developed world. That means we have to act.
> Is the rest of the world acting? Well, we’ve been through those facts and figures before, and I’m happy to supply them all again, but, yes, the rest of the world is also acting on climate change and we can’t afford to be left behind.



http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/..._wont_tell_you_her_tax_wont_stop_any_warming/


----------



## trainspotter (5 July 2011)

> _Well, we’ve been through those facts and figures before, and I’m happy to supply them all again, but, yes, *the rest of the world* is also acting on climate change and *we can’t afford to be left behind.*_




Pfffffffffffffffffffftttttttttttttttttt !



> But final confirmation came when Russia, Japan and Canada officially told the G8 meeting of the world's leading economies in Deauville, France, at the weekend they would not join a post-Kyoto deal that *does not include emissions reductions from developing countries such as China.*
> 
> US President Barack Obama used the G8 dinner to confirm that like Kyoto Mark 1, the *US is not interested* in what has been seen as a Eurocentric global agreement.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...-to-ross-garnaut/story-e6frg6z6-1226066761712

C'mon boys and girls ......... let's all put our hands in the fire! Those other kids over there did it .......... no wait ........... the smart ones haven't.


----------



## bigdog (8 July 2011)

Australia Post have created and marketed a new stamp displaying a picture of the current Prime Minister of Australia, Ms Gillard. 

The prime minister had requested a recall of the stamps following concerns that they weren’t sticking. 

Australia Post recently suspended a recall of the stamps after the findings of a special Senate Committee were released. 





The Prime Minister was told that the stamp was not sticking to envelopes and the enraged Prime Minister demanded a full investigation. 

After a month of testing and spending of $1.85 million, a special Senate Committee led by the leader of the Greens, Bob Brown, presented the following findings -

1)  The stamp is in perfect order. 
2)  There is nothing wrong with the adhesive. 
3)  People are spitting on the wrong side of the stamp.


----------



## sails (8 July 2011)

LOL Bigdog - however, if they ever did bring out a stamp with Gillard, I don't know how many would buy them.  I would buy stamps in smaller amounts without her picture.  Her fleeting TV appearances before the remote can work it's magic is bad enough...

I think most people despise those who constantly try to deceive others.


----------



## trainspotter (8 July 2011)

OHHHHHHHH MY HOLY AUNT !!!!!!!!!! The government did WHAT ???



> The arrangement is being seen as confirmation that the Government *traded off massive investment in alternative power sources to get Green concessions* on a starting carbon price and on protection of polluting industries.




Read more: http://www.news.com.au/national/lib...me/story-e6frfkw9-1226090637270#ixzz0t4YtOsnF


----------



## springhill (8 July 2011)

She will be remembered forever more as a terrible Minister for Education, and our worst PM ever. What a diabolical sell-out she is, all for the sake of clinging pathetically to power over national interest.


----------



## joea (9 July 2011)

noco said:


> Does anyone really know what this Prime Minister of ours stands for?
> 
> I do know one thing, and that is, she does not appear to know what she is doing or does she?
> 
> ...




Hi.
Of all the posts that I have read, plus all the articles from the media, the above post is so accurate "it's not funny".
On Sunday we are going to hear something about the carbon tax.
Will it be the complete story?
Will it be a front for another hidden agenda?

If I was to choose what the hidden agenda was, I would say that at the end of the Gillard government, the tax, come grants, come rebate, come money management of the Australian government will be in such a mess that it will take some time to unravel.

I think the hidden agenda is to destroy the audit system of government  money management. Gillard has money going here, going there, plucking billions from nowhere to chuck somewhere.

Does anybody actually believe that Swan understands the money trail?
Please don't answer yes.
It will never be "all revieled".
joea


----------



## noco (9 July 2011)

joea said:


> Hi.
> Of all the posts that I have read, plus all the articles from the media, the above post is so accurate "it's not funny".
> On Sunday we are going to hear something about the carbon tax.
> Will it be the complete story?
> ...




Wow! what a wonderful Prime Minister and Treasurer we have!!!!!!!!

How generous of her!!!!!!

They are giving us more compensation than we need for the extra cost the carbon dioxide tax is going to cost the working famlies and pensioners. All sounds good, but it will be just another BIG GILLARD LIE!!!!!!

But can you believe what this deceitful liar of a Prime Minister says?

"There will be NO carbon dioxide tax under the government I lead".

How can anyone now trust her!!

How can anyone take her word that she will give more than is needed. The woman is SOOOOOO DESPERATE.

She has no credibility left  what so ever. 








http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/gillards-hanging-out-at-the-last-chance-saloon/


----------



## sails (9 July 2011)

Below is a picture of arrogance of the woman who wants to shove her nose in our faces courtesy of free TV time to tell us about a tax which the majority absolutely don't think is right for Australia.

Just look at the falling polls from Morgan since Gillard announced her pathetic carbon tax where 2pp is: L-NP 58.5% (up 4% over the last two weeks) with a clear winning lead over the ALP 41.5% (down 4%).  Labor primary is 31.5% and LNP is 49%.  The website shows how the polls have consistently been going against labor since the carbon tax announcement in February.  What part of NO doesn't she understand.

Roy Morgan Poll June 25/26 & July 2/3 2011





_"A fight to the death in the arena of public opinion" ... Prime Minister Julia Gillard turns 
her back on Opposition Leader Tony Abbott on 7 July 2011. Photo: Andrew Meares_

Source: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/po...ning-politics-upside-down-20110708-1h6p5.html


----------



## sails (9 July 2011)

Doesn't Gillard get it that many are terrified about anything she touches?  It's got nothing to do with Abbott - has everything to do with the daily news of her seemingly never ending bungles:



> But as well as Abbott's untiring anti-tax campaign, Sunday will also mark the start of the Greens' efforts to differentiate themselves from Labor, with claims about what they achieved in the carbon tax deal.




Full story from The Age by Lenore Taylor: Climate policy turning politics upside down


----------



## Julia (9 July 2011)

noco said:


> They are giving us more compensation than we need for the extra cost the carbon dioxide tax is going to cost the working famlies and pensioners.



How do we know this?  Today's "The Australian" suggests the compensation paid to pensioners and retirees will be the massive sum of $210!  Will we be shown the modelling that demonstrates how much the tax will push up all prices for all consumers, and then that the 'compensation' does actually compensate for this?

I wouldn't be surprised if they've just picked what they consider to be an affordable figure and tossed it out there, on the basis that "if we tell people they're going to be over-compensated, they'll believe that."

The next lot of polls will be interesting.

(This is an aside and not relevant necessarily to the thread, but I was just polled today by an organisation called "Q & A Research", which asked some incredibly loaded questions in a very badly designed questionnaire clearly designed to elicit responses critical of the LNP in NSW.)


----------



## drsmith (9 July 2011)

sails said:


> Below is a picture of arrogance of the woman who wants to shove her nose in our faces courtesy of free TV time to tell us about a tax which the majority absolutely don't think is right for Australia.
> 
> Just look at the falling polls from Morgan since Gillard announced her pathetic carbon tax where 2pp is: L-NP 58.5% (up 4% over the last two weeks) with a clear winning lead over the ALP 41.5% (down 4%).  Labor primary is 31.5% and LNP is 49%.  The website shows how the polls have consistently been going against labor since the carbon tax announcement in February.  What part of NO doesn't she understand.
> 
> ...



What one wit had to say on Andrew Bolt's Blog,



> Its not that Julia is being rude, its just that she would like to see where the knives are coming from ..




http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...comments/and_not_just_on_abbott/#commentsmore

It illustrates the contempt she has for others as a whole.


----------



## Logique (9 July 2011)

sails said:


> ...Full story from The Age by Lenore Taylor: Climate policy turning politics upside down



The article opens with what seems reasonable commentary, but returns to the company line in the final paragraphs. Knows which side her bread is buttered does Lenore. Her place on The Insiders couch is safe for another week.


----------



## Julia (9 July 2011)

Logique said:


> The article opens with what seems reasonable commentary, but returns to the company line in the final paragraphs. Knows which side her bread is buttered does Lenore. Her place on The Insiders couch is safe for another week.



I had exactly the same thought.  Started reading it and thought 'wow, this is a turn around for Ms Taylor', but she soon reverted to character.

Still, we should perhaps be encouraged that she has even made any slight noises which represent objectivity.


----------



## trainspotter (9 July 2011)

She has form and the Australian people will be next on Sunday.


----------



## noco (9 July 2011)

Julia said:


> How do we know this?  Today's "The Australian" suggests the compensation paid to pensioners and retirees will be the massive sum of $210!  Will we be shown the modelling that demonstrates how much the tax will push up all prices for all consumers, and then that the 'compensation' does actually compensate for this?
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised if they've just picked what they consider to be an affordable figure and tossed it out there, on the basis that "if we tell people they're going to be over-compensated, they'll believe that."
> 
> ...




Julia, the statement on receiving more compensation than required was made by both Gillard and Swan on TV today. They way I understood their message was pensioners would be better of by $210 over and above the basis of compensation. I stand corrected if I am wrong.

Tomorrow will reveal all.


----------



## noco (10 July 2011)

noco said:


> Julia, the statement on receiving more compensation than required was made by both Gillard and Swan on TV today. They way I understood their message was pensioners would be better of by $210 over and above the basis of compensation. I stand corrected if I am wrong.
> 
> Tomorrow will reveal all.




Julia, here is a link confirming what I observed on TV regarding the extra $210 pensioners will receive over and above the amount they would have been compensated for the extra cost of living created by Gillards carbon dioxide tax.

But of course you have a different interpretation to me, but that is the way I read it.



http://www.couriermail.com.au/money...rcompensate-them/story-fn3hskur-1226090990799


----------



## Julia (10 July 2011)

Don't know, noco.  The comments following the article seem to echo my interpretation but those people could be wrong too.
She is today quoting the cost of the tax as $10 per week.  So compensation would need to be over $500.  $210 certainly won't cut it, so you're probably correct with your interpretation.
I don't have time right now to look, but no doubt the detail is available somewhere.


----------



## joea (12 July 2011)

Home at the Lodge.

"Well Tim my polling is not going so well at the moment, do you think it's because of the Carbon Tax?

"I am not sure Julia dear".

"What do you think I should try to do Tim?

"Well Julia we could dye your hair to another colour."

"What colour do you  suggest Tim"

"Any colour but red or green Julia"

Joea


----------



## noco (16 July 2011)

OMG. I think JU-LIAR has been taking acting lessons from Cate Blanchett. 

What a fake this socialist left wing Prime Minister has turned out to be.

Surely she did not think voters would fall those 'CROCODILE TEARS'. 



http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...reat-performance/story-e6frerff-1226095517015


----------



## wayneL (16 July 2011)

noco said:


> OMG. I think JU-LIAR has been taking acting lessons from Cate Blanchett.
> 
> What a fake this socialist left wing Prime Minister has turned out to be.
> 
> ...




I think the tears are genuine - "nobody loves me and I'm going to be thrashed at an early election" WAAAAAAHHHHHHH!!!


----------



## joea (16 July 2011)

Hi.
I know a number of people will see through the charade of tears, but I wonder how many don't.

I think its summed up in the Australian.

"THE BEGINNING OF LABOR'S END.

I think Australia needs  it to happen before Christmas, then reduce rates and devalue our dollar slightly.

joea ( the back yard economist from Miallo Nth. Qld.)


----------



## noco (16 July 2011)

joea said:


> Hi.
> I know a number of people will see through the charade of tears, but I wonder how many don't.
> 
> I think its summed up in the Australian.
> ...




Joe, you are spot on "THE BEGINNING OF LABOR'S  END".

The Greens have all but destroyed Labor who knew not what the Greens were capable of doing. Labor has only got theselves to blame.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ng-of-labors-end/story-e6frgd0x-1226095563597


----------



## Calliope (16 July 2011)

*Gillard fiddles with the Carbon Tax while the World economy burns.* Somebody should whisper into her shell pink ear *"It's the economy, stupid"*

*World holds it's breath as US plays with fire on debt and default.*



> *ON August 2, a deadline little more than two weeks away, the US government faces a default for the first time in history on its $US14.3 trillion ($13.3 trillion) debt.
> 
> President Barack Obama is staring down Republican Party leaders in congress over a looming government debt crisis that threatens to throw the US economy and others around the world into turmoil.
> 
> "Don't call my bluff," the Democrat President warned Republican negotiators at the end of one round of tense negotiations at the White House cabinet table this week. That's just what some Republicans want to do. Political brinkmanship does not get bigger than this. While Rome burns, the scene in Washington could soon be worse.*




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...debt-and-default/story-e6frg926-1226095583583


----------



## medicowallet (16 July 2011)

Calliope said:


> *Gillard fiddles with the Carbon Tax while the World economy burns.* Somebody should whisper into her shell pink ear *"It's the economy, stupid"*
> 
> *World holds it's breath as US plays with fire on debt and default.*
> 
> ...




"but the cost of inaction is higher than the cost of action now"

or some other crazy statement.

Welcome to the real world people. We are in for extremely interesting times and YOU gave the greens the balance of power.

I hope Wayne Swann has made allowances in his budget for extra seats in the centrelink queue.


----------



## Julia (16 July 2011)

wayneL said:


> I think the tears are genuine - "nobody loves me and I'm going to be thrashed at an early election" WAAAAAAHHHHHHH!!!



 I don't even think they're genuine on that basis.  More likely imo that she was responding to Graeme Richardson telling her she needed to 'show a softer side'.

The speech was embarrassing and the tears as fake as the 'fake Julia' we saw some months ago.

This is the sort of trouble you create for yourself when you act in opposition to your core beliefs.  She sacrificed her previously sensible approach of obtaining community consensus, and waiting until/if the rest of the world were to act,  on the altar of doing what the Greens told her she had to in order to get their backing.

As a consequence she has ever since come across as insincere, unconvinced in any real sense.  The electorate can see this.  They are not stupid, as Ms Gillard seems to believe.


----------



## nulla nulla (16 July 2011)

Julia said:


> I don't even think they're genuine on that basis.  More likely imo that she was responding to Graeme Richardson telling her she needed to 'show a softer side'.
> 
> The speech was embarrassing and the tears as fake as the 'fake Julia' we saw some months ago.
> 
> ...




And of course the alterantive, Tony Abbott, is so much better. Here is a link to todays Sydney Morning Herald letters to the editor where some of the puplic have written in with their views on Mr Abbott,

http://www.smh.com.au/national/lett...hat-we-surrender-our-will-20110715-1hi3w.html

I thought this one particularly worth a read...

"When a politician runs his own country down for the sake of his own ambitions, it is leadership at its worst. The Abbott effect is being felt all across Australia as a torrent of constant and unthinking negativism has dragged down our nation.

While we have one of the healthiest economies in the world, with most of our citizens still earning what they did before the GFC, still in their own homes and with our banks still in good shape, our retailers are slowly dying.

People are afraid, the Abbott effect has stripped the confidence out of our nation as he rips down anything and everything that stands in his way to power. Tony Abbott needs to get off the bike, stop looking at himself in the mirror, and see what his negativity is doing to our country."

Reminds me of the old axiom "We have nothing to fear but fear itself"  and now ofcourse..Mr Abbott.


----------



## springhill (16 July 2011)

nulla nulla said:


> And of course the alterantive, Tony Abbott, is so much better. Here is a link to todays Sydney Morning Herald letters to the editor where some of the puplic have written in with their views on Mr Abbott,
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/national/lett...hat-we-surrender-our-will-20110715-1hi3w.html
> 
> ...




Big whoop-di-whoop, that's the opinion of one person.
Letters to the West Australian this week were something like 70% against carbon tax and only 20% for, according to The West.

Gillard should look at what her putting us at a competitive disadvantage is doing to our country.

Simple fact: Gillard wants to export our dollars offshore in the form of 10% handout to the UN and purchasing overseas carbon credits. Abbott wants to keep our dollars here.


----------



## sptrawler (16 July 2011)

It's O.K saying Abbott is being negative, however maybe Julia and the Labor party could try and do somthing that will bring about a positive outcome.
Jeez give me a break, tell me one thing in the last four years that has had a positive outcome.
What an absolute joke, if Julia , Wayne and Bob are so pleased with their achievements they should have no problems going to the polls, that would shut Tony up.
The only reason they are going to drag out an election to 2013, if they can, is to try and lock in a better pension for themselves.
I loved the way Julia got the independents on national t.v swearing their allegiance  to the carbon tax, thats got them locked into the same fate as Labor and the Greens.
The next election will certainly rewrite the record books, it will be another one of those once in a lifetime events we seem to be having. At least it will give us something to tell our grandkids about.


----------



## joea (16 July 2011)

Hi.
At the local vegie store ( cane farmer diversfied) I had a discussion with a pensioner who was born in Germany.
Gillard is her friend she said, she is giving her an extra $210 dollars a year.
She pays $110 a quarter for electricity and everone can do the same.

No logic could convince her that she is a single person and others have family's.
She says that is irrelevant, we must save the planet like Europe is doing.
She say's listen to Gillard and Brown and we will save the planet.

Well I went home and on the way, I took out my frustations on my cap, and now have to buy a new one.
It did not taste very nice.

joea


----------



## Julia (16 July 2011)

nulla nulla said:


> And of course the alterantive, Tony Abbott, is so much better. Here is a link to todays Sydney Morning Herald letters to the editor where some of the puplic have written in with their views on Mr Abbott,



Why oh why, would anyone draw an automatic assumption that by criticising one leader we are therefore positively endorsing another?
Completely faulty reasoning.



> I thought this one particularly worth a read...
> 
> "When a politician runs his own country down for the sake of his own ambitions, it is leadership at its worst. The Abbott effect is being felt all across Australia as a torrent of constant and unthinking negativism has dragged down our nation.
> 
> ...



What a joke.  A Labor voter trying to blame the opposition for the failure of the government.  That you can offer this as being worth reading is quite astonishing.



springhill said:


> Big whoop-di-whoop, that's the opinion of one person.
> Letters to the West Australian this week were something like 70% against carbon tax and only 20% for, according to The West.
> 
> Gillard should look at what her putting us at a competitive disadvantage is doing to our country.
> ...



Exactly.  This is the reason for voter discontent and to try to blame the Opposition simply draws further attention to the desperation of the government and its supporters.


----------



## sails (16 July 2011)

It seems that labor/greens just don't get what's pulling them down in the polls and they continue the same nonsense day after day.  And then they blame Abbott.  I think if Gillard blamed the dog for eating her homework, it would be more believable...


----------



## trainspotter (16 July 2011)

This one goes out to Nulla Nulla .........



> The Opposition party's main role in the House is to present arguments against the Government's policies and legislation, and attempt to hold the Government accountable as much as possible by asking questions of importance during Question Time and during debates on legislation .




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_House_of_Representatives

Go and do the research as to how negative Labor was in Opposition from 1996 til 2007.

Last time I looked this is still a democratic country. Gillard keeps complaining about Abbott focusing on her government's incompetence and this is somehow being misconstrued as him being negative ?? 

No seriously .... you are pulling my leg right? 

And retail slump is caused by Tony Abbott doing his job in opposition? WTF ???


----------



## springhill (17 July 2011)

springhill said:


> Big whoop-di-whoop, that's the opinion of one person.
> Letters to the West Australian this week were something like 70% against carbon tax and only 20% for, according to The West.
> 
> Gillard should look at what her putting us at a competitive disadvantage is doing to our country.
> ...






Julia said:


> Exactly.  This is the reason for voter discontent and to try to blame the Opposition simply draws further attention to the desperation of the government and its supporters.




Julia, i am fearing that for the most part the general public is resisting the carbon tax simply because it is a tax, not understanding the intrinsic specifics of it and how it could harm our nation.
I was at a party tonight and many people there were sucked in by the feel-good sense of 'we are doing something for the planet'.
When i started talking about the cold hard facts, ie. how much CO2 emissions humans actually contribute to the atmosphere, the amount of money will flow out of the country in the form of buying carbon credits, the 10% of carbon tax UN donation when major polluting countries aren't paying one cent, the 500 biggest polluters that are bring excluded from the carbon tax for political reasons, the fact the Aus Govt is being excluded from paying carbon tax because it would cost them a fortune and the $4.3 BILLION black hole in treasury figures, you should have seen their re-action.

It is sad that many people will never be fully informed, when 1 hour of proper research on the fors and againsts would make for serious conversation instead of this tripe trotted out in newspapers and internet forums alike across the country.

Wake up people, this is a global agenda, not a government looking after it's own nation. This is bigger than Australia, we are small potatoes.


----------



## Boggo (17 July 2011)

Another little greenie driven tax, this time for home sellers and renters.

$750, how much per hour does this bloody scam work out to ?

Another labour/greenie tax scam


----------



## startrader (17 July 2011)

Boggo said:


> Another little greenie driven tax, this time for home sellers and renters.
> 
> $750, how much per hour does this bloody scam work out to ?
> 
> Another labour/greenie tax scam




Oh my gosh!!  This is getting way beyond a joke.  This can't be for real - homeowners will have to pay $750 to have their house audited to give it a green rating? How can people stand for this absolute nonsense!  This government has got to go NOW!!!!!!


----------



## nulla nulla (17 July 2011)

All of the above is nothing more than I expected but here is another one that puts the whole debacle of the present standards of politics in perspective. Please remember I am posting quotes from letters to the paper. The quotes do not necessarily represent my personal views   .

"If Tony Abbott visits any more fish markets would someone please re-enact the Monty Python fish dance and give him a slap on the side of his head with a giant pike."



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/lett...er-our-will-20110715-1hi3w.html#ixzz1SJNnYel9


----------



## startrader (17 July 2011)

nulla nulla said:


> All of the above is nothing more than I expected but here is another one that puts the whole debacle of the present standards of politics in perspective. Please remember I am posting quotes from letters to the paper. The quotes do not necessarily represent my personal views   .
> 
> "If Tony Abbott visits any more fish markets would someone please re-enact the Monty Python fish dance and give him a slap on the side of his head with a giant pike."
> 
> ...




Really, why would anyone take any notice of letters that are printed in the Herald?  9 out of 10 of them are pro the carbon dioxide tax when opposition to the tax with the general public is at least 60% against, so this newspaper is clearly biased and does not represent the views of the majority of Australians.  I take whatever is printed in that extremely biased newspaper with a grain of salt.


----------



## nulla nulla (17 July 2011)

startrader said:


> Really, why would anyone take any notice of letters that are printed in the Herald?  9 out of 10 of them are pro the carbon dioxide tax when opposition to the tax with the general public is at least 60% against, so this newspaper is clearly biased and does not represent the views of the majority of Australians.  I take whatever is printed in that extremely biased newspaper with a grain of salt.




And of course the Murdock owned Australian is so balanced and neutral. Never a whiff of bias or scandal with Murdocks papers.   News of The World anyone?


----------



## Julia (17 July 2011)

nulla nulla said:


> And of course the Murdock owned Australian is so balanced and neutral. Never a whiff of bias or scandal with Murdocks papers.   News of The World anyone?



 If you have a specific reason to imply that the Australian organisation has engaged in anything untoward, then let's hear it.
If, however, you don't, you need to think seriously about casting such aspersions as you are doing here.


----------



## bandicoot76 (17 July 2011)

nulla nulla said:


> All of the above is nothing more than I expected but here is another one that puts the whole debacle of the present standards of politics in perspective. Please remember I am posting quotes from letters to the paper. The quotes do not necessarily represent my personal views   .
> 
> "If Tony Abbott visits any more fish markets would someone please re-enact the Monty Python fish dance and give him a slap on the side of his head with a giant pike."
> 
> ...




your posts are pointless inane drivel and have no intelligent content


----------



## Logique (17 July 2011)

springhill said:


> ...the cold hard facts, ie. how much CO2 emissions humans actually contribute to the atmosphere, the amount of money will flow out of the country in the form of buying carbon credits, the 10% of carbon tax UN donation when major polluting countries aren't paying one cent, the 500 biggest polluters that are bring excluded from the carbon tax for political reasons, the fact the Aus Govt is being excluded from paying carbon tax...



Springhill, I reckon you're like Brett Burton, a 'Birdman'.  Meanwhile we'll be lucky if we beat Freo today.

Anyway as a sucker for punishment, I tuned into the _Insiders_ this morning. Surprise! It seemed like a balanced panel this time. The concluding montage of cuts from the history of the show was a cracker, and very funny. Julie Bishop's '..you're a naughty boy..' to Kevin Rudd in Question Time was a scream.

Happy birthday Barry Cassidy, and thanks for the show.


----------



## Wysiwyg (17 July 2011)

It is easy to see that politicians in senior positions have no greater intelligence or wisdom. The scatter brains such as Turnbull, Katter and Joyce for example slip through plus the nonsense rantings from Abbot, Gillard and Swan when answering genuine questions of concern is prime example. They talk a lot but say nothing. Theatrical at best.


----------



## noco (17 July 2011)

Laurie Oakes put Gillard through the hoops this morning about her broken promise and how she talked Kevin Rudd out of a double dissolution of parliament in early 2010 and how she persuaded Rudd to dump the carbon tax and ETS before the 2010 election.


http://news.ninemsn.com.au/video.aspx


----------



## sails (17 July 2011)

noco said:


> Laurie Oakes put Gillard through the hoops this morning about her broken promise and how she talked Kevin Rudd out of a double dissolution of parliament in early 2010 and how she persuaded Rudd to dump the carbon tax and ETS before the 2010 election.
> 
> 
> http://news.ninemsn.com.au/video.aspx




But be prepared for much waffle and spin in that patronising voice...


----------



## Calliope (17 July 2011)

nulla nulla said:


> And of course the Murdock owned Australian is so balanced and neutral. Never a whiff of bias or scandal with Murdocks papers.   News of The World anyone?




I was not aware that anyone called "Murdock" owned any  papers in Australia. If it wasn't for the Murdoch papers in Australia , all we would be fed is lies and crap. On the same lines as your posts.

I'm not surprised that Brown and Gillard want to muzzle them. They already have the Fairfax press and the ABC docilely doing their bidding.


----------



## bellenuit (17 July 2011)

noco said:


> Laurie Oakes put Gillard through the hoops this morning ........




It is interesting you should say that.  I tried to listen to the interview at the link you gave, but half way through Julia's first answer I couldn't stand her anymore and exited. But when you say Oakes put her through the hoops, I heard a segment from that interview on ABC News Radio this morning and the segment they played was just an opportunity for Gillard to mouth her usual stuff about being for a cleaner Australia etc.  In fact it seemed like Oakes was not asking anything difficult. 

Why should I be surprised that the ABC chose to omit the meaty stuff and just air the anaemic schoolteacherish crap that she mouths at every opportunity.


----------



## nulla nulla (17 July 2011)

Calliope said:


> I was not aware that anyone called "Murdock" owned any  papers in Australia. If it wasn't for the Murdoch papers in Australia , all we would be fed is lies and crap. On the same lines as your posts.
> 
> I'm not surprised that Brown and Gillard want to muzzle them. They already have the Fairfax press and the ABC docilely doing their bidding.




My apologies to Mr Murdoch and his family for spelling his name wrong.


----------



## noco (17 July 2011)

bellenuit said:


> It is interesting you should say that.  I tried to listen to the interview at the link you gave, but half way through Julia's first answer I couldn't stand her anymore and exited. But when you say Oakes put her through the hoops, I heard a segment from that interview on ABC News Radio this morning and the segment they played was just an opportunity for Gillard to mouth her usual stuff about being for a cleaner Australia etc.  In fact it seemed like Oakes was not asking anything difficult.
> 
> Why should I be surprised that the ABC chose to omit the meaty stuff and just air the anaemic schoolteacherish crap that she mouths at every opportunity.






It was on channel 9 and you can retrieve it on www.ninenews.com.au


----------



## nulla nulla (17 July 2011)

bandicoot76 said:


> your posts are pointless inane drivel and have no intelligent content




Seeing as how the letters to the SMH editer have bought so much cheer and response from the posters to this thread, I thought it appropriate to include one more...

"Dear Tony Abbott, would you please stop flirting with all these minor prophesies like BHP going broke and tell us when the world is going to end."    



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/lett...er-our-will-20110715-1hi3w.html#ixzz1SLUFqRZ7


----------



## nulla nulla (17 July 2011)

And for those that thought that the SMH only printed those letters favourable to the ALP here is one of the unfavourable letters...

"Apparently it's compulsory for Labor prime ministers to cry - about the time they're leaving office. Spare me, Ms Gillard - just come across, at least occasionally, as a real person telling the truth."


Actualy, from memory, Malcol Fraser shed a tear on election night when defeat heralded his time to "leave office".  Must be a trait common among politicians, not just labor. Then again Malcolm isn't very popular these days with the libs is he.



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/lett...er-our-will-20110715-1hi3w.html#ixzz1SLVEVHnv


----------



## wayneL (17 July 2011)

nulla nulla said:


> ...Then again Malcolm isn't very popular these days with the libs is he.




They found out he is a closet Fabian, like Malcom Turnbull.


----------



## IFocus (17 July 2011)

wayneL said:


> They found out he is a closet Fabian, like Malcom Turnbull.





No they found out he had a pulse unlike the current leadership


----------



## springhill (17 July 2011)

IFocus said:


> No they found out he had a pulse unlike the current leadership




IFocus, if Gillard had a pulse or a shred of decency she would listen to the call of the people. Poll after poll after poll is saying 60% against 29% for 11% undecided.
We don't want it.

Over in the West they call Eric Ripper, Mr 1%, don't think that Ms 27% can't go any lower.


----------



## drsmith (17 July 2011)

IFocus said:


> No they found out he had a pulse unlike the current leadership



Any Coalition pulse is being drowned out by the coronaries Labor continues to have.

Labor is now being overwhelmed by the iceberg that is its carbon tax lie. Foolishly, they let the Greens steer them straight into it.

Gillard Labor is finished. The engine room is flooded and the keel of the ship is broken.  It's now only a question of time before the stern disappears below the water. The best Labor can do now is to throw the Greens out of the lifeboats and try to save as much of themselves as they can.


----------



## nulla nulla (17 July 2011)

drsmith said:


> Any Coalition pulse is being drowned out by the coronaries Labor continues to have.
> 
> Labor is now being overwhelmed by the iceberg that is its carbon tax lie. Foolishly, they let the Greens steer them straight into it.
> 
> Gillard Labor is finished. The engine room is flooded and the keel of the ship is broken.  It's now only a question of time before the stern disappears below the water. The best Labor can do now is to throw the Greens out of the lifeboats and try to save as much of themselves as they can.




In the abscence of a bi-election in a non labour stronghold, the current coalition of the ALP & the greens will serve full term. Get used to it.


----------



## wayneL (17 July 2011)

nulla nulla said:


> bi-election




Is that a new PC left wing term for a by-election? :


----------



## sails (17 July 2011)

wayneL said:


> Is that a new PC left wing term for a by-election? :




Perhaps "by" is getting too close to "bye"...


----------



## nulla nulla (17 July 2011)

wayneL said:


> Is that a new PC left wing term for a by-election? :




 Touche..apart from the influence of a "rusty nail", I could  plead that Mr Abbotts desire for a double disolution influenced my spelling. Bi-election.


----------



## Julia (17 July 2011)

noco said:


> Laurie Oakes put Gillard through the hoops this morning about her broken promise and how she talked Kevin Rudd out of a double dissolution of parliament in early 2010 and how she persuaded Rudd to dump the carbon tax and ETS before the 2010 election.
> 
> 
> http://news.ninemsn.com.au/video.aspx



When I go to that link I get stuff about football.  Not that I'm burning to hear Gillard's voice any more than I have to, I guess.


----------



## drsmith (17 July 2011)

Julia said:


> When I go to that link I get stuff about football.  Not that I'm burning to hear Gillard's voice any more than I have to, I guess.



Use the site's internal search using Oakes. It's the first video.

She looks a little under the weather. Must have something to do with the deteriorating political climate she finds herself in.

EDIT:
During that interview, she said she could have taken the poitically easy course.

In declaring no carbon tax during the election campaign, she did.


----------



## drsmith (17 July 2011)

nulla nulla said:


> In the abscence of a bi-election in a non labour stronghold, the current coalition of the ALP & the greens will serve full term. Get used to it.



That so-called coalition is killing Labor.

A more immediate question may be the extent to which elected Labor politicians are prepared to go down with the ship for that coalition, or not.


----------



## nulla nulla (17 July 2011)

drsmith said:


> Use the site's internal search using Oakes. It's the first video.
> 
> She looks a little under the weather. Must have something to do with the deteriorating political climate she finds herself in.
> 
> ...




Maybe she had a "Rusty Nail" as well. One part Drambuie, one part Johny Walker Black and the rest dry ginger (or mixer of your choice).


----------



## noco (17 July 2011)

Julia said:


> When I go to that link I get stuff about football.  Not that I'm burning to hear Gillard's voice any more than I have to, I guess.




Julia, that video has gone off the side. Scroll down to the right further and you will see more videos. Type in Oakes/Gillard interview. It is there.


----------



## drsmith (17 July 2011)

nulla nulla said:


> Maybe she had a "Rusty Nail" as well. One part Drambuie, one part Johny Walker Black and the rest dry ginger (or mixer of your choice).



It may have been doubles after the "nail on the head" summary Laurie Oakes gave near the end of that interview.


----------



## bandicoot76 (17 July 2011)

drsmith said:


> That so-called coalition is killing Labor.
> 
> A more immediate question may be the extent to which elected Labor politicians are prepared to go down with the ship for that coalition, or not.




while ever labor and the union movement continue to be controlled by the fabian socialist agenda they are steering away from the direction (and support) of mainstream australia

 i know hardcore labor die-hards who are totally disillusioned by the direction their beloved party is headed... once they realise the cause perhaps labor can return to its rightful direction.... chiffley style! 

p.s i follow neither labor nor lib/nat... neither subscribe to the pro-libertarian ideology that i support.


----------



## sails (18 July 2011)

From ABC: More pain for Labor in latest poll

Latest Nielsen poll shows labor primary vote down to 26 with a 61:39 2pp in coalition's favour.  Abbott is now leading Gillard as preferred PM by 11 points.  More interesting stats in the article.

It seems the more Gillard puts herself and her tax on TV, the more angry voters are becomming.


----------



## noco (25 July 2011)

My 12 year old grand son is studying endangered species at school and his teacher asked him to name one.

Answer, "JULIA GILLARD".

His father informs me, politics are never discussed at home.

So how much confidence is our illustrious Prime Minister giving to school kids.

My Grand Son lives in Victoria. This is a true story.


----------



## trainspotter (25 July 2011)

Q) Whats the difference between Julia Gillard & Kermit the Frog?

A)  Nothing ... they are both green puppets.


----------



## noco (26 July 2011)

Our Prime Minister has lied so many times before and been found out.

I guess another lie to place in her diary would just about fill the book.

Maybe Kevvie leaked again.



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...tion-carbon-plan/story-fn59niix-1226101633453


----------



## drsmith (30 July 2011)

Whether it's their PM or state premiers, Labor just can't kick the habit.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-07-30/sa-premier-mike-rann-to-be-replaced/2817414

Who's next ?


----------



## Logique (31 July 2011)

noco said:


> Our Prime Minister has lied so many times before and been found out...http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...tion-carbon-plan/story-fn59niix-1226101633453



I wouldn't trust her to mind my shopping trolley at the checkout. Everything she says has to be fact checked.


----------



## joea (31 July 2011)

Logique said:


> I wouldn't trust her to mind my shopping trolley at the checkout. Everything she says has to be fact checked.




Hi.

Why do you think she continues to do it?
Is it because she can get away with it?
Is it because she thinks the PM can say anything to the people?
Or is it because she needs physiological help?

Surely there is a simple reason, or could it be complex?

joea


----------



## Logique (31 July 2011)

Perhaps this might provide a partial explanation Joea?

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...h-scientist-says/story-e6frev20-1226104884753
World we see is make-believe, top British scientist says - From: NewsCore July 30, 2011


----------



## joea (31 July 2011)

Logique said:


> Perhaps this might provide a partial explanation Joea?
> 
> http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...h-scientist-says/story-e6frev20-1226104884753
> World we see is make-believe, top British scientist says - From: NewsCore July 30, 2011




Yep!

I can comprehend that! I see individuals and couples living a dream quite frequently.

But I cannot understand Gillards beliefs, as she speaks on an Australian wide "stage".
I will  quote " Nobody is defeated until they start blaming somebody else".
Obviously Gillard is overdue to be replaced or removed.

Thanks anyway.
joea


----------



## pixel (3 August 2011)




----------



## sails (3 August 2011)

Interesting poll on who is preferred *Labor Leader* from Essential Media.



> 37% of respondents prefer Kevin Rudd as leader of the Labor Party, 12% prefer Julia Gillard and 11% Malcolm Turnbull.
> 
> Among Labor voters, 43% prefer Kevin Rudd and 31% Julia Gillard.




Some interesting figures on the report.  It seems that at 6% of labor voters are not so keen on Turnbull being labor leader, but liberal voters at 17% are quite happy for Turnbull to cross over to labor and be leader...

There were also 28% on average who simply didn't know who would be best for labor leader, but Gillard is not looking good.

http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/essential-report/


----------



## wayneL (3 August 2011)

I reckon Labor is far too right wing for Mal; perhaps the Greens would be a better fit. :


----------



## joea (3 August 2011)

Hi.
Its interesting that Simon Cream's name has come up afew times since the weekend.
It appears the Liberals think it will be him.
The Liberal guy in Cairns was praising him on the radio today. He commented that you can actually talk to him and have a conversation.
Interesting! very interesting!
joea


----------



## sails (3 August 2011)

Joea, I noticed that Crean wasn't on this poll by essential media.  Maybe Crean is the libs idea for labor leadership much like labor seems to want Turnbull but not for themselves...

And Gillard is not inspiring confidence even with her own voters (however many are left, I don't know).


----------



## Julia (3 August 2011)

joea said:


> Hi.
> Its interesting that Simon Cream's name has come up afew times since the weekend.
> It appears the Liberals think it will be him.
> The Liberal guy in Cairns was praising him on the radio today. He commented that you can actually talk to him and have a conversation.
> ...



 I can't see that they could go back to Simon Crean.  He had his go and was a failure.
How stupid would they look to bring him back again!

Yes, he may well be better than either Gillard or Swan, but they will not see that as being the point.  If they behaved logically, they'd have recommissioned Nauru instead of getting sucked into this ridiculous deal with Malaysia.


----------



## sptrawler (3 August 2011)

I think the Libs would love to have Crean back, he wasn't a top performer. 
There is no way they will dump Gillard, that would be admitting they are useless( even though everybody knows it).
No I think they will stumble on to the next election, unless one of the independents wants to save their own skin.


----------



## noco (9 August 2011)

Poor Juliar, she keeps moving backwards after promising everybody she would move forward.

Ithink her clunker has only one gear. REVERSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...voters-stay-cool/story-fn59niix-1226111309260


----------



## sails (21 August 2011)

Convoy of no confidence rolling into Canberra tomorrow morning.




And a clip of their song:


----------



## Logique (22 August 2011)

noco said:


> Poor Juliar, she keeps moving backwards after promising everybody she would move forward. I think her clunker has only one gear. REVERSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...voters-stay-cool/story-fn59niix-1226111309260



Moving Backwards Together. Been that way for some time.


----------



## Julia (22 August 2011)

If reports on ABC Radio are correct, the convoy is somewhat smaller than expected, i.e. about 800 rather than the two or three thousand suggested.


----------



## Calliope (22 August 2011)

Julia said:


> If reports on ABC Radio are correct, the convoy is somewhat smaller than expected, i.e. about 800 rather than the two or three thousand suggested.




I have very little confidence in the "Convoy of No Confidence" being seen as anything more than a stunt.


----------



## Julia (22 August 2011)

Agree.  I suppose it's an expression of their unhappiness but it could never have been expected to actually effect any changes in government policy.


----------



## noco (31 August 2011)

What next will this incompetent Prime Minister of ours try, just to cling to power.

This case of trying to silence the media is becoming more socialistic by the day. This is the sort of tactics used in Communist regimes and dictatorships.

Will somebody tell Julia Gillard Australia is a democracy and we believe in fredom of speech. "If it is getting too hot in the kitchen she should get out".

Make sure you read the 500 odd comments that goes with this link. 




http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...ers_an_inquiry_that_could_muzzle_her_critics/


----------



## noco (6 September 2011)

Going on today's poll fewer and fewer voters have confidence in our fearless socilaist left wing leader. 

Just waiting for the Labor Party implosion..........days?,,,,,,,,weeks?????????? Won't be long.




http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...rd-lows-newspoll/story-e6freonf-1226130134737


----------



## Aussiejeff (6 September 2011)

noco said:


> Going on today's poll fewer and fewer voters have confidence in our fearless socilaist left wing leader.
> 
> Just waiting for the Labor Party implosion..........days?,,,,,,,,weeks?????????? *Won't be long*.
> 
> ...




Nah. The current Labor noddies (both sexes) are all "straw men" (ie - gutless). Party unity is more important to them than what's good for the nation. Don't hold your breath too long!


----------



## noco (14 September 2011)

How smart is our Prime Minister? 

Just got to love this link.



http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai..._of_these_statements_are_no_longer_operative/


----------



## Happy (14 September 2011)

Those spinels power hungry currently in power will do anything to last the distance.
They have no shame and not enough dignity to acknowledge it and call it a day.

Yet time and time again Labor gets to power, to blow the accumulated wealth and throw away money as there is no tomorrow.

And more dole-for life individuals we have the more votes they will have.


----------



## drsmith (14 September 2011)

noco said:


> How smart is our Prime Minister?
> 
> Just got to love this link.
> 
> ...



There are some gems in there.



> .....when we have a deep and lasting community concensus to do it and I don't believe we have that lasting and deep community concensus.




She could always say she was four short at the time of that statement, Bob Brown, Tony windsor, Rob Oakshott and Andrew Wilkie.

Everbody is equal, but some are more equal than others. That's how history will judge her.


----------



## Julia (14 September 2011)

Did anyone watch Ms Gillard interviewed on 7.30 this evening?   She seems to be becoming even worse, especially in the face of some more than usually aggressive questioning from Chris Urhlman.
Does she ever, I wonder, watch her own interviews and actually get how utterly patronising her manner is?
Just embarrassing.


----------



## Logique (15 September 2011)

I've reached the point where I can't sit through these interviews. Can't bear to see the prosperity and reputation of an entire nation subverted by personal ambition, inflexible ideology and sectional interest. 

Of course we've been collectively a little cruel to this PM, and the Labor Party must shoulder more of the blame than they have to date, but if you stand for PM it comes with the territory. How much did John Howard cop, and still copping from the _illuminati_ of the Left!

As for Paul Barry on Q&A and subsequently elsewhere, wanting an examination of the media, well let's include The Age, The Sydney Morning Herald, and ABC Radio and ABC Television in that shall we. Be careful what you wish for mate.


----------



## joea (15 September 2011)

Julia said:


> Did anyone watch Ms Gillard interviewed on 7.30 this evening?   She seems to be becoming even worse, especially in the face of some more than usually aggressive questioning from Chris Urhlman.
> Does she ever, I wonder, watch her own interviews and actually get how utterly patronising her manner is?
> Just embarrassing.




Julia it maybe  embarrassing, but wait until the next state, then federal election and you will really see embarrassing.
joea


----------



## Surly (16 September 2011)

Which State is next due to hold an election?

cheers
Surly


----------



## Julia (16 September 2011)

Surly said:


> Which State is next due to hold an election?
> 
> cheers
> Surly




Queensland is due early 2012 so probably next.


----------



## Logique (19 September 2011)

Bolt is somewhat revisionist here. There was a time when he was mightily impressed by the Melbourne based Gillard, even 'a little in love' with her. For my part, since the ill fated Medicare Gold, and when her (then) chum Mark Latham was dumped, only to see Gillard emerge as the deputy to Kim Beazley, my opinion hasn't changed. 



> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/
> ...Take Graham Richardson’s analysis now of the woman cheered by so many in the media as our first female prime minister - a symbol whose past failures and lack of successes somehow seemed of little consequence at the time:…
> 
> ...he insists Labor did not underestimate the electorate’s revulsion at the axing of Rudd. There was only a ‘‘gross overestimation of Gillard’s ability‘’.
> ...


----------



## sails (19 September 2011)

Logique - Richardson's sums labor's disappointment in Gillard poignantly with their:

*"gross overestimation of Gillard’s ability".*

I think we all thought it couldn't get much worse than Rudd - and obviously the labor power brokers thought the same.  But if labor had lost it's way then, it is falling off a cliff now while Gillard is shouting "I'm the Proime Minister of Ostralia and this is the roight thing to do".

And I have found Bolt rarely to be partisan.  It seems he is content to try and keep governments accountable and somewhat honest.  I never heard a labor support complain about him when the Murdoch media were rightly giving the majority a voice over work choices.  But now that the majority are fed up with this minority government, they want to silence the same media who gave the people voice in 2007.  


Here is a list of labor's lemons which came via email:


Subject: *The Top 50 Labor Lemons - so far!*


 1.. Carbon Tax - "There will be no carbon tax under the Government I lead."

2.. NBN - $50 billion but no cost-benefit analysis

3.. Building the Education Revolution - The school halls fiasco

4.. Home Insulation Plan (Pink Batts) - Dumped

5. Citizens Assembly - Dumped

6.. Cash for Clunkers - Dumped

7.. Hospital Reform - Nothing

8.. Digital set-top boxes - Cheaper at Harvey Norman

9.. Emissions Trading Scheme - Abandoned

10. Mining Tax - Continuing uncertainty for our miners

11. Livestock export ban to Indonesia - Over-reaction

12. Detention Centres - Riots & cost blow-outs

13. East Timor 'solution' - Announced before agreed

14. Malaysia 'solution' - Only just agreed, scuttled by High Court.

15. Manus Island 'solution' - On the back burner

16.. Computers in Schools - $1.4 billion blow out; less than half delivered

17. Cutting Red Tape - 12,835 new regulations, only 58 repealed

18. Asia Pacific Community - Another expensive Rudd frolic. Going nowhere

19. Green Loans Program - Abandoned. Only 3.5% of promised loans delivered

20. Solar Homes & Communities plan - Shut down after $534 million blow out

21. Green Car Innovation Fund - Abandoned

22. Solar Credits Scheme - Scaled back

23. Green Start Program - Scrapped

24. Retooling for Climate Change Program - Abolished

25. Childcare Centres - Abandoned. 260 promised, only 38 delivered

26. Take a "meat axe"' to the Public Service - 24,000 more public servants

27. Murray Darling Basin Plan - back to the drawing board

28. 2020 Summit - Meaningless talk fest

29. Tax Summit - Deferred and downgraded

30. Population Policy - Sets no targets

31. Fuel Watch - Abandoned

32. Grocery Choice - Abandoned

33. $900 Stimulus cheques - Sent to dead people and overseas residents

34. Foreign Policy - In turmoil with Rudd running riot

35. National Schools Solar Program - Closing two years early

36. Solar Hot Water Rebate - Abandoned

37. Oceanic Viking - Caved in

38. GP Super Clinics - 64 promised, only 11 operational

39. Defence Family Healthcare Clinics - 12 promised, none delivered

40. Trade Training Centres - 2650 promised, 70 operational

41. Bid for UN Security Council seat - An expensive Rudd frolic

42.. MySchool Website - Revamped but problems continue

43. National Curriculum - States in uproar

44. Small Business Superannuation Clearing House - 99% of small businesses reject it

45. Indigenous Housing Program - way behind schedule

46. Rudd Bank - Went nowhere

47. Using cheap Chinese fabrics for Defence uniforms - Ditched

48. Innovation Ambassadors Program - junked

49. Six Submarines - none operational

50. Debt limit to be increased to $250 billion - to pay for all of this and much more​


----------



## noco (16 October 2011)

How can anyone have one shrewd of confidence in Julia Gillard when half of her own cabinet ministers don't?

It is time for her to resign. Where does the Governor General fit into all this mess. Surely her son-in-law is keeping her abreast as to what is going on.

If Gillard does not resign, she should be sacked for incompetence.


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/mo...s-cabinet-crisis/story-fn7x8me2-1226167569620


----------



## Julia (16 October 2011)

This, from the comments following noco's link, pretty much expresses the frustration, disgust and fury much of the electorate is feeling:



> What could one expect, labor had Rudd drive it to a nearly unheard electoral defeat after one term, followed by gillard driving labor in to the ground. Now we hear that Rudd supports gillard in her decision not to use Nauru. has labor gone barking MAD honestly. Malaysia only had 800 person transfer thenwas off, and was inconsistent with Gillards clearly and often stated requirements for the UN conventions to be signed. Forget cabinet solidarity forget cabinet confidentiality how about running the country as per the mandate given to you!!!! stop lying, stop trying to spin everything and most of all stop telling us we dont get things such as the carbon tax we understand we just dont want it. is everyone in the ALP deaf or just stupid! look at the figures 70% of Australia don't want you!!!!!!!!!!




Looks as if Kevin is up to his old ways of leaking cabinet information.  No doubt now that he's positioning himself to return to the leadership.

How anyone can so quickly forget how unbearably arrogant and dismissive he was, how utterly consumed by hubris, is quite beyond me.  The notion that he will come back is just awful, awful, awful.


----------



## noco (27 October 2011)

I don't think Ms Gillard knows which way to go. She is like a mother hen with 12 misbehaved chickens.
I would really like to know what other countries think of her!!!!!!!!



http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/opinion/gillard-character-crisis/story-e6frerdf-1226177690280


----------



## noco (1 November 2011)

How can one have confidence this inept Prime Minister of ours to avert the 'shut down' of Qantas as she should have.

It all could have been avoided with true leadership. As the link states, Hawke and Keating would have acted immediately to avoid such a shamble.


http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...nt_failed_to_lead_and_then_tried_to_cover_up/


----------



## JTLP (2 November 2011)

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/mo...or-rates-cut-joy/story-fn7x8me2-1226183012125

Vintage Labor government. I laugh so much I hear talk of interest rates and ra ra ra. Seriously these guys have to go...


----------



## IFocus (2 November 2011)

JTLP said:


> http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/mo...or-rates-cut-joy/story-fn7x8me2-1226183012125
> 
> Vintage Labor government. I laugh so much I hear talk of interest rates and ra ra ra. Seriously these guys have to go...





Interest rates are always lower under Coalition governments............


----------



## moXJO (2 November 2011)

IFocus said:


> Interest rates are always lower under Coalition governments............




Not true, they are not the ones driving sentiment into the toilet. Labor is best at stuffing up the show


----------



## Knobby22 (15 November 2011)

*David Cameron imitates Julia Gillard*

Needs no introduction

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-11-15/david-cameron-imitates-julia-gillard/3667082


----------



## Julia (15 November 2011)

*Re: David Cameron imitates Julia Gillard*

Thanks, Knobby.


----------



## DocK (15 November 2011)

*Re: David Cameron imitates Julia Gillard*

Not a bad attempt at the accent -  and about time!  If the royal family can adjust to the present day, why can't the Catholic Church?


----------



## noco (11 December 2011)

With all of Gillard's broken promises, it makes one think, how can she be more popular than Abbott.

It is good to note Abbott is standing firm on his pre-election policies.

The comments to this link confirms who should be on top of the popularity contest.

It is an easy choice. Do you prefer a leader who is honest and commited or one who has lied, is so dishonest and wasted so much of tax payers money? 

Our economy may be in good shape, but how better could it have been without all the stuff ups of this Green/Labor socialist government.



http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai..._promise_should_go_against_an_mps_conscience/


----------



## Eager (11 December 2011)

noco said:


> Our economy may be in good shape, but how better could it have been without all the stuff ups of this Green/Labor socialist government.



Probably better than under a National/Liberal fascist government! 

Sorry, I apologise; of course Howard's War Chest would have still beeen intact, there would have been no Stimulus Package, and we would have still been in recession - no doubt preferable to you.

There would have been no Pink Batts scheme, where liberal leaning rogue small businesses would have sprung up to rip off the country and kill people along the way by employing untrained slaves, as is their bent.

There wouldn't have been a Pollution Tax (admittedly poorly named as a Carbon Tax) to make people think that pollution is actually a bad thing, and that we can't continually keep trashing the planet for comparitively short-term monetary gain.

Our economy IS in great shape, so why whinge?


----------



## Julia (11 December 2011)

Eager said:


> Sorry, I apologise; of course Howard's War Chest would have still beeen intact, there would have been no Stimulus Package, and we would have still been in recession - no doubt preferable to you.



What did all the money spent on stimulus actually achieve?  It just allowed the government to claim they had averted recession because we did not actually experience the technical two quarters of 'negative growth'  (such a euphemistic phrase!).  It was political more than anything else.

The economy is now experiencing what is effectively a delayed reaction to the GFC, i.e. the artificial stimulus of people gettng $900 cheques, the wasted funds on the pink batts etc etc have largely finished, exposing the economy to simple reality.

So the budget is in deficit for what exactly?

If more businesses, and on a global perspective banks, had been allowed to fail, perhaps the world would not be facing the imminent day of reckoning that is coming in a much larger proportion. 



> There wouldn't have been a Pollution Tax (admittedly poorly named as a Carbon Tax) to make people think that pollution is actually a bad thing, and that we can't continually keep trashing the planet for comparitively short-term monetary gain.



If it had actually been a tax on pollution in the true sense of the word, rather than a tax on carbon dioxide, I reckon the electorate at large would have got behind it.
But most Australians are smart enough to know when they're being had and when a tax is simply a political move in order to appease the dreaded Greens who are keeping the Prime Minister in power.


----------



## Julia (11 December 2011)

noco said:


> With all of Gillard's broken promises, it makes one think, how can she be more popular than Abbott.



Noco, one day you're going to have to just accept that many people simply do not like Tony Abbott.  They see him as populist in the extreme, willing to change his views according to whom he is speaking to at the time or what question he is answering.  He has had so many changes of policy it's clear he is not a politician of conviction, totally unlike John Howard who was always clear about what he stood for.



> It is good to note Abbott is standing firm on his pre-election policies.



If he thought there was a political advantage to changing any of his policies, he'd do this in a heartbeat.



> It is an easy choice. Do you prefer a leader who is honest and commited or one who has lied, is so dishonest and wasted so much of tax payers money?



Might be an easy choice for a committed conservative such as yourself, noco, but not for most people, who largely appear to regard the choice as being about the least worst alternative.


----------



## joea (12 December 2011)

Julia said:


> Noco, one day you're going to have to just accept that many people simply do not like Tony Abbott.




I believe the voters may soon (or have), seen what Gillard is really like.
She is attempting to tax us to death with  federal taxes that cloud over the state taxes.

There is a current state tax for everything she is attempting to do. She wants two bites out of the same pie.

Gillard knows she has a fight on her hands over taxes as more states change to coalition.

Latest poll
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...ead-of-reshuffle/story-fn3dxity-1226219483996

joea


----------



## noco (12 December 2011)

Julia said:


> Noco, one day you're going to have to just accept that many people simply do not like Tony Abbott.  They see him as populist in the extreme, willing to change his views according to whom he is speaking to at the time or what question he is answering.  He has had so many changes of policy it's clear he is not a politician of conviction, totally unlike John Howard who was always clear about what he stood for.
> 
> 
> If he thought there was a political advantage to changing any of his policies, he'd do this in a heartbeat.
> ...




Well Julia, with the gloss now gone off the Queen's visit, the Obama visit, CHOGM in Perth, the APEC meeting in Hawaii and the G20 meeting Julia Gillard's 'shoe shine' has gone and we are now back to reality as the latest Neilson poll indicates.

Primary vote back down to 29%
Abbott leads Gillard in the popularity stakes 46 to 42
Two party preferred 57 to 43%

You state Abbott changes his mind as to whom he speaks. What are you referring to here and do you have a link to back up your statement?

You also state many people do not like Tony Abbott. Once again, and I have mentioned this before, Abbott does not have the charisma and the sex appeal to many women. Don't worry about what he stands for or how efficient and effective he is. He must be doing something right to have Gillard and her inept government in this position. If he had a "CLARKE GABLE" or "PIERCE BROSNAN" lmage his ratings would go sky high. Maybe Julia, you and many other women should accept the image Abbott portrays and allow him to prove himself if gains the opportunity, then you will have the opportunity to criticize or praise him at will and I may well be there with you if he does wrong. FCS give him a break.

There is a very good posting #1003 on this thread listing the failings, stuff ups and back flips by Julia Gillard. Perhaps you shoud read and refresh your memory as to how bad she and her government has been.

As to labelling me as a committed conservative, I guess you are working on pure assumption and would have no idea what I have followed or voted for in the past and it is me to know and you to find out.



http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...ead-of-reshuffle/story-e6freooo-1226219501664


----------



## Julia (12 December 2011)

joea said:


> I believe the voters may soon (or have), seen what Gillard is really like.
> She is attempting to tax us to death with  federal taxes that cloud over the state taxes.
> 
> There is a current state tax for everything she is attempting to do. She wants two bites out of the same pie.



Agree.  And the electorate is well aware of this.

And noco, it's not me you need to convince.  I will without question be voting for Mr Abbott and his Coalition.  But you simply cannot ignore the fact that many people, male and female, do not like or trust him.

They do not like or trust Julia Gillard either.

Therefore, as I said, it comes down to the least worst alternative.

Disliking one person and having no respect for their party or policies i.e. how I feel about Labor, does not ipso facto result in my liking Tony Abbott or universally accepting his approach to everything, e.g. his ridiculously extravagant maternity leave scheme.

It's good to see that, as you say, the gloss for Gillard of the international stage has worn off.


----------



## sptrawler (12 December 2011)

I think the shine has gone off Julia again, due to her and her rag tag government backing the gay marriage issue.
Before everyone jumps on my case, I don't mean the fact they are backing it. More the fact it is percieved as Gillard bending to Bob's whims. 
Tony saying sod off I'm not changing my stand just because the media and Bob want me to, I think is been seen by the silent majority as a sign of strengh against a minority push.


----------



## Logique (12 December 2011)

If not Tony Abbott then who? The Minister for Goldman Sachs?

 Failing a shock return by Peter Costello, then Abbott it will be. He hasn't done too badly for mine, not that I agree with all of his policies. 

Nothing new, been said a thousand times, but just tragic PCs political fate. The leadership Australia could have had in these volatile times, compared to these ALP-Greens.


----------



## Julia (12 December 2011)

sptrawler said:


> I think the shine has gone off Julia again, due to her and her rag tag government backing the gay marriage issue.
> Before everyone jumps on my case, I don't mean the fact they are backing it. More the fact it is percieved as Gillard bending to Bob's whims.



Agree.  Plus the fact that the electorate overall thinks there are way more important issues to which the government should be paying attention, e.g. the rising cost of living.



> Tony saying sod off I'm not changing my stand just because the media and Bob want me to, I think is been seen by the silent majority as a sign of strengh against a minority push.



Yep, good on him for this.  Given his religious background I wouldn't think there's a hope in hell of him changing his mind.




Logique said:


> If not Tony Abbott then who? The Minister for Goldman Sachs?



No thanks to Turnbull.  Much rather Tony Abbott.   Malcolm Turnbull had his chance and fluffed it completely.   Abbott is at least a career politician.  For Turnbull, it's just another notch in his career.



> Nothing new, been said a thousand times, but just tragic PCs political fate. The leadership Australia could have had in these volatile times, compared to these ALP-Greens.



So true.  And to think we used to be critical of Peter Costello's smirk!   How little we knew about the horrors to come.


----------



## noco (12 December 2011)

> Therefore, as I said, it comes down to the least worst alternative.



So what are you trying to tell me?

If Abbott's popularity falls below Gillards, Gillard gets the vote!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## sptrawler (12 December 2011)

Julia said:


> Agree.  Plus the fact that the electorate overall thinks there are way more important issues to which the government should be paying attention, e.g. the rising cost of living.




It amazes me, how Julia G thinks putting a big fanfare on about something no one gives a rats behind about, in some way is going to turn the majority opinion.
It just goes show how much contempt she has for 'ordinary' Australia.
When she first attained the office I thought it was just nerves, but as time has gone by I tend to think she seeths arrogance and contempt, not a nice persona. 
I think Tony will look like angel by the time this term is through.


----------



## DocK (12 December 2011)

Julia said:


> And to think we used to be critical of Peter Costello's smirk!   How little we knew about the horrors to come.




Bring back the smirk!  Seriously.   I too will be voting for the coalition, but only because they appear to me to be the lesser of two evils, not because I actually want them in power.

Voting at the next election is likely to be like going to a buffet where the only choices are between a dish that you dislike and one that you're highly allergic to - I'll pick the one I dislike, but only because I fear the alternative might kill me (the country) off altogether.  

I wonder sometimes if I'll live long enough to set out for the voting booth with a sense of purpose again, rather than resignation.


----------



## joea (13 December 2011)

The government has also made it clear it is not interested in the Productivity Commission's view, that Government Projects should be subject to proper Cost - Benefit - Analysis. 

This understanding alone by the voter, should unseat Labor.

joea


----------



## Calliope (13 December 2011)

DocK said:


> Voting at the next election is likely to be like going to a buffet where the only choices are between a dish that you dislike and one that you're highly allergic to - I'll pick the one I dislike, but only because I fear the alternative might kill me (the country) off altogether.




I think the big catalyst will be the Labor conference decision to expedite the poofterisation of Australia. I think yesterday's Nielsen poll reflects this. The silent majority reject the debasing or the institution of marriage.



> The two-party-preferred vote, with the* Coalition on 57 per cent and Labor on 43 *per cent, would mean disaster for the government if an election were held now, as it has for months. *And Julia Gillard's brief ascendancy over Tony Abbott as preferred prime minister has collapsed: he is on 46 per cent while her support has slipped 3 percentage points since November, to 42 per cent.* Whatever had been working in her favour has apparently been erased from voters' minds.



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/edito...he-ministry-20111212-1or90.html#ixzz1gMbcZLb6


----------



## Logique (13 December 2011)

> Does Gillard inspire confidence?



Yes from Nicola Roxon, quietly installed as the new Attorney General. Having set Parliament alight with her performance as Minister for Health and Ageing.

And us thinking the heir apparent PM would come from a known field. Tanya got promoted too, don't say mieow to her.


----------



## Eager (13 December 2011)

Julia said:


> What did all the money spent on stimulus actually achieve?  It just allowed the government to claim they had averted recession because we did not actually experience the technical two quarters of 'negative growth'  (such a euphemistic phrase!).  It was political more than anything else.



It is, of course, subjective what the outcome might have been if the $900 cheques hadn't happened. But consider this:

Say that a person had lost their job because of the lack of stimulus. Suppose then, that instead of being a $300 per week taxpayer, they were a $300 per week welfare recipient. In 3 weeks the cheque would have paid for itself! Now suppose, that during a recession, that person was out of work for 15 weeks. That is equivalent to 5 cheques. How many people had their jobs saved and remained off welfare for an extended period because of the stimulus package? Who knows exactly, but I'm sure it was many.

What really gives me the irrits is the opinion of some people who imagine that _everybody_ stormed the shops for a new telly...sure, a few people may have, but not many. In fact I personally don't know of anyone who did. Myself, I paid my council rates off, which meant I could continue to spend normally on all manner of things instead of save. Surely that helped the economy. At the time there was certainly an element of mischievous media with sensationalist headlines who loaded a gun with the line about plasma TV's; it appears that some vacuous types happily swallowed the seed of everything that spurted their way as a result.


----------



## Julia (13 December 2011)

Eager said:


> Say that a person had lost their job because of the lack of stimulus. Suppose then, that instead of being a $300 per week taxpayer, they were a $300 per week welfare recipient. In 3 weeks the cheque would have paid for itself! Now suppose, that during a recession, that person was out of work for 15 weeks. That is equivalent to 5 cheques. How many people had their jobs saved and remained off welfare for an extended period because of the stimulus package? Who knows exactly, but I'm sure it was many.



And that, theoretically, is what it was designed to do.  I repeat my point about it being primarily politically rather than economically motivated.  You will probably disagree and that's fine.



> What really gives me the irrits is the opinion of some people who imagine that _everybody_ stormed the shops for a new telly...sure, a few people may have, but not many. In fact I personally don't know of anyone who did.



You are really contradicting yourself here.   Above you point out the purpose of the cheques to individuals was to spend in the economy, thus saving jobs (dubious imo).
And then you're implying criticism of those who actually did go out and buy the supa dupa plasma or whatever.



> Myself, I paid my council rates off, which meant I could continue to spend normally on all manner of things instead of save. Surely that helped the economy.



You would have paid the rates anyway.  I don't know what your income level is, but I'd be surprised if most people didn't simply continue to spend as normal unless they were financially disadvantaged.

Many people actually saved the $900, thus - even on your own description of the policy - totally subverting its purpose.

I'll stick with my conclusion that it was largely wasted money in that it simply postponed the financial slowdown, something which we are seeing now.


----------



## pilots (13 December 2011)

Julia, when the $900 check hit the NT the  the liquor outlets could not keep up, we had to bring it in from interstate. I would say 90% of the money was completely wasted in the NT.


----------



## sptrawler (13 December 2011)

Julia said:


> And that, theoretically, is what it was designed to do.  I repeat my point about it being primarily politically rather than economically motivated.  You will probably disagree and that's fine.
> 
> 
> You are really contradicting yourself here.   Above you point out the purpose of the cheques to individuals was to spend in the economy, thus saving jobs (dubious imo).
> ...




Touche Julia, It's nice to see someone hit the 'plants' with a riposte. LOL


----------



## Julia (13 December 2011)

Pilots, that seems like largely waste to me, but I guess Eager would contend that the money was doing its job in keeping the booze sellers in a job.

Hardly my idea of my tax dollars at work, however.


----------



## noco (15 December 2011)

After 2 years of enquiries, Fair Work Austrlia are still unable, or I should say unwilling, to come up with a report on this 'SCUM BAG' Craig Thomson.

It is a political issue which Julia Gillard is tyring to withhold as long as she can.

This new link revels the out come of Thomson's $24,000 tax payer overseas study and his report based on PLAGIARISING some other people's work. 

He is not only a liar and a fraud but a cheat as well.

How can anyone have confidence in a Prime Minister who is prepared to shield such a rotten MP.

I wonder if he will feel guilty about accepting his massive pay rise.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...nd-pasted-report/story-e6freooo-1226222453020


----------



## noco (27 January 2012)

If Gillard still expresses confidence in Craig Thomson when parliament returns, I am afraid to say not too many will have confidence in Gillard.

I had believed that FWA had already made a statement some time ago that they did not have enough evidence on Thomson., but according to the link below it is now all starting to be revealed. 

Why is it also taking the Victorian Police so long. Maybe there are still some ALP stooges high up in the Vic. constabulary.



http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai..._and_still_counting_down_to_thomsons_big_day/


----------



## noco (15 February 2012)

To be a good liar, one must have a good memory and Julia Gillard has failed on the good memory part.

How can anyone have confidence in this Prime Minister under such circumstances??


http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...omments/column_is_your_prime_minister_a_liar/


----------



## drsmith (15 February 2012)

It also helps not to be a serial liar.

That increases the memory requirement somewhat.


----------



## noco (29 February 2012)

Does Julia Gillard really want to hold her job as Prime Minister after cabinet knocked her back over Bob Carr as foreign Minister.Just 48 hours after winning the ballot.

She then denies on TV that she ever offered the job to Bob Carr.

Bob Carr says he had he plane fair booked to go to Canberra to accept the position.

This woman could not lie straight in bed. Just another big lie.





http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ms-bob-carr-plan/story-fn59niix-1226284538034


----------



## sptrawler (29 February 2012)

She certainly doesn't inspire confidence with solar hot water system manufacturers.


----------



## StumpyPhantom (27 March 2012)

*Re: Gillard's Speech*

"Who are WE? We are US!!"

Well I tell you what Julia, US are going to WEE on you at election time.

What an insult to politics this Labor Party is - more befitting to the mafia gangs whose only pursuit was to maintain their supremacy in whatever it was they were doing.

Is it any wonder they have no idea what they are doing or what they stand for.

Yep - we are us, and us is nobody


----------



## StumpyPhantom (28 March 2012)

noco said:


> This woman could not lie straight in bed. Just another big lie.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ms-bob-carr-plan/story-fn59niix-1226284538034




I just feel sure, when she's in her early taxpayer-funded retirement, that she will look back on this and CRINGE - absolutely curl up in bed and cringe with embarrassment!!

How did a competent Employment and Education Deputy PM get cajolled into doing this to herself?

If Rudd was crashing, the honorable thing was not to make statements about being a full forward for the Bulldogs.  

The honorable thing to do and say was "If this ship is going down, I'm going down with it" and then seek to be Labor leader in opposition.  Or if Rudd won in 2010, then serve another couple of years of the apprenticeship and then seek the caucus vote about now.

Instead, she chose the dishonorable path and every single thing she has done since then has been just that - DISHONORABLE!

Someone please help me - has she done one honorable thing since July 2010?


----------



## StumpyPhantom (28 March 2012)

*Re: Gillard abandons mining towns*

Guys, Gillard abandoned all of us in June 2010 when she decided to pursue power at any cost.

Give her a time machine to go back to that point, and she would not have done the same thing, knowing how she has been thrashed since then.


----------



## StumpyPhantom (28 March 2012)

*Re: David Cameron imitates Julia Gillard*

CRINGE-WORTHY


----------



## StumpyPhantom (28 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



Julia said:


> Really, the crocodile tears were a bit much.   She walked woodenly through all the visits to flood affected areas, clutched voters in the obligatory hugs of sympathy, and gave zero impression of being remotely affected.
> 
> Since then there has been much media comment about how poorly her performance contrasted with the empathy shown by Anna Bligh, how robotic and unsympathetic she was, and now suddenly today, voila, she is moved to uncontrollable sadness and tears.
> 
> ...




You're very perceptive - I got all of that and more!  What about the giggling teenage girl outside the Lodge talking about Tim - that was fake too.

There's nothing there.  The Labor Party (left wing) upbringing combined with the lawyer training has shelled her like a crab at the dinner table.

There's nothing left - I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when she recently visited her elderly parents in an Adelaide nursing home for dinner over a couple of years.

And she has a sister - what must be she thinking of the red headed robot gracing our screens on a nightly basis.

I suspect election night 2013 is when we will see the Julia dam burst open like Wivenhoe.  There will be nowhere to hide then, and I won't be very happy to see her blame us stupid voters then.  A Kernot-esque election night dummy spit would just about seal this terrible part of Australian history.

This grace-less woman must start preparing for a graceful exit now, because she will need all that time to convince even 10% of the elctorate (but not you or I).


----------



## StumpyPhantom (28 March 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*

Let's forget her pathetic attempts at feeble policy (the most conspicuous being in the border protection area).

Gillard is not just showing Stockhom Syndrome and captive of the Labor Party apparatchiks obssessed with clinging onto power.

She has been "cored out" and stands for nothing.  Imagine sending 800 people to Malaysia to be detained in squalor and possibly caned.

Did her father look her in the eye and relate his experience as a 10 pound Pom?


----------



## dutchie (28 March 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> I believe that Gillard practices hypnotism en masse.
> 
> She goes on in a monotone sprouting all sorts of bull****, and stares.
> 
> ...





Now we know why Tony's doing it too.

Obviously Bob Carr did not close his eyes when Tony was speaking.


----------



## joea (28 March 2012)

Juliar Gillard believes she inspires confidence because of her accomplishments.
Now she hopes to inspire "trust". Trust is perpetuated from starting with the truth.

Her idea of truth is::::
"A lie told often enough, becomes the truth."  Lenin(1870 - 1924).

Why does she continue to do this?
Answer!!! "The public will believe anything, as long as its not founded on truth". Edith Sitwell (1887 - 1964).

So her basic problem problem is how she is going about it. And at the moment she is going in the opposite direction.
joea


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (28 March 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*



dutchie said:


> Now we know why Tony's doing it too.
> 
> Obviously Bob Carr did not close his eyes when Tony was speaking.




I mentioned this to Bob Carr last year, at a campaign I was asked to assist in, in ALP HQ in Sussex St. in Sydney. The function was not open to workers or taxpayers, just to ALP head honchos, greens, unionists, university professors, whalers, gamers and millionaires such as yours truly. 

I am most upset he used it in an attack on Tony Abbott, without attribution to me. 

He was the only person present who didn't shout me for the analogy.

gg


----------



## dutchie (28 March 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Stockholm Syndrome*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> He was the only person present who didn't shout me for the analogy.
> 
> gg




Poor form Bob


----------



## rumpole (28 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*

Are there any adults here ?


----------



## IFocus (28 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



rumpole said:


> Are there any adults here ?





No but interesting watching the women haters apply their double standards whats the word? 

Misogyny

Party poling has show men will not forgive women poly's but male poly's get another chance or two Howard proved the point I think.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (28 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



rumpole said:


> Are there any adults here ?






IFocus said:


> No but interesting watching the women haters apply their double standards whats the word?
> 
> Misogyny
> 
> Party poling has show men will not forgive women poly's but male poly's get another chance or two Howard proved the point I think.




I would agree with you both, not a good day for ASF.

gg


----------



## rumpole (28 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



IFocus said:


> No but interesting watching the women haters apply their double standards whats the word?
> 
> Misogyny
> 
> Party poling has show men will not forgive women poly's but male poly's get another chance or two Howard proved the point I think.




Very true. Maybe I'm starting to believe the saying "women have to do twice as much as men to be considered half as good".

Julia Gillard is about as sexy as a woman as John Howard is as a man, yet we get continual debates about her attractiveness (or lack of it), the way she dresses and other rubbish. At least Howard was judged solely on his performance.


----------



## Julia (28 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



rumpole said:


> Very true. Maybe I'm starting to believe the saying "women have to do twice as much as men to be considered half as good".
> 
> Julia Gillard is about as sexy as a woman as John Howard is as a man, yet we get continual debates about her attractiveness (or lack of it), the way she dresses and other rubbish. At least Howard was judged solely on his performance.



Nonsense.  He was continuously pejoratively referred to as "Little Johnnie".
That is way more insulting than a criticism of Ms Gillard's dress sense.

If you are seriously suggesting Julia Gillard is being judged more harshly because of her gender, you are even more of an uncritical ALP disciple than I'd imagined.
It's her policies, her lying, and her general incompetence that has her where she is in the polls.

But hey, if you want to believe otherwise, go for it.  It will be just that more of a shock when the next Federal election eventually occurs.


----------



## sails (28 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



IFocus said:


> No but interesting watching the women haters apply their double standards whats the word?
> 
> Misogyny
> 
> Party poling has show men will not forgive women poly's but male poly's get another chance or two Howard proved the point I think.





Absolute rubbish, IF.  There are women members at ASF.  Why would we be against women?  I suppose that is a difficult concept given the size of a galah brain...

Personally, I find Gillard is an embarrassment to women.  Most women have far more common sense for starters.


----------



## rumpole (29 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



> If you are seriously suggesting Julia Gillard is being judged more harshly because of her gender, you are even more of an uncritical ALP disciple than I'd imagined.




I am seriously suggesting that, and your failure to realise it is evidence of your political bias.

John Howard didn't have mocking shows like "At Home with Julia" made about him, so why make them about Gillard ?


----------



## wayneL (29 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



rumpole said:


> I am seriously suggesting that, and your failure to realise it is evidence of your political bias.
> 
> John Howard didn't have mocking shows like "At Home with Julia" made about him, so why make them about Gillard ?




Oh please!  _And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?_

Astonishing hypocrisy!


----------



## DocK (29 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



rumpole said:


> I am seriously suggesting that, and your failure to realise it is evidence of your political bias.
> 
> John Howard didn't have mocking shows like "At Home with Julia" made about him, so why make them about Gillard ?




I didn't care for "At Home with Julia" myself as I prefer to see the office of PM treated with a little more dignity, regardless of who is occupying it at the time.  I do, however, clearly recall several satires and caricatures of John Howard over the many years that he held the office, on shows such as Full Frontal, the Chasers etc.  I used to get a great laugh out of some of the cartoons etc - and I voted for him!  We live in a world where politicians are regarded as "fair game" for comedic purposes, regardless of their sex.  How often was Howard shown in the legendary Aussie tracksuit?  Or Hawke's eyebrows exagerated to get a laugh? Or Keating's nose lengthened?  If I were a politician I'd feel almost a reverse sexism if I were not given the same treatment simply because I'm female - sometimes equality means copping the same criticisms, peurile as they may be.


----------



## sails (29 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



DocK said:


> I didn't care for "At Home with Julia" myself as I prefer to see the office of PM treated with a little more dignity, regardless of who is occupying it at the time.  I do, however, clearly recall several satires and caricatures of John Howard over the many years that he held the office, on shows such as Full Frontal, the Chasers etc.  I used to get a great laugh out of some of the cartoons etc - and I voted for him!  We live in a world where politicians are regarded as "fair game" for comedic purposes, regardless of their sex.  How often was Howard shown in the legendary Aussie tracksuit?  Or Hawke's eyebrows exagerated to get a laugh? Or Keating's nose lengthened?  If I were a politician I'd feel almost a reverse sexism if I were not given the same treatment simply because I'm female - sometimes equality means copping the same criticisms, peurile as they may be.





Agree DocK.  I suspect feminists would be offended if they didn't get the same treatment as the guys - at least favourable treatment.  However, I sometimes think they like to have their cake and eat it too and then try to use "gender" as an excuse to escape negative treatment.  They want the good but not the difficult.  All the marks of a coward, imo.

And all this nonsense about labor being unpopular because of gender is nothing but nonsense.  IMO, it's merely labor spin in attempt to try and get their own way in attempting to make people feel guilty and to question themselves.

If the PM were a male and had performed exactly the same as Gillard, there would be just as much hostility to that person.

After all, Howard was a male and that didn't win him any favours when he upset the majority of voters.  Neither did it help Whitlam.  

Gender is irrelevant.  Performance and respecting voters is everything, imo.


PS - I have never liked power hungry  incompetent feminists and I suspect there are many other females out there who would agree with me...


----------



## Knobby22 (29 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*

I don't think the female effect is strong but doesn't she have a lower rating among males than females?

I know my Dad is a bit of a dinosaur but he spent years keeping women out of the local club and he would would never vote for a woman, so these guys still exist. (sorry Dad)

(PS I'm not looking forward to all these numerous Julie threads going to the next election. It feels like some have a fixation.)


----------



## Miss Hale (29 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*

The female effect can work both ways.  I'm sure there are some people like Knobby22's dad who wouldn't vote for Gillard because she is a woman but there are also some who vote for her because she *is* a woman.  Remember all the hype about having 'our first female Prime Minister'? I know some people who thought it was great that we had a female PM and this definitely affected how they voted.


----------



## rumpole (29 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



Knobby22 said:


> (PS I'm not looking forward to all these numerous Julie threads going to the next election. It feels like some have a fixation.)




Absolutely right.

Lets have some more focus on the Opposition. 

Tony Abbott's nuts for example


----------



## Julia (29 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



sails said:


> Gender is irrelevant.  Performance and respecting voters is everything, imo.
> 
> PS - I have never liked power hungry  incompetent feminists and I suspect there are many other females out there who would agree with me...



Indeed. And +1 on your top statement above.



Miss Hale said:


> The female effect can work both ways.  I'm sure there are some people like Knobby22's dad who wouldn't vote for Gillard because she is a woman but there are also some who vote for her because she *is* a woman.  Remember all the hype about having 'our first female Prime Minister'? I know some people who thought it was great that we had a female PM and this definitely affected how they voted.



So right.  I've spoken to women who have been so ultra feminist that they have actually admitted they will vote for her regardless of what sort of job she does.

And Rumpole, didn't you describe this or similar thread as puerile?
It might be good not to further lower the level of discussion by the sort of reference to Tony Abbott's anatomical features you've just made.  I'm sure you can discuss his disattributes without this.


----------



## rumpole (29 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



Julia said:


> I
> And Rumpole, didn't you describe this or similar thread as puerile?




Yes I did Julia, but it seems to be what this forum likes. Just look at the number of "Gillard" threads here.


----------



## Logique (29 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



rumpole said:


> ...At least Howard was judged solely on his performance.



Really? And btw 'Little Johnnie' was taller than Bob Hawke. Which PM last year called Christopher Pyne a 'poodle'.  When Labor appeals to 'Working Families' to prevent 'Abbott, Abbott, Abbott', do you think there's a subtle sub-text at play.


----------



## rumpole (29 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



> Really? And btw 'Little Johnnie' was taller than Bob Hawke.




If "Little Johnny" was the worst he had to put up with the press went very easy on him.


----------



## bellenuit (29 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



Knobby22 said:


> I don't think the female effect is strong but doesn't she have a lower rating among males than females?




As some later posters stated, it cuts both ways.  That statement would equally be correct but portray almost the opposite meaning if you framed it as:

_I don't think the female effect is strong but doesn't she have a higher rating among females than males?_


----------



## moXJO (29 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*

Hey Joe can you just merge all these dumb Gillard threads into one


----------



## Miss Hale (29 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



rumpole said:


> If "Little Johnny" was the worst he had to put up with the press went very easy on him.




They didn't go easy on him.  He was variously portrayed as a dork, a geek, a sports tragic, as someone else said they made fun of his tracksuit and his eyebrows.  His voice was also mocked, same as Julia's is. And what about all the attacks on Tony Abbott? The press, especially the cartoonists, don't go easy on anyone regardless of what party they are from.

I am no fan of Gillard but I also didn't like "At Home with Julia", I think it was somewhat disrespectful to the position of PM (plus, from what I saw of it, it wasn't that funny,  more like a one joke sketch spun out to a TV series).


----------



## IFocus (29 March 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard a Dalek?*



bellenuit said:


> As some later posters stated, it cuts both ways.  That statement would equally be correct but portray almost the opposite meaning if you framed it as:
> 
> _I don't think the female effect is strong but doesn't she have a higher rating among females than males?_




Female ministers get a real shellacking to if their body shape is not so so Amanda Vanstone got monster-ed if I remember correctly.


----------



## noco (31 March 2012)

After Julia Gillard's visit to Queensland today and talks with Cambell Newman, I don't believe she in any way popoular with the voters of Queensland after reading some 791 comments to this link.
She should go home and stay there.


http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...s-in-election/comments-e6freooo-1226314902946


----------



## Julia (31 March 2012)

Heavens, I flicked through the first 100 of those comments and found only one which demonstrated any trust in her at all.
The rest were full of incredibly virulent hatred, to a much greater degree than I ever heard expressed toward Anna Bligh.


----------



## MrBurns (31 March 2012)

Julia said:


> Heavens, I flicked through the first 100 of those comments and found only one which demonstrated any trust in her at all.
> The rest were full of incredibly virulent hatred, to a much greater degree than I ever heard expressed toward Anna Bligh.




Yes she's not at all popular.....


----------



## tigerboi (1 April 2012)

ive got confidence that these incompetent fools will get the biggest thrashing

i predict labour/green criminal socialists will be left with 15 or less seats.

never wanted so bad to vote these mongrels out...tb

we should bring in contracts so no carbon tax means by law you cant do it.


----------



## StumpyPhantom (9 April 2012)

tigerboi said:


> ive got confidence that these incompetent fools will get the biggest thrashing
> 
> i predict labour/green criminal socialists will be left with 15 or less seats.
> 
> ...




I like your tiger-ish views!  Alas, I fear this will be what happens after the Coaltion landslide win in the 2013 Federal election.  The bill to repeal the carbon tax gets blocked by the Greens in the Senate, helped by the rump of Labor Senators left there.


----------



## Klogg (9 April 2012)

StumpyPhantom said:


> I like your tiger-ish views!  Alas, I fear this will be what happens after the Coaltion landslide win in the 2013 Federal election.  The bill to repeal the carbon tax gets blocked by the Greens in the Senate, helped by the rump of Labor Senators left there.




Then with any luck, we get a double dissolution and the Greens can get back to where they belong - the unemployment office.


----------



## drsmith (9 April 2012)

Klogg said:


> Then with any luck, we get a double dissolution and the Greens can get back to where they belong - the unemployment office.



Yes, before they send the rest of us there.


----------



## joea (10 April 2012)

Julia said:


> Heavens, I flicked through the first 100 of those comments and found only one which demonstrated any trust in her at all.
> The rest were full of incredibly virulent hatred, to a much greater degree than I ever heard expressed toward Anna Bligh.




It is interesting how the comments have drifted against her over the last year.
So I have doubts in the numbers of today's poll in the Australian, in regards to her being a better PM. 
Labor is going to come up with a few tricks in this budget.
Swan is already taking credit for the interest rate decrease next month. This fellow is complete idiot!!
joea


----------



## Julia (10 April 2012)

Klogg said:


> Then with any luck, we get a double dissolution and the Greens can get back to where they belong - the unemployment office.



 +1.


joea said:


> Swan is already taking credit for the interest rate decrease next month. This fellow is complete idiot!!
> joea



Um, it hasn't happened yet.

Btw, I read somewhere recently that the much vaunted compensation for the carbon tax all ceases when the switch occurs to an ETS.   Hopefully they won't still be attempting to run the country by then, but it's certainly a point that they have avoided making clear.


----------



## sails (10 April 2012)

Klogg said:


> Then with any luck, we get a double dissolution and the Greens can get back to where they belong - the unemployment office.




I think this is what will be needed to oust any poison pills Gillard and her minority may have put into HER unwanted legislations.

I suspect Gillard will have used her balance of power in both houses to make carbon tax and other unwanted legislation difficult to repeal.


----------



## joea (10 April 2012)

Julia said:


> +1.
> 
> Um, it hasn't happened yet.




Julia 
It was indicated that our interest rate should drop 1% last year. When I posted.
Swan and the RBA have been shadow boxing with the banks.
If there are any brains on the RBA board the rate decrease  next month will be 0.50%.

As you mentioned, it has not happened yet. But I have seen Wayne Swan in front of the media, saying because he is going to bring in a surplus next year, the people will be rewarded with a interest rate drop next month.

I nearly spilled my beer watching it.
joea


----------



## StumpyPhantom (10 April 2012)

Klogg said:


> Then with any luck, we get a double dissolution and the Greens can get back to where they belong - the unemployment office.




Hey Klogg - love your high speed fast-forward analysis!  However, my legally trained doomsday scenario is based on the glacial pace that these Constuitutional things have to proceed by.

Check out this analysis from one of the climate hippie sites:

http://www.hacaustralia.com/carbonsignal/?p=2334

My real hope is that the double dissolution WON'T be necessary because the few Labor senators that are left see the writing on the wall, that their beloved Labor Party will go up in smoke LITERALLY if they don't vote to pass the repealing legislation and go to a double dissolution.

Absolute decimation has a real way of concentrating the mind, so I hope the huge kicking they get in the 2013 Federal election will be all that's needed.

Wish my mad optimism luck anyway!


----------



## noco (18 April 2012)

If there is ever a Royal Commision into Fair work Australia which may be extended to the handling of the Craig Thomson affair, perhaps they should go further into the $1,000,000 which Gillard helped her boy friend, at the time Bruce Wilson, rip off from the AWU.

It is also claimed Gillard accepted $57,000 to spend on clothes ($17,000) AND $40,000 to renovate her house in Melbourne.

Please read the link and associated links which lead to the downfall of Glen Milne.

Milne was obviously onto something when he was ultimately gagged.



http://kangaroocourtofaustralia.com...past-the-fairfax-media-and-news-corp-scandal/


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (27 April 2012)

*Julia Gillard Resignation*

I have been awoken from a slumber on the verandah of the hotel, in full rush hour traffic here in Townsville by a contact in Sussex St.

The word is about that there will be a "managed" change in the leadership of the Federal ALP.

Apparently Julia is sick of it all.

We do live in interesting times.

I am back to the verandah, the hum of utes is soothing to the ear.

Let us see what eventuates.

gg


----------



## sails (27 April 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Resignation*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> I have been awoken from a slumber on the verandah of the hotel, in full rush hour traffic here in Townsville by a contact in Sussex St.
> 
> The word is about that there will be a "managed" change in the leadership of the Federal ALP.
> 
> ...





GG - are you sure?  I don't think Gillard would give in so easily...lol.  One thing she seems good at is clinging on to power by her fingernails in a democracy where the majority do not want her.

And, it seems that Kathy Jackson of HSU has been asked to resign. That, on top of Shorten putting the HSU into receivership stinks to high heaven of coverups, imo. Bold is mine:



> MEETING of the top brass of the Health Services Union (HSU) has called for national secretary Kathy Jackson to resign.
> 
> Outside the meeting in Sydney, acting president Chris Brown said Ms Jackson needed to resign for the good of the union.
> 
> "We need to have confidence that a national secretary is in a position to be *leading the union in a way we require the national secretary to do s*o," he said.




How, exactly how do they want a national secretary to lead?  Do they mean with blinkers?

http://www.news.com.au/breaking-new...gn/story-e6frfku0-1226340816462#ixzz1tD60wB4O


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (27 April 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Resignation*



sails said:


> GG - are you sure?  I don't think Gillard would give in so easily...lol.  One thing she seems good at is clinging on to power by her fingernails in a democracy where the majority do not want her.




I am told she is just sick of it.

gg


----------



## drsmith (27 April 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Resignation*

Good heavens GG. Managed and ALP don't belong in the same book at the present time, let alone in the same sentence.

If she's just sick of it, I'm sure Kevin Rudd could help.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (27 April 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Resignation*



drsmith said:


> Good heavens GG. Managed and ALP don't belong in the same book at the present time, let alone in the same sentence.
> 
> If she's just sick of it, I'm sure Kevin Rudd could help.




The Brissie King has been dealt out of succession, according to my contacts.

gg


----------



## Miss Hale (27 April 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Resignation*

Well I certanly couldn't blame her for being sick of it, I would be too in her situation (even if a lot of it is self inflicted).


----------



## DB008 (27 April 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Resignation*

GG, as l suggested via PM recently, Bob Carr.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (27 April 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Resignation*



DB008 said:


> GG, as l suggested via PM recently, Bob Carr.




I do not think Bob would consider leading the Federal ALP, I may be wrong.

gg


----------



## sails (27 April 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Resignation*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> I am told she is just sick of it.
> 
> gg





I think the feeling is mutual with a large portion of the electorate - let's hope a new leader will listen to the people...


----------



## MrBurns (27 April 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Resignation*

I'm sure she's sick of it, as we all are, there's no where fror her to go, she can see it through to the end but she may not have the ticker for that now the result is already a fait compli...........


----------



## joea (27 April 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Resignation*



MrBurns said:


> I'm sure she's sick of it, as we all are, there's no where fror her to go, she can see it through to the end but she may not have the ticker for that now the result is already a fait compli...........




If she has had enough, then she knows a lot more than does the public.(which she should)
Has it all become unmanageable?
Maybe the Budget is the breaker. Or have the independents turned?
joea


----------



## Calliope (27 April 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Resignation*

She is dead in the water. As Richo said;

"This all amounts to a double bunger for our hapless prime minister. Maybe she could survive one of the Craig Thomson and Peter Slipper scandals, but not both. They ensure that she is permanently engulfed in a bad smell. That odour permeates through her every utterance and every policy announcement. It would appear that no amount of perfumed spray will kill the stench."


----------



## Julia (27 April 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Resignation*

gg, it must be immensely satisfying to you that your stirring can conjure up so much response.


----------



## explod (27 April 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Resignation*

Well as good investors all, it will not make a farthing of a difference to the Dow or the US dollar overnight.

Got physical pm


----------



## So_Cynical (27 April 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Resignation*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> I have been awoken from a slumber on the verandah of the hotel, in full rush hour traffic here in Townsville by a contact in Sussex St.
> 
> The word is about that there will be a "managed" change in the leadership of the Federal ALP.
> 
> ...




Apperiantly they are going to scrap the NBN too.   

Quick start a thread...oh yeah you did that like 12 months ago didn't you.

------------

Oh here's a news flash...Tony Abbott wins the leadership ballot by 1 vote...Slippery Pete's vote. 

Perhaps we can get the 2 threads merged.?


----------



## banco (27 April 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Resignation*

As I mentioned on another thread GG is a combination of bob jelly, walter mitty and willy loman.


----------



## Calliope (27 April 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Resignation*



So_Cynical said:


> Oh here's a news flash...Tony Abbott wins the leadership ballot by 1 vote...Slippery Pete's vote.




Congratulations. You are the only Slipper supporter game enough to put his hand up.:hide:


----------



## nulla nulla (28 April 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Resignation*



Calliope said:


> She is dead in the water. As Richo said;
> 
> "This all amounts to a double bunger for our hapless prime minister. Maybe she could survive one of the Craig Thomson and Peter Slipper scandals, but not both. They ensure that she is permanently engulfed in a bad smell. That odour permeates through her every utterance and every policy announcement. It would appear that no amount of perfumed spray will kill the stench."




Funny that. Richo has been dead in the water for years. His run has finished, the clock has run down and he should retire to the watering hole of his choice and pull his head in. It seems the only people that can't see he has little or no current relevence are him and channel 7. They keep trotting him out and paying him for his two bobs worth of drivel.

As for "the stench of scandal", Johny Howard survived 14 years with the stench of scandal, I'm sure J Gillard can serve out the remainder of her term (subject of course to the proverbial bus and any subsequent bi-election)


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (29 April 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Resignation*



Calliope said:


> She is dead in the water. As Richo said;
> 
> "This all amounts to a double bunger for our hapless prime minister. Maybe she could survive one of the Craig Thomson and Peter Slipper scandals, but not both. They ensure that she is permanently engulfed in a bad smell. That odour permeates through her every utterance and every policy announcement. It would appear that no amount of perfumed spray will kill the stench."




My contacts related to me last night that the embarrassing world wide youtube performance by little Billy Shorten was a smokescreen for a move from Shorten and Smith on the leadership of the ALP.

It appears Peter van Onselen agrees.

From the http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/
A publication not known to sensationalise or politicise the news.



> The federal Labor Party is once again about to go through a period of leadership instability as speculation mounts about a possible challenge to the Prime Minister just two months after she comfortably dispatched Kevin Rudd's bid to return to the top job.
> 
> This time disgruntled MPs aren't only plotting a possible removal of a prime minister. If Julia Gillard goes, so should a number of senior ministers who shielded her from Rudd's challenge the first time around.
> 
> Wayne Swan, Stephen Conroy, Nicola Roxon and Tony Burke are just four members of the Cabinet who would find it near impossible to work for Rudd were he again to become prime minister, given what they said about him in February. And there are others.




gg


----------



## Logique (29 April 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard Resignation*

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...s-an-independent/story-e6freuy9-1226341845378
News - The Daily Telegraph April 29, 2012 10:05AM
*MP Craig Thomson resigns from Labor party to run as an independent*




> http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/new...-1226341845378
> 
> EMBATTLED Labor MP Craig Thomson is set to quit the Australian Labor Party and sit in parliament as an independent.
> 
> ...


----------



## MrBurns (11 June 2012)

*Gillard on Q&A*

Soft questions from a soft audience, Tony Jones has been the only one to have a go.....so far.


----------



## MrBurns (11 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*

Even the comments the foot of the screen are pathetic boot licking, grovelling rubbish.

This is just a showcase for Gillard to shore up support.


----------



## joea (11 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



MrBurns said:


> This is just a showcase for Gillard to shore up support.




If she wants more support she needs to get off TV.
Let her Senior ministers have a go.
She is trying to put on a front, "Julia can fix it".
The voters did not elect her, Labor MP's did.
Let the MP's have a go.
joea


----------



## MrBurns (11 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*

Well that was a bloody waste of time.

A Gillard giggle fest of pandering weak questions.


----------



## StumpyPhantom (11 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*

This little conspiratorial performance between Gillard and the ABC will ensure she fronts up to the electorate at the 2013 election.

BRING IT ON!


----------



## Purple XS2 (11 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*

I posit the notion that it is impossible for any media entity, no matter how grovelling, biased etc, to do the P.M. a favour by giving her air-time, no matter how obsequious the interviewer or audience.

Gillard is such a empty-headed fake, that the only service that can be done her is to present her less.

I watched for about 5 minutes, suppressed the urge to throw up, and switched off.


----------



## noco (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*

She is a good actor and should apply for a job in Hollywood.

When talking about the $23 tonne carbon dioxide tax, I was hoping someone would ask her why are we sending 10% of the takings to the United Nations Climate Change Committee of which K.Rudd is a member.


----------



## dutchie (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



Purple XS2 said:


> I posit the notion that it is impossible for any media entity, no matter how grovelling, biased etc, to do the P.M. a favour by giving her air-time, no matter how obsequious the interviewer or audience.
> 
> Gillard is such a empty-headed fake, that the only service that can be done her is to present her less.
> 
> I watched for about 5 minutes, suppressed the urge to throw up, and switched off.




+1  

You lasted longer than I did.


----------



## joea (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*

I think Gillard handled her composure very well last night, and no doubt she is displaying another look.
There was  a blonde lady in a black skivvy who said she was from the middle class and asked why  Labor always hurts that class. She said the working class she represents gets minimal compensation from any of the schemes that Julia made reference too. Gillard answered that she must be looking at the wrong sites.
This was the question of the night!! From my perspective.
If that women is correct, I hope it gets exposure for that class(its a big class). Personally I think that Labor is handing out one lot of compo. to cover more that one tax or cost.(say 3)
Anyway that's it from me.
joea


----------



## joea (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



Purple XS2 said:


> Gillard is such a empty-headed fake, that the only service that can be done her is to present her less.
> 
> I watched for about 5 minutes, suppressed the urge to throw up, and switched off.




I had my finger on the trigger to change stations, however watched it out. She did not bash Abbott(which I predicted she would). her "minders" are grooming her up to stay as leader.
However she rambles when she answers, and after a number of question was attempting to tie them all together.
If her minders get her to shorten her answers, she may get a lift in the polls.
i.e. she is, exercising, boxing and yoga, knitting, etc. etc. There is no doubt she is chasing a new image, but hopefully the public will see through it.
joea


----------



## Logique (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*

I decided to give it five tweets, as they ran across the bottom of the screen. They were all of the adoring '..Julia you are such a role model to my kids..' type.

So I upped stumps and flicked over to Hamish Macbeth, another fiction, but at least entertaining.


----------



## pixel (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



dutchie said:


> +1
> 
> You lasted longer than I did.




+2
... by about a minute ...


----------



## sails (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



dutchie said:


> +1
> 
> You lasted longer than I did.





Yes, I lasted about 15 secs...

It was more than likely going to be another giggling gertie performance where any difficult questions would be skirted around and not answered.  :bad:


----------



## sails (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



joea said:


> I had my finger on the trigger to change stations, however watched it out. She did not bash Abbott(which I predicted she would). her "minders" are grooming her up to stay as leader.
> However she rambles when she answers, and after a number of question was attempting to tie them all together.
> If her minders get her to shorten her answers, she may get a lift in the polls.
> i.e. she is, exercising, boxing and yoga, knitting, etc. etc. There is no doubt she is chasing a new image, but hopefully the public will see through it.
> joea





Unless she fixes the carbon tax by abandoning it until the people have had a chance to vote on it, fix our border security and stop the wasteful spending - those things for a start, she can come across as the sweetest little giggling knitting granny in the world and still get booted out at the next election. imo.

Voters do not like to be dudded and have long memories.




Logique said:


> I decided to give it five tweets, as they ran across the bottom of the screen. They were all of the adoring '..Julia you are such a role model to my kids..' type...





What role model?  She lies.  If that's what these people want as role models for their kids, it's not the Australia I know.


----------



## DB008 (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A - soft audience.....*



noco said:


> She is a good actor and should apply for a job in Hollywood.
> 
> When talking about the $23 tonne carbon dioxide tax, I was hoping someone would ask her why are we sending 10% of the takings to the United Nations Climate Change Committee of which K.Rudd is a member.




And if the environment is so important, why wind back the Solar Rebate?

Where will the carbon tax be spent? 
Specifically, on what renewable projects? 

So far the only one l've heard about is the commercial solar farm in Nyngan (?) for $300 million. 
Where is the rest of the tax going to be spent? Oh yeah, it won't, it'll be used for other areas of short fall which have nothing to do with reducing CO2/Environmental benefits.


----------



## MrBurns (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*

Gillard has her media handling down pat, no matter what question they raise she responds with a slight variation on the answers she is programmed to use, she laughs to disarm critics and talks slowly and at length so people just stop listening BUT she never gets caught out.

Bring back Michael Willessee


----------



## pilots (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*

You people don't know how to use Julia, the wife and I have her photo on this back of the toilet door, this has saved us a fortune on laxatives.


----------



## Miss Hale (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



Logique said:


> I decided to give it five tweets, as they ran across the bottom of the screen. They were all of the adoring '..Julia you are such a role model to my kids..' type.
> 
> So I upped stumps and flicked over to Hamish Macbeth, another fiction, but at least entertaining.




I'm afraid I didn't even attempt to watch it - straight to Hamish Macbeth and the shinty match for me!

(I did watch 4 Corners though about the EU, very interesting).


----------



## Julia (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



MrBurns said:


> Well that was a bloody waste of time.
> 
> A Gillard giggle fest of pandering weak questions.



The ABC Radio report on it described the questions as "mostly tough".

I only saw the last ten minutes or so, but actually thought she handled herself quite well.
Perhaps she improved towards the end.


----------



## sails (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*

I really don't care if she was good, bad or indifferent on Q&A.  It's how she's running the country (or failing the country) is what matters.

*12 boats in 12 days* - what a dismal performance by this PM.

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/twelve_boats_in_12_days/


----------



## IFocus (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*

Gillards performance was solid and sure footed by any measure and looked like a PM.

I am hardly a Gillard fan but she handled the night well I thought.


----------



## sails (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



IFocus said:


> Gillards performance was solid and sure footed by any measure and looked like a PM.
> 
> I am hardly a Gillard fan but she handled the night well I thought.





Well, now it's time to handle border security and actually get something right.

And, stall the carbon tax until the people have voted.

Then she might earn a little respect...maybe.


----------



## dutchie (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



IFocus said:


> Gillards performance was solid and sure footed by any measure and looked like a PM.




Gillard will *never* be PM material - she just does not have the intelligence.


----------



## MrBurns (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*

I'm suprised people arent throwing eggs at her when she's in public.

Restaurants in Meblourne are closing, businesses going broke, EVERYONE I talk to is having difficulty.

Yet she and Swan laugh their heads off telling us how good it is and anyone who says otherwise is being negative.


----------



## Macquack (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



MrBurns said:


> I'm suprised people arent throwing eggs at her when she's in public.




Go ahead Burns, make a name for yourself. Could be your 15 minutes of fame.


----------



## MrBurns (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



Macquack said:


> Go ahead Burns, make a name for yourself. Could be your 15 minutes of fame.




I'm already famous so I'll leave that to you.


----------



## drsmith (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*

People don't want to throw eggs at her. They just want to throw her out of office.

I doubt we'll get the chance. Labor will throw her overboard first.


----------



## Macquack (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



MrBurns said:


> I'm already famous so I'll leave that to you.




Your a legend in your own mind. The biggest ego I have ever come across.


----------



## MrBurns (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



drsmith said:


> People don't want to throw eggs at her. They just want to throw her out of office.
> 
> I doubt we'll get the chance. Labor will throw her overboard first.




I dont think so now... I think all we have seen lately is to protect her from a challenge, knitting for babies, emergency meeting re child care costs, the weakest Q & A I've ever seen etc, etc


----------



## MrBurns (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



Macquack said:


> Your a legend in your own mind. The biggest ego I have ever come across.




You gratuitous insults are really weak these days you must be getting old


----------



## drsmith (12 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



MrBurns said:


> I dont think so now... I think all we have seen lately is to protect her from a challenge, knitting for babies, emergency meeting re child care costs, the weakest Q & A I've ever seen etc, etc



I wouldn't worry about Q&A. Labor will skewer her to the plank with those knitting needles and whatever else is at hand and hack it off as necessary before the next election to salvage whatever's left of their broken furniture.


----------



## BradK (13 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*

What a dishonest, one-sided rant this thread is. 

I had to get to page two of the thread to see someone who actually watched the same show as I did. And I am no Gillard fan! 

I thought it was a great interview where the PM finally got to have her say on some issues without the carping from Mr Abbot in the background. 

Are you sure you weren't watching M*A*S*H or something, Mr Burns? 

Mostly, I heard an audience saying 'gimme gimme gimme with the left hand' and 'cut cut cut tax with right' *shrugs*


----------



## MrBurns (13 June 2012)

Gee brad not sure what you were watching but I was watching the most unpopular PM since federation giggling her way through everyone else's economic pain assisted by the ABC


----------



## DB008 (13 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



BradK said:


> What a dishonest, one-sided rant this thread is.
> 
> I had to get to page two of the thread to see someone who actually watched the same show as I did. And I am no Gillard fan!
> 
> ...





Meanwhile, in the real world....



> SHATTERED DREAMS: Police recruit denied entry over daughter's autism
> 
> 
> English cop had been offered a job as a constable at Ceduna
> ...




LINK

It's ok, those illegal que jumpers will make mighty fine cops one day who will contribute to our society. They won't be a drain on our welfare system and try leach every penny they can get their hands on from honest hard working citizens....(NOT!)


----------



## dutchie (13 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



DB008 said:


> Meanwhile, in the real world....
> 
> SHATTERED DREAMS: Police recruit denied entry over daughter's autism
> 
> ...




So typical of this pathetic government.


----------



## Miss Hale (13 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*

I remember a similar case a few years ago relating to a doctor that wanted to move here, disappointing that they have not altered the regulations after that case which I assumed they would as it all seemed so unreasonable at the time and definitely not something that would make the family in question any less suitable to migrate here.


----------



## dutchie (14 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



dutchie said:


> So typical of this pathetic government.




Decision overturned by Bowen - well done.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (14 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



BradK said:


> What a dishonest, one-sided rant this thread is.
> 
> I had to get to page two of the thread to see someone who actually watched the same show as I did. And I am no Gillard fan!
> 
> ...




I couldn't bring myself to watch her being interviewed by the soft left Jones and a leftie audience..

It will be interesting to see the viewer numbers for her QANDA "Show".

I would bet London to a brick that nausea would have caused many like me not to watch.

The ABC probably won't have the guts to publish the viewing figures.

gg


----------



## sptrawler (14 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> I couldn't bring myself to watch her being interviewed by the soft left Jones and a leftie audience..
> 
> It will be interesting to see the viewer numbers for her QANDA "Show".
> 
> ...




+1   GG 
As soon as I see her I switch off and I think that is the problem the government has. 
Everyone has made their minds up and most are just killing time untill the next election, I think it will be the biggest bloodbath in history.


----------



## Eager (14 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



joea said:


> I think Gillard handled her composure very well last night, and no doubt she is displaying another look.
> There was  a blonde lady in a black skivvy who said she was from the middle class and asked why  Labor always hurts that class. She said the working class she represents gets minimal compensation from any of the schemes that Julia made reference too. Gillard answered that she must be looking at the wrong sites.
> This was the question of the night!! From my perspective.
> If that women is correct, I hope it gets exposure for that class(its a big class). Personally I think that Labor is handing out one lot of compo. to cover more that one tax or cost.(say 3)
> ...



I also watched the show for a few short minutes. I couldn't stand it. Reason? Gillard was giving the same tired old responses, because.....the one-dimensional Libs in the audience were firing the same old tired questions.

I saw the Miss Prissy in the black skivvy too...why didn't anyone ask her why the wealthy middle class should be entitled to unbridled welfare?


----------



## sptrawler (14 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



Eager said:


> I saw the Miss Prissy in the black skivvy too...why didn't anyone ask her why the wealthy middle class should be entitled to unbridled welfare?




Can you explain why someone who gets one step up the ladder, has to be kicked in the guts to put them back where they started?


----------



## Eager (15 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



sptrawler said:


> Can you explain why someone who gets one step up the ladder, has to be kicked in the guts to put them back where they started?



After you explain why the wealthy middle class should be entitled to unbridled welfare...

I'm not talking about the Mum & Dad who between them approach $150k per year - that is not necessarily wealthy - I am talking about the mindset of those that see welfare as a right despite their high earning capacity. Welfare is NOT a right for high income earners. Maybe if those that don't actually NEED welfare to exist from week to week gave it up, yours and everyone elses tax bill would be lower.


----------



## sptrawler (15 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



Eager said:


> After you explain why the wealthy middle class should be entitled to unbridled welfare...
> 
> I'm not talking about the Mum & Dad who between them approach $150k per year - that is not necessarily wealthy - I am talking about the mindset of those that see welfare as a right despite their high earning capacity. Welfare is NOT a right for high income earners. Maybe if those that don't actually NEED welfare to exist from week to week gave it up, yours and everyone elses tax bill would be lower.




Well if the "wealthy" middle class worked their way up from the the socially disadvantaged class and did so by, doing without, saving, working 3 jobs, not pi$$ing it up against the wall. 
While at the same time paying increased taxes and recieving less incentive, other than incentive gained through harder work.
Why should they not be entitled to some return on the extra they have put in, as opposed to those who don't strive and choose to rely on welfare ? I do realise there are some with real problems, however we are talking generally.
Please don't say it is lack off opportunity, apparently there is heaps of opportunity, just lack of interest?LOL,LOL


----------



## Eager (15 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



sptrawler said:


> Well if the "wealthy" middle class worked their way up from the the socially disadvantaged class and did so by, doing without, saving, working 3 jobs, not pi$$ing it up against the wall.
> While at the same time paying increased taxes and recieving less incentive, other than incentive gained through harder work.
> Why should they not be entitled to some return on the extra they have put in, as opposed to those who don't strive and choose to rely on welfare ? I do realise there are some with real problems, however we are talking generally.
> Please don't say it is lack off opportunity, apparently there is heaps of opportunity, just lack of interest?LOL,LOL



LOL,LOL, it's great to see that you have embraced cyber language. Are you 80?  LOL,LOL,LOL

"*Why should they not be entitled to some return on the extra they have put in,*"

FFS the return for the extra that they have put in is measured by the extra dollars in their pockets!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What you are saying is that if a person works hard enought to earn $200k instead of $140k, the Government is compelled to 'reward' them with a free handout.

Bizarre.


----------



## sptrawler (15 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



Eager said:


> LOL,LOL, it's great to see that you have embraced cyber language. Are you 80?  LOL,LOL,LOL
> 
> "*Why should they not be entitled to some return on the extra they have put in,*"
> 
> ...




Well from personal experience a few years ago but still the same principle. After job promotion more resposibility, more accountability, more hassle.
The end result was after loosing child support the take home wage was the same as i was on before the promotion.
You can laugh and some would say, go back to the workshop floor, but that is the problem why strip out incentive.
The U.K system is what our welfare sytem was based on and they still maintain that if someone has paid in to the system for their working career they get the basic pension. Canada has a similar sytem and still aligns with the U.K.
What you are saying is if someone works hard don't reward the effort with a token amount(doesn't have to be much).
Rather reward those that do sod all, don't want to take on jobs in the bush, want to sit on welfare. 
While we debate bringing in foriegn workers for the jobs they don't want to do.
Like that is going to help the situation. Why does someone that chooses not to work, deserve to have someone who works hard support them.
Funny the Germans are asking the same question, I love how you are taking the Greek, Italian , Spain attitude.


----------



## sptrawler (15 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



Eager said:


> LOL,LOL, it's great to see that you have embraced cyber language. Are you 80?  LOL,LOL,LOL
> 
> "*Why should they not be entitled to some return on the extra they have put in,*"
> 
> ...




I'll put it in terms that you may understand.
Eager, is a young bloke who is on top of the game and getting good money, putting in lots of hours saving tons.
Well unfortunately there is a huge downturn by China and Eager is laid off. 
He isn't too worried he has saved $50k during the good time, toward the deposit for a house in the future.
Well after applying unsucessfully for several jobs, Eager is getting nervous as he has spent $10k of his $50k.
So he decides to see what C.E.S has to offer if the problem persists, they tell him when you have spent the rest of the $50k come back and see us.
Eager say's, rightfully, I have paid my taxes why do I have to spend the money I have saved and done without, to put together. When I could have taken o/s holidays and pi$$ed it up to the wall.
Well why should the government support you when you have money?
Untill you experience it you don't understand it.IMO and I'm not 80 I'm 56 cheeky $hit


----------



## waimate01 (16 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



sptrawler said:


> ...they tell him when you have spent the rest of the $50k come back and see us....




Is the dole asset tested?


----------



## wayneL (16 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*

I'm worried.

First I agreed with something Keating said in the other thread...

...now I'm agreeing with Eager. 

Middle Class welfare is an oxymoron. Why take it away then give it back? Just lower taxes.


----------



## Eager (16 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



sptrawler said:


> Well from personal experience a few years ago but still the same principle. After job promotion more resposibility, more accountability, more hassle.
> The end result was after loosing child support the take home wage was the same as i was on before the promotion.



That's right - you got paid a higher wage, therefore you don't NEED the welfare anymore.

You are not a defenceless chick in the nest squawking for a worm. You can go out and get your own worms. You do not NEED anyone to give you free ones as well.

Your reward for going out and getting a higher paid job is the knowledge that you are not as parasitic as you once were.


----------



## Eager (16 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



sptrawler said:


> I'll put it in terms that you may understand.
> Eager, is a young bloke who is on top of the game and getting good money, putting in lots of hours saving tons.
> Well unfortunately there is a huge downturn by China and Eager is laid off.
> He isn't too worried he has saved $50k during the good time, toward the deposit for a house in the future.
> ...



I thought you were talking about welfare paid every fortnight as a reward while you were working, now this? If I lost my job I'd hardly be a middle class income earner, would I? 

I'm confused!


----------



## sptrawler (16 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



Eager said:


> I thought you were talking about welfare paid every fortnight as a reward while you were working, now this? If I lost my job I'd hardly be a middle class income earner, would I?
> 
> I'm confused!




What I am getting at is why have a system in place that constantly works to encourage failure and punish acievement. Why shouldn't the bloke who has saved his money get the dole for a period of time before he has to spend his savings. Why force him back onto the bottom of the ladder when he has paid his fair share of tax.
The pension system in the U.K and Canada gives everyone a basic pension based on the number of years you have paid tax. Our system was the same untill the politicians saw how they could get their hands on it.

It is a shame they didn't look at their own pension system, when they took welfare off others. What is the politicians super system and perks, if not middle class welfare on a massive scale.
I don't hear you saying anything about that?
Don't worry i'm against middle class welfare, I'm also against welfare that encourages laziness. But what really irks me is the hypocricy of politicians constantly bagging good honest hard workers.


----------



## sptrawler (16 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q & A*



waimate01 said:


> Is the dole asset tested?




As far as I know it is.


----------



## Julia (16 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



waimate01 said:


> Is the dole asset tested?



Not so much asset tested in that you can own a house you're living in but savings are considered an income generating asset.
It's one of the reasons I so often raise the unfairness of the dole.  Not only is it much less than anyone could reasonably be expected to live on, but you are required to use up almost all your savings before being granted a dollar in dole money.  Very tough on someone who has saved hard for many years with the aim of contributing to their own support in retirement, then being made redundant in middle age.

The welfare system is imo very uneven.  You have the dole as above as a very unfair contrast to some of the family benefits to the reasonably well off, and worst of all, Tony Abbott's proposed maternity leave scheme.


----------



## sptrawler (16 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Julia said:


> The welfare system is imo very uneven.  You have the dole as above as a very unfair contrast to some of the family benefits to the reasonably well off, and worst of all, Tony Abbott's proposed maternity leave scheme.




Is that right, maybe I should use politician welfare as an example. Welfare is welfare,it's all funded through taxes.
I just get fed up of people blindly following attacks on the so called "middle class" just because politicians want to use them as a football. When politicians have the best welfare sytem in the country, tax payer funded.

Maybe someone should put forward there is no welfare untill there is 0 unemployment. The only recipients will have to give just cause as to why they can't take a job, relocate or retrain.
No it's just easier to take cheap shots at the ones who pay most of the tax.
As I said in an earlier post I don't agree with middle class welfare. I've never had welfare, allways worked and payed taxes since 15years old. 
Just get fed up with the blind attacking of the real "working family"


----------



## Calliope (16 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



sptrawler said:


> No it's just easier to take cheap shots at the ones who pay most of the tax.
> As I said in an earlier post I don't agree with middle class welfare. I've never had welfare, allways worked and payed taxes since 15years old.
> Just get fed up with the blind attacking of the real "working family"




I agree. They are an easy target for whingers in the new class warfare attacks instituted by Gillard and Swan. Gillard's "working families" excludes the middle class who pay the taxes.


----------



## Julia (16 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



sptrawler said:


> Welfare is welfare,it's all funded through taxes.
> I just get fed up of people blindly following attacks on the so called "middle class" just because politicians want to use them as a football. When politicians have the best welfare sytem in the country, tax payer funded.



I totally agree about politicians, as will 99% of the population.

Cannot agree, though, that because it's all funded through taxes, "welfare is welfare".
Imo we have an absolute obligation to care for people who cannot care for themselves, e.g. the severely disabled.

But I don't understand why we have any such similar obligation to pay people earning $150K pro rata that salary for six months if they choose to have a baby instead of continue to work.  (If that figure is not correct, my apologies, but Mr Abbott's scheme from memory is somewhere around that.)

Yes, I have been very irritated over many years at paying taxes that support lazy, layabouts who just don't want to work, and young women who choose to have kid after kid rather than acquire decent education and a job.   But the other side of that coin is the person I referred to earlier who has worked hard, saved, then lost a job through redundancy or illness.  Imo such people should receive taxpayer support that is actually enough to live on.


----------



## sptrawler (16 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Julia said:


> I totally agree about politicians, as will 99% of the population.
> 
> Cannot agree, though, that because it's all funded through taxes, "welfare is welfare".
> Imo we have an absolute obligation to care for people who cannot care for themselves, e.g. the severely disabled.
> ...




Agree completely, what I am going on about is the way the debate has been hijacked and is completly focused on the middle class welfare debate. It is a huge con job, this would be a miniscule part of the welfare debate.
Like i said it is a con and I'm sick of hearing it. Why do they keep harping on about the ones whose net contribution would be hugely tax positive. That is so we don't talk about the ones who contribute nothing and have no intention of doing so.
Also I am not including people who have a genuuine reason to be on welfare.


----------



## Calliope (16 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Julia said:


> But I don't understand why we have any such similar obligation to pay people earning $150K pro rata that salary for six months if they choose to have a baby instead of continue to work.




Abbott will put that one on hold after he is safely elected and gets Costello to audit the books, as the Qld LNP government has done. Pie in the sky.:shake:

His first priority should be to weed the deadwood out of the bloated public service as Newman has done.


----------



## noco (16 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Calliope said:


> Abbott will put that one on hold after he is safely elected and gets Costello to audit the books, as the Qld LNP government has done. Pie in the sky.:shake:
> 
> His first priority should be to weed the deadwood out of the bloated public service as Newman has done.




Yes I agree. I believe there are over 1000 PS on the Climate Change committee or what ever they call it.
'CANDO' in Queensland threw it and Greg Withers out the window in the first month


----------



## noco (16 June 2012)

I have noticed Gillard is endorsing the MP "DIRT FILE" in manner of using it to back up her statements by Greg Combet that Abboot has been saying "the coal mines will close due to the Carbon dioxide tax ( ops sorry Julia, it's called carbon price)" Originally she denied knowing anything about it ahla Sargent Schultz."I know nothing".
Gillard is trying to smear coalition MPs who may or may not have bought shares in coal mines. I hope she comes up with a shovel full of mud that blows back in her face.


----------



## markforex (16 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



noco said:


> Yes I agree. I believe there are over 1000 PS on the Climate Change committee or what ever they call it.
> 'CANDO' in Queensland threw it and Greg Withers out the window in the first month





I dont get it, how did climate change enter the debate?


----------



## Julia (16 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



markforex said:


> I dont get it, how did climate change enter the debate?



The observation was made by noco that Cando Newman slashed public service numbers when taking office.  Amongst this, was the closing down of the office of climate change, headed by Greg Withers, husband of Anna Bligh, late Premier.
OK?


----------



## sails (16 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



markforex said:


> I dont get it, how did climate change enter the debate?





Because this thread is about Gillard and Gillard has not only broken a pre-election strong commitment NOT to introduce carbon tax, she then went ahead and legislated it with much glee against the will of the majority of voters (as per opinion polls).

It is not unusual for the "climate change" excuse for her tax to be discussed whenever Gillard's name is mentioned.  She will probably always be remembered as Ms broken promise carbon tax.

But surely, that's stating the obvious...


----------



## sptrawler (17 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*

Just watching Q & A on ABC, it is all a bit like a Julia advert, nobody is questioning her answers. It appears very staged and a bit of a saturday night live show.


----------



## markforex (17 June 2012)

GumbyLearner said:


> Oops sorry! Australia is not a republic!




Not yet anyway, which Gillard in charge who knows what could happen.


----------



## StumpyPhantom (17 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



sptrawler said:


> Just watching Q & A on ABC, it is all a bit like a Julia advert, nobody is questioning her answers. It appears very staged and a bit of a saturday night live show.




Happy with that little 'ivory tower' display by Gillard and her supporters.  Happier still to see a bounce in the polls for Gillard to remove talk of her removal in 2012.

Hopefully by 2013, the ALP will think it too late to remove her.  The carbon tax will be the one that comes back to bite.  Every 3 months in fact, and 'family assistance' money will be long gone by then.

Come the election, we will all be reminded about "There will be no carbon tax under the Government I lead".  I heard someone persuasively say the other day - It wasn't a lie, she just changed her mind.  Maybe Richo, I don't know.  That makes sense, I suppose.

But it's the way this has all been shoved down our throats that will deliver the killer blow at the election.  If you changed your mind, just put your hand up and say it.  Don't insult our intelligence by saying to us "Open wide, this bitter pill is good for you".

So let's have Gillard on Q&A every week.  From all reports, it was good practice for the stage-managed economics forum in Brisbane the next week.

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm dying to see the face of remorse on Gillard on election night 2013.  It would be mind-boggling to hear her if she displays stubborn pride by saying "I knew it would come to this, but I did it because it was good for you"


----------



## joea (17 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



StumpyPhantom said:


> I don't know about anyone else, but I'm dying to see the face of remorse on Gillard on election night 2013.  It would be mind-boggling to hear her if she displays stubborn pride by saying "I knew it would come to this, but I did it because it was good for you"




Yeah I have been talking to the Coalition.
That print with "she is gone" on the bottom will be on sale to the general public.
At this point in time we think we can take 15% off the deficit in the first year from sales.
Of course there will be international sales as well.
joea:bananasmi


----------



## Julia (17 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



StumpyPhantom said:


> I don't know about anyone else, but I'm dying to see the face of remorse on Gillard on election night 2013.  It would be mind-boggling to hear her if she displays stubborn pride by saying "I knew it would come to this, but I did it because it was good for you"



I hope you're not holding your breath for this, Stumpy.   I don't anticipate ever seeing the slightest shred of remorse from Ms Gillard.  She has a self belief greater than any politician I've ever seen.
It's her greatest disattribute, imo, because it doesn't allow her to see the real impact of her decisions on the electorate.
She's like a steamroller.


----------



## MrBurns (17 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Julia said:


> I hope you're not holding your breath for this, Stumpy.   I don't anticipate ever seeing the slightest shred of remorse from Ms Gillard.  She has a self belief greater than any politician I've ever seen.
> It's her greatest disattribute, imo, because it doesn't allow her to see the real impact of her decisions on the electorate.
> She's like a steamroller.




Thats one of the most insightful descriptions of Gillard Ive read.


----------



## noco (17 June 2012)

Before Ms Gillard gets too involved with her "DIRT FILE" she should look at her own grubby past with ex boy friend Wilson and the AWU fraud of which she had suspressed with the media. How much did she pay?


http://kangaroocourtofaustralia.com...d-and-the-bob-kernohan-statutory-declaration/


----------



## StumpyPhantom (17 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Julia said:


> I hope you're not holding your breath for this, Stumpy.   I don't anticipate ever seeing the slightest shred of remorse from Ms Gillard.  She has a self belief greater than any politician I've ever seen.
> It's her greatest disattribute, imo, because it doesn't allow her to see the real impact of her decisions on the electorate.
> She's like a steamroller.




Then an election thumping it wil have to be, and I'll have to settle for it.

Deep down, I too believe it will be a bloodless, self-righteous departure lacking in any remorse and regret for the huge breach of trust and the historical legacy of leaving us with our first female PM as an abject failure.

That's why I've jokingly thought that Gillard would call the army in (except that they would all be pre-occupied with the Royal Commission called by Smith).  Gillard's not making much of the legislative robustness of her 'carbon price' at the moment, but that stubbornness is on show via Combet's stated attempts to Abbott-proof it from being dismantled.

Talk about total annihilation.


----------



## IFocus (18 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



sptrawler said:


> Just watching Q & A on ABC, it is all a bit like a Julia advert, nobody is questioning her answers. It appears very staged and a bit of a saturday night live show.




Maybe she is taking lessons from Abbott's endless photo ops with the 3 worded slogans and no questions.........


----------



## sptrawler (18 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



IFocus said:


> Maybe she is taking lessons from Abbott's endless photo ops with the 3 worded slogans and no questions.........




Yes your probably right. 
It's just a shame that the ABC don't give Tony 1hr of airplay, feeding warm feel good questions. Then make the audience say nothing while he answers them. 
Also it was nice to see an A.B.C reporter sitting there with his gob shut and a smile on his face, while Julia spewed out rubbish, without challenging it.
Again it would be nice if they extended the same opportunity to Tony.
Hope it all works out well for the A.B.C, they certainly are rolling the dice.


----------



## DB008 (18 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



sptrawler said:


> Also it was nice to see an A.B.C reporter sitting there with his gob shut and a smile on his face, while Julia spewed out rubbish, without challenging it.




Was I the only one to catch Tony's cheeky smirk during the show? 
I'll have a look for it. It was sooooooo obvious that Julia wasn't going to get hammered that show.


----------



## StumpyPhantom (18 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



DB008 said:


> Was I the only one to catch Tony's cheeky smirk during the show?
> I'll have a look for it. It was sooooooo obvious that Julia wasn't going to get hammered that show.




There was no better example of scripting than when the Prime Minister reached out her hand and placed it on the forearm of the presenter.

The cooperation (as we know the PM's staff pursue with pre-interview discussions) only needed to use the word 'friendly' as a cue, and the hand reached out.  Jones looked nonplussed, as if he knew it was coming but he couldn't manufacture a suitable look, so he did the 'stunned mullet', half orgasmic grin.


----------



## DB008 (18 June 2012)

LOL


----------



## StumpyPhantom (18 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



DB008 said:


> LOL




Yep - that's the one!  Poor Tony - this one's going to last forever!

I'LL TAKE THAT AS A CUMMENT


----------



## sptrawler (18 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*

Like I said, I wonder if they will cut Tony the same slack.
I doubt it, but when labor get thrown out, the A.B.C will be bitching and crying when the Libs go through them like a dose of salts.LOL
Same $#!t different day at the A.B.C just depends who is in power, to whose ar$e you kiss


----------



## Eager (18 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



sptrawler said:


> Like I said, I wonder if they will cut Tony the same slack.



He'll get plenty on The Bolt Report, I'm sure...


sptrawler said:


> I doubt it, but when labor get thrown out, the A.B.C will be bitching and crying when the Libs go through them like a dose of salts.LOL




^ Just like many Libs are still unable to come to terms with the last election result...

You believe what you want to believe, and think that everyone else in the world is wrong. You have the warm fuzzy feeling of support from the overwhelming majority of this forum, which is why you hang around, and no doubt your personal leanings will be vindicated at the next election, but are you _really_ right?

FFS just enjoy living here.


----------



## IFocus (18 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Eager said:


> He'll get plenty on The Bolt Report, I'm sure...




Oh you mean the Liberal party infomercial  

Pure out right vomit


----------



## Julia (18 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Eager said:


> You believe what you want to believe, and think that everyone else in the world is wrong.



We're not talking about the rest of the world, most of whom would have no idea what is happening in Australia.
We are discussing Australian politics, so perhaps consider that an overwhelming majority of Australian voters are disgusted by this government.


> You have the warm fuzzy feeling of support from the overwhelming majority of this forum, which is why you hang around, and no doubt your personal leanings will be vindicated at the next election, but are you _really_ right?
> 
> FFS just enjoy living here.



What an odd comment.   There is also support for his comments by the vast majority of Australians.  Nothing to do with opinions just on this forum.


----------



## sptrawler (18 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Eager said:


> He'll get plenty on The Bolt Report, I'm sure...
> 
> 
> ^ Just like many Libs are still unable to come to terms with the last election result...
> ...




Actually I'm not that taken by the Bolt report, watched it once and decided it was too coalition biased for me.

But by the same token Gillard on Q & A was just the same.
So I will make my mind up on election day by performance, as I usualy do.

Also probably lived here for longer than you and contributed more than you, but I wouldn't want to rub your nose in it.


----------



## Eager (18 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*

Julia, there is a _greater_ majority on ASF, which is surely a comforter to those bent that way.

Still, just enjoy living here!!!!!!!!!

Or nominate which country you (or any complainer) would prefer to live in.


----------



## wayneL (18 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Eager said:


> Julia, there is a _greater_ majority on ASF, which is surely a comforter to those bent that way.




I think it is merely a microcosm of the wider community, an accurate reflection.... at the moment anyway. 

Julia G sure doesn't have many friends out there.


----------



## sptrawler (18 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



IFocus said:


> Oh you mean the Liberal party infomercial
> 
> Pure out right vomit




I wouldn't go as far as saying that, but I don't watch it.


----------



## sptrawler (18 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Eager said:


> Julia, there is a _greater_ majority on ASF, which is surely a comforter to those bent that way.
> 
> Still, just enjoy living here!!!!!!!!!
> 
> Or nominate which country you (or any complainer) would prefer to live in.




Mate, get a life, make constructive comment or researched criticism.
Otherwise find a forum where waffle talk is appreciated.
If you want to debate the Q & A presentation on the A.B.C keep on track.


----------



## Julia (18 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Eager said:


> Julia, there is a _greater_ majority on ASF, which is surely a comforter to those bent that way.
> 
> Still, just enjoy living here!!!!!!!!!
> 
> Or nominate which country you (or any complainer) would prefer to live in.



NZ.  Canada.  Both of which are not on because of their cold climates.
But both of which score much more highly on the "Least Corrupt" surveys.

I'd like to see you justify your comment that there is a greater right majority or greater number against the carbon tax on ASF than Australia.
Sounds like the mother of all biased statements to me, with nothing to actually back it up.
Not surprising.


----------



## Eager (19 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Julia said:


> NZ.  Canada.  Both of which are not on because of their cold climates.
> But both of which score much more highly on the "Least Corrupt" surveys.



"I'd go but it's too cold!" 

Sure.



Julia said:


> I'd like to see you justify your comment that there is a greater right majority or greater number against the carbon tax on ASF than Australia.



Was merely pointing out that there is a difference between right, Right, and righteous. There is plenty of evidence on ASF of righteosness from those that lean Right. Obviously, some are oblivious to it and cannot see any difference in those 3 terms anyway.



Julia said:


> Sounds like the mother of all biased statements to me, with nothing to actually back it up.
> Not surprising.



That's not fair - you know damn well that I am one of the minority who actually provide links to back up many of my claims. Many of your cohorts simply don't, and you know it. 

I will give you the benefit of the doubt and accept yopur apology because I see you made your post late at night and you might have been influenced by other factors, who knows.


----------



## sails (19 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Eager said:


> Julia, there is a _greater_ majority on ASF, which is surely a comforter to those bent that way.
> 
> Still, just enjoy living here!!!!!!!!!
> 
> Or nominate which country you (or any complainer) would prefer to live in.





Rubbish, Eager.  Have you not seen opinion polls over the last few months...lol

Latest galaxy - 80% are unhappy with Gillard's boat arrivals.  That would surely be more than at ASF

You really do flame other posters.  Shame really as ASF used to have some sensible discussions than the absolute nonsense posts you are dishing out.  I've been away for a couple of days and can't believe the lack of content in so many posts - mainly yours.


----------



## Miss Hale (19 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



IFocus said:


> Oh you mean the Liberal party infomercial
> 
> Pure out right vomit




Rating better than Insiders though.


----------



## wayneL (19 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Eager said:


> I will give you the benefit of the doubt and accept yopur apology because I see you made your post late at night and you might have been influenced by other factors, who knows.




Straight out of the Fabian playbook... smear and innuendo.


----------



## Eager (19 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



sails said:


> You really do flame other posters.  Shame really as ASF used to have some sensible discussions than the absolute nonsense posts you are dishing out.  I've been away for a couple of days and can't believe the lack of content in so many posts - mainly yours.



It is blatantly obvious that sometimes I upset some of the membership here simply because I have an opinion different to theirs. 

I made some posts last night in a different thread that included a credible link but I was then accused of being selective. I then did my level best to expand on my original stance, which was that the mining and associated industry isn't the dominating factor in our economy (and it ISN'T), but was then met with hysterical remarks about shutting the whole industry down, and that certain parties want to do that anyway. I asked for a link to prove that claim, but surprise surprise, none has been forthcoming. From very early on in my time here it was obvious that any explanation or proof of fact to support the Left or to argue against the Right was labelled as spin, yet every skerrick of Right opinion was swallowed as gospel. And so on.

ASF IS dominated by coalition voters (and I have no problems with that), and it seems TO ME that it would be over 90%. That makes it more 'Right' than the general population and I have absolutely no doubt that the core of senior coalition voting members here take comfort in that fact - they are amongst friends, and can say what they want regardless.

I remember being given a complement once because I was challenging the ingrained thoughts of the majority here. All I can say is that I haven't changed, but for some reason the bitterness and intolerance of some members has grown. Are you guys interested in debate on issues or not????????????


----------



## Eager (19 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



wayneL said:


> Straight out of the Fabian playbook... smear and innuendo.



Oh, come on!  

I was accused of never backing up what I said, yet shortly beforehand Julia replied to me in another thread....about a link I provided to back up my position on an issue!


----------



## wayneL (19 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*

OK, debate issues then.

Leave the BS out and that will likely be reciprocated.


----------



## qldfrog (19 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Eager said:


> ASF IS dominated by coalition voters (and I have no problems with that), and it seems TO ME that it would be over 90%. That makes it more 'Right' than the general population and I have absolutely no doubt that the core of senior coalition voting members here take comfort in that fact - they are amongst friends, and can say what they want regardless.



Allow me to see it in a different way, I for one is not a coalition fan, hate Abbott  and his pettiness, am liberal at heart (liberal in the US/strict term, not LP way) and am more green than red so not a coalition supporter by birth
 yet as many here, I have some economic background, have a business or work in private enterprise  and am taxed to the death. I can  see a country quickly turning the wrong way after never ending inept not to say suicidal policies and management mess up at the federal level.
What do you expect?Truth can not be blindfolded
And any true labor supporter with a bit of economy/real world  knowledge should be the same
So yes ASF will have a majority of anti Gillard as this is not a corner pub forum.
The day our prime minister will be truly elected and will take sensible decision, be he/she right or left wing , then ASF will have a more balanced opinion but as I see this, this is not for tomorrow
my 20c only


----------



## sptrawler (19 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Eager said:


> It is blatantly obvious that sometimes I upset some of the membership here simply because I have an opinion different to theirs.
> 
> I made some posts last night in a different thread that included a credible link but I was then accused of being selective. I then did my level best to expand on my original stance, which was that the mining and associated industry isn't the dominating factor in our economy (and it ISN'T), but was then met with hysterical remarks about shutting the whole industry down, and that certain parties want to do that anyway. I asked for a link to prove that claim, but surprise surprise, none has been forthcoming. From very early on in my time here it was obvious that any explanation or proof of fact to support the Left or to argue against the Right was labelled as spin, yet every skerrick of Right opinion was swallowed as gospel. And so on.
> 
> ...




Absolutely, I love your childlike belief that the labor party will look after you, I had the same belief 30yrs ago.
But lets have some ground rules, we won't say anything that can't be substantiated.O.K


----------



## Julia (19 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Eager said:


> Was merely pointing out that there is a difference between right, Right, and righteous. There is plenty of evidence on ASF of righteosness from those that lean Right. Obviously, some are oblivious to it and cannot see any difference in those 3 terms anyway.



Explod started a thread called "Gobbledegook".  I'd suggest that's a good place for the above comment. 



> That's not fair - you know damn well that I am one of the minority who actually provide links to back up many of my claims. Many of your cohorts simply don't, and you know it.



You can supply all the links you like.  But if you selectively quote from them, and then follow with your own remarks which totally lack objectivity, you can expect to be either challenged or ignored.



> I will give you the benefit of the doubt and accept yopur apology because I see you made your post late at night and you might have been influenced by other factors, who knows.



Accept my apology????   First it would have had to be offered.  I can assure you there's no way it will be.
What rubbish.  As is the remainder of that paragraph.  
I rarely use the Ignore function, but you've just earned yourself a level of my disgust that will provoke such use.
Disappointing, Eager, as I have from time to time gone out on a limb to defend your right to make the comments you have, to the anger of some members here.   Clearly, that was poor judgment on my part.





sails said:


> Rubbish, Eager.  Have you not seen opinion polls over the last few months...lol
> 
> Latest galaxy - 80% are unhappy with Gillard's boat arrivals.  That would surely be more than at ASF
> 
> You really do flame other posters.  Shame really as ASF used to have some sensible discussions than the absolute nonsense posts you are dishing out.



Yes, you were a member before me, Sails.  Clearly you can remember that some years ago we were able to  have interesting and thoughtful discussions which did not revert to personal insult and innuendo.
It is not surprising that most of the participants in those discussions have long since departed this forum.




Eager said:


> Oh, come on!
> 
> I was accused of never backing up what I said, yet shortly beforehand Julia replied to me in another thread....about a link I provided to back up my position on an issue!



What I responded to was your pathetic selective quoting.  I responded with the full paragraph from your link which supplied a quite different picture from that you attempted to present.


----------



## sails (19 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Eager said:


> It is blatantly obvious that sometimes I upset some of the membership here simply because I have an opinion different to theirs.
> 
> I made some posts last night in a different thread that included a credible link but I was then accused of being selective. I then did my level best to expand on my original stance, which was that the mining and associated industry isn't the dominating factor in our economy (and it ISN'T), but was then met with hysterical remarks about shutting the whole industry down, and that certain parties want to do that anyway. I asked for a link to prove that claim, but surprise surprise, none has been forthcoming. From very early on in my time here it was obvious that any explanation or proof of fact to support the Left or to argue against the Right was labelled as spin, yet every skerrick of Right opinion was swallowed as gospel. And so on.
> 
> ...





Eager, does it ever occur to you that your posting style seems to be designed to inflame those who may hold differing opinions to yourself?

You seem hell bent on stirring.  Your opinion is your right, but there is no need to be so rude to those with whom you do not agree...


----------



## Calliope (19 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Julia said:


> Disappointing, Eager, as I have from time to time gone out on a limb to defend your right to make the comments you have, to the anger of some members here.   Clearly, that was poor judgment on my part.




Yes I was one you accused of being nasty to poor little Eager. It was good judgment on my part.


----------



## joea (21 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



joea said:


> Yeah I have been talking to the Coalition.
> That print with "she is gone" on the bottom will be on sale to the general public.
> At this point in time we think we can take 15% off the deficit in the first year from sales.
> Of course there will be international sales as well.
> joea:bananasmi




orders for 2 million have come in after her visit overseas.
joea:wreath


----------



## Eager (22 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



sails said:


> Eager, does it ever occur to you that your posting style seems to be designed to inflame those who may hold differing opinions to yourself?



That is exactly why I often find myself feeling frustrated here!

My posts are not really like that at all, rather they are taken that way by the majority because the opinions contained in them differ to theirs and they are uncomfortable with that! 

Also, condescending remarks such as the one Calliope made the other day about me punching above my weight are always met with tacit approval by the majority, but if I was to reply in kind.....well, you know the rest. But it doesn't _really _matter, this is just an internet forum, and not important at all.


----------



## Calliope (22 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Eager said:


> Also, condescending remarks such as the one Calliope made the other day about me punching above my weight are always met with tacit approval by the majority, but if I was to reply in kind.....well, you know the rest. But it doesn't _really _matter, this is just an internet forum, and not important at all.




Good for you Eager. You are starting to show a bit of maturity at last.


----------



## Logique (23 June 2012)

*Re: Gillard on Q&A*



Eager said:


> ...remarks such as the one Calliope made the other day about me punching above my weight are always met with tacit approval by the majority, but if I was to reply in kind.....well, you know the rest. But it doesn't _really _matter, this is just an internet forum, and not important at all.



Hey Eager, don't take it all to heart. There are plenty of valued posters in ASF whose politics are from the 'other side'. They keep it to an exchange of ideas and views, they give respect and receive it in return.


----------



## drsmith (25 June 2012)

*Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*

Where was someone from the Labor side to start this thread ?


----------



## sptrawler (25 June 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*

Two years of kissing Bob Brown's butt. Congratulations  yeh sit on that. OOPs that didn't come out as expected, appologies to the thumb.


----------



## drsmith (25 June 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*

I won't mention the latest polls. 

This is a party for Labor supporters.


----------



## noco (25 June 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*



drsmith said:


> I won't mention the latest polls.
> 
> This is a party for Labor supporters.




Do you think she will see a 3rd Doc?


----------



## drsmith (25 June 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*



noco said:


> Do you think she will see a 3rd Doc?



No comment.

I'd be spoiling the party if I answered that.


----------



## noco (25 June 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*



drsmith said:


> No comment.
> 
> I'd be spoiling the party if I answered that.




Doc, that one came across ahla GG.


----------



## Surly (26 June 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*

I do wonder if Gough Whitlam calls Kevin Rudd on a regular basis to express his sincere gratitude at the fact that he got to see one, possibly two, people wrest the title of Australia's worst Prime Minister from him in his own (long) life time.

cheers
Surly


----------



## drsmith (26 June 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*

Alternatively, Gough might be dissappinted losing his claim to fame in his own lifetime.


----------



## drsmith (26 June 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*

Oh, and I forgot to mention,

Refreshments and light entertainment are courtesy of the HSU.


----------



## numbercruncher (26 June 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*

It gets kind of old when you guys increasingly use forum space for political slinging opportunities - could we atleast wait until closer to elections or keep it within a couple of threads ?

Its really no different than a thread entitled " x years since Howard toppled as PM " , then questioning why no mourning liberal supporters hadnt started it .....

Are you going to start a new one of these threads for every minute political related issue ?

Anyway not sure why I even bothered to open this thread as I pretty much expected the contents !


----------



## noco (26 June 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*



numbercruncher said:


> It gets kind of old when you guys increasingly use forum space for political slinging opportunities - could we atleast wait until closer to elections or keep it within a couple of threads ?
> 
> Its really no different than a thread entitled " x years since Howard toppled as PM " , then questioning why no mourning liberal supporters hadnt started it .....
> 
> ...




Would somebody be good enough to give numbercruncher a violin for Xmas.


----------



## numbercruncher (26 June 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*

Please do it may drown out you peoples constant political whinging.


----------



## drsmith (26 June 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*



numbercruncher said:


> Its really no different than a thread entitled " x years since Howard toppled as PM " , then questioning why no mourning liberal supporters hadnt started it .....



Johnny had too many of these annual get-togethers on behalf of his prime-ministership and in the end, lost his political marbles.

Julia's still looking for hers.


----------



## sails (26 June 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*



numbercruncher said:


> Please do it may drown out you peoples constant political whinging.





You are the one doing all the whinging...


----------



## dutchie (28 June 2012)

*Is Julia Gillard the worst PM the world has seen?*

I am starting to rate her performance as the worst in the world.

Are there any other contenders?


----------



## DB008 (28 June 2012)

*Ferenc GyurcsÃ¡ny - Hungarian PM - 2004-2009*



dutchie said:


> I am starting to rate her performance as the worst in the world.
> 
> Are there any other contenders?




Any contenders. Yes, Yes and Yes.

Meet Ferenc GyurcsÃ¡ny - Hungarian PM - 2004-2009. MSZP - Hungarian Socialist Party.

Caught on hidden microphone.


----------



## Calliope (28 June 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard the worst PM the world has seen?*



dutchie said:


> I am starting to rate her performance as the worst in the world.
> 
> Are there any other contenders?




Worst in the World? That's drawing a long bow, and it's impossible to be objective about whether we rate them  for performance or character.  Back here in Australia and talking about living ex-PMs, the one I despise most is Rudd, followed closely by Frazer. This is purely a subjective assessment. On an objective basis I would probably nominate Robert Mugabe. 

Of course the are dozens of Presidents much worse but you stipulated PMs.


----------



## CanOz (28 June 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard the worst PM the world has seen?*

Hands down *Cristina FERNANDEZ DE KIRCHNER*.

Gillard's got nothing on this waste of air....

for many years i had hoped a woman would step up and show the male pig politicians how its done...so far no inspirational examples. Still hoping.

CanOz


----------



## Glen48 (28 June 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard the worst PM the world has seen?*





NEED TO GIVE HER SOME CREDIT:


----------



## Glen48 (28 June 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard the worst PM the world has seen?*

looks like BJ is not a fan:




*Please find below an opinion piece written by Senator Joyce published in The Canberra Times 21 June 2012*


*Of Lies, Damned Lies and Delusion*

*The thought of Julia Gillard lecturing to the world at the G20 in Mexico on Labor’s economic record lives in the space between skin-creepingly embarrassing and delusional. Under Labor we have had the four biggest deficits in this nation’s history, the highest debt, and three extensions of our nation’s credit limit as we continually max it out.

Once more Ms Gillard and Mr Swan are claiming responsibility for the events of the Permian and Precambrian periods when the coal deposits of Australia were laid down around 300 million years ago and iron ore deposits were formed around 600 million years ago.*

*These two substances, one made up of that evil substance carbon, and the other responsible for abundant carbon dioxide emissions as it is turned into steel, gave us a role to play in China’s boom as prices for coking coal went from around $50 per tonne to $300 per tonne and iron ore went from $40 per tonne to more than $160 per tonne. 

If Julia Gillard was honest about our luck in recent years then she should have given a lecture on geology and geography not on economics. We have a $231 billion gross debt. Ours is the third fastest proportionate increase in global public sector debt since 2007, as found by Dr Ken Rogoff of Harvard. Only Iceland and Ireland beat us.

After decades of mismanagement from the Queensland Labor Party, Queensland's debt is heading towards $100 billion. That makes the average Queenslander's share of Commonwealth and State debts $32,000. Greece's debt at the moment is $41,000 per person.

We have very little to brag about on government management of the bountiful harvest which is, maybe was, the mining boom.

Labor’s latest foray into their key policy objective of closing things down can now be seen in the oceans of our coast. It is perplexing when trying to go beyond the usual roll out of the rhetoric of imminent environmental destruction to find exactly what they believe is a problem.

Australia extracts less than 30 kilograms of fish per square kilometre from our ocean territory, compared to a global average of 755 kilograms per square kilometre. We are an island continent surrounded by fishing grounds but we now import 72% of our seafood as we close down our capacity to feed ourselves.

We get most of our fish from Thailand, China and Vietnam, and all of these countries extract more than 5,000 kilograms per square kilometre, around 200 times our rate of extraction. 

Try and buy a fish caught in Australian waters, you will be searching, and now it is going to become even harder.

So it is evil to sustainably log our forest but we have no problem importing timber from other countries that clear fell theirs? In net terms, we import around $2 billion of wood and timber products each year. So each year we need to put $2 billion of products on a boat to send in the other direction to fund this.

We appear to believe irrigation in the Murray-Darling is wrong but subsidised European food is right. Australian coal burnt in Australia to keep our power prices down will destroy the world but if you burn it in Beijing it is miraculously cleansed of its environmental sins, you might even get a carbon credit for it.

The theme of this government is becoming clear; if it is open, shut it; if it is saved, spend it and if it is not saved borrow it. Don’t grow or make anything that you could import, and if there are things you are good at then dream up dopey taxes so that you stop growing or making them.

So a more honest appraisal by Ms Gillard at the G20, of the graces and acumen of her government, would be a truly riveting speech, but not one that would gather her many accolades. It would be a speech that starts with the removal of a popularly elected Prime Minister, followed up with a massive broken promise to the electorate, then stumbles along with a circus of fiascos. It finishes with a massive debt and some bizarre belief in a domestic climate control policy legislated by the Australian Government and administered by the Australian Taxation Office.

Barnaby Joyce is the Nationals' Senate Leader.*


----------



## CanOz (28 June 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard the worst PM the world has seen?*

Well said Mr. Joyce!

Kick her ass out of office!

CanOz


----------



## Julia (28 June 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard the worst PM the world has seen?*

That's a really well constructed comment by Barnaby Joyce.   Would he ever get a chance to make such a comment in the parliament?  Probably not.


----------



## drsmith (28 June 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*

Where's the fashion police ?

Julie Bishop's dress sense and Julia Gillard's common sense are a lot alike.


----------



## drsmith (30 June 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*

Today is the last day for partygoers to really whoop it up. From tomorrow, it's candles only, bedtime at dusk, raw vegan hardcore and basket weaving all day.

That's tomorrow. For today, don't worry about the noise. The venue is well insulated and the kids are away for two weeks.


----------



## dutchie (30 June 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard the worst PM the world has seen?*

It is obvious to me that the number of posters at ASF are anti-Gillard (more than 90% ????) . At least going by the General Chat forum and by the small number of pro-Gillard posters.

Is this just the ASF or are other forums, blogs etc in a similar situation?


----------



## sails (30 June 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard the worst PM the world has seen?*



dutchie said:


> It is obvious to me that the number of posters at ASF are anti-Gillard (more than 90% ????) . At least going by the General Chat forum and by the small number of pro-Gillard posters.
> 
> Is this just the ASF or are other forums, blogs etc in a similar situation?




Dutchie - I think it is widespread.  And yet lefties seem to think if they harp on enough we might forget Gillard's stuff-ups and debacles.  They forget voters have long memories and that the majority of voters do not like their democratic right to vote on major issues removed from them.

Look at what they did to Howard.  I remember ASF being far more in favour of labor in 2007.  They did not forget that  Howard denied them a vote over work choices.

Anna Bligh backflipped on policy here in Qld and voters simply waited until election time came.  The result - 78 to LNP and 7 to labor.  Says it all, imo.


----------



## drsmith (30 June 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard the worst PM the world has seen?*

For the nostalgic, there's a complete video history of Gillard Labor.

http://www.youtube.com/user/ywiabychi/videos?view=0


----------



## sails (30 June 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard the worst PM the world has seen?*



drsmith said:


> For the nostalgic, there's a complete video history of Gillard Labor.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/user/ywiabychi/videos?view=0





I watched one and the google ad came up with the "Household Assistance Package" while the video played relentlessly "there will  be no carbon tax..."...

And how much are taxpayers paying for all these "household assistance package" ads?  If there was no carbon tax, there would be no need for assistance.


----------



## drsmith (30 June 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard the worst PM the world has seen?*



sails said:


> I watched one and the google ad came up with the "Household Assistance Package" while the video played relentlessly "there will  be no carbon tax..."...
> 
> And how much are taxpayers paying for all these "household assistance package" ads?  If there was no carbon tax, there would be no need for assistance.



There's some absolute classics in there.


----------



## sptrawler (30 June 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard the worst PM the world has seen?*



sails said:


> Dutchie - I think it is widespread.  And yet lefties seem to think if they harp on enough we might forget Gillard's stuff-ups and debacles.  They forget voters have long memories and that the majority of voters do not like their democratic right to vote on major issues removed from them.
> 
> Look at what they did to Howard.  I remember ASF being far more in favour of labor in 2007.  They did not forget that  Howard denied them a vote over work choices.
> 
> Anna Bligh backflipped on policy here in Qld and voters simply waited until election time came.  The result - 78 to LNP and 7 to labor.  Says it all, imo.




Dutchie, I think sails has summed it up.
The problem is there is a very good chance, due to this federal labor government, that we will have liberal state and federally. They will also end up with control of the senate, this isn't a good outcome.
However it will have been brought about because this government has walked all over peoples right to choice.
They will have no one else to blame than themselves, realistically they have done more damage to the labor brand and democratic process, than anyone else in our history.
The funny thing is, they will be all sitting back on their pensions, saying whats the problem. While the workers cop a flogging. LOL History repeats.
Hope I'm wrong, but I doubt it.


----------



## drsmith (30 June 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard the worst PM the world has seen?*



sptrawler said:


> They will also end up with control of the senate, this isn't a good outcome.



Should that happen, they will have learned the lessons of their 2004/07 term, hopefully. :dunno:


----------



## sptrawler (30 June 2012)

*Re: Is Julia Gillard the worst PM the world has seen?*



drsmith said:


> Should that happen, they will have learned the lessons of their 2004/07 term, hopefully. :dunno:




One would hope so.
The crazy thing is doc, labor have had windows of opportunity to call an election and minimise damage.
However the choice they have made to ride it out and hope people forget they were railroaded, is doomed to failure, resentment will build.IMO


----------



## drsmith (1 July 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*

I'm celebrating the first day of Wayne's hysterical nonsense and the tax we wern't going to have under a government Julia leads by lighting the fire.


----------



## drsmith (1 July 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*

Tonight is video night.

Watch till you drop.

http://www.youtube.com/user/ywiabychi/videos


----------



## sails (1 July 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*



drsmith said:


> I'm celebrating the first day of Wayne's hysterical nonsense and the tax we wern't going to have under a government Julia leads by lighting the fire.





Yes, what an absolute lie he told.


----------



## drsmith (1 July 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*



sails said:


> Yes, what an absolute lie he told.



The fire's still going. 

Unfortunately, I was a little hasty with the government propaganda I through in a while ago.

I should have saved it for today.


----------



## drsmith (2 July 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*

Tonight is amature talent night.

First up is Craig Emerson doing his best Skyhooks.

What would Red say ?


----------



## Glen48 (2 July 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*

Think this sums it up completely:

*Subject:*  The silent majority


This seems to put into words what I ? And I am sure many others of the silent majority ? Think!  It was written by Mrs Jenny Bell of South Australia to Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott:  

To  Julia Gillard (Prime Minister) & Tony Abbott (Leader of the Opposition) ...

You BOTH Worry me ! ( In fact both of your Political parties worry the hell out of me !!!)

Over the last three years, I find myself becoming more and more fearful of the pair of you, and between you, you are turning this country into a place that I no longer feel at home in, or feel a part of! I watch you in parliament, and no, not just the two of you, but every politician that I see, stand up in parliament sneering at each other, and acting like children !!! (..and if you were my children, I would be ashamed of you all ... What an example to set!)

Although you would like us all to believe that you are putting the needs of this country at the forefront, NEITHER of you are doing that, you seem more interested in "one-up-manship ", in scoring off each other,  & denigrating each other, to the detriment of this country & its people !!!It seems to be all about YOU as individuals, and not about what you can DO for this country !
It is fast becoming a place that I do not recognize, as the place I always thought, was the best place in the world to be !!!

But no longer !!!

You are not listening to the people of this country !!!
And here in South Australia , your  counterparts are afflicted with the same disease - is it endemic in all politicians ?

I am watching the deterioration of living standards in this country, (and according to you, on a world stage we are doing better than most countries ... REALLY ???) ... And yet the gap is widening between the "haves"  and the "have-nots" .  I see our homeless on the streets, our hospitals under-funded,  and understaffed, our health system is an absolute mess and a disgrace ... And yet I see multi-millions of dollars being sent off shore, in aid to other countries, before attending to this country's needs !

I see the "selling off of the farm", in large amounts, to foreign interests, (In Every State ) including water rights to foreign interests too ... And WHY...?

Especially when you go to great lengths to tell us that water is a finite resource, & supposedly,  we must ALL be careful with how we use it, so that we ensure we have it for the future ?

Foreign interests "Fracking"  for coal seam gas, and riding rough shod over farmers' rights to their own land, AND USING QUESTIONABLE CHEMICALS. (You don't even KNOW what chemicals they use),  and possibly causing damage to the water table  in the process !!!
And those foreign interests I believe, do NOT have to pay anything in royalties back to this country, for the first five years of their tenure  ... IS THIS CORRECT ???

A Carbon Tax,( which you KNOW  is just another tax with a "Starting Point dollar value")  which will make NO appreciable difference, to carbon emissions, AT ALL!

A tax,  which in spite of all your arguments FOR it, you are doing alone, when other major countries will NOT & DO NOT embrace it, or believe in it  !

All that it will do for this country is put working families and small businesses behind the eight ball, ....what planet are you on, if you think that your few hundred dollars a year,  will make even a scrap of difference to the effect of the carbon tax on people ?Blind Freddy can see the holes in that argument !!! Do you really think we are  that dumb ???

The CONVOY OF NO CONFIDENCE was real !!! ..and I haven't spoken to even ONE person, who would not have liked to be there if they could, but the tyranny of distance and /or work was the only thing that kept them away,  ( myself included ), .. And you KNOW that only a part of the convoy was actually allowed to be in front of Parliament house and ON VIEW ... The rest were streets away, unreported by the media !

For Mr Albanese to stand up in parliament,  and call it "THE CONVOY OF NO CONSEQUENCE ", in his sneering tone, shows just how out of touch with the people of Australia , you really are !!!!  WE WOULD HAVE ALL LIKED TO BE THERE !!!

DEFENCE ........ Because Americans are our Allies, and we support them in Wars, ......... Korea , Vietnam , Iraq , Afghanistan , ..... and you have sent our soldiers to those places, and our soldiers fought for you, and for Australia ........ some coming home with terrible physical injuries, and some with devastating Mental Injuries as well ..... BUT WHERE ARE YOU, WHEN THEY NEED YOU ?????

Veteran's Indexation to CPI only is a disgrace .. and is something YOUR Labor party Julia, used as an election sweetener, to get the Veteran's Vote ... BUT YOU LIED (Again) ! You never had any intention of honouring your election promise to them ... and it WILL come back to bite you at the next election !!!! (And Tony, Liberals were NO BETTER, Howard had more than 10 years to "fix it " and didn't !)

Veterans are not alone, they have families, friends and supporters, who are heartily sick of the deception your party perpetrated on them ....AND THEY ALL VOTE !!!!

THEY are your obligation, first and foremost ..... and it is not your first obligation to give aid to every man and his dog overseas first !!!  Look after your own FIRST !!!! Is this what you call SALUTING THEIR SERVICE ???

Have you any idea , how sickening it is for our Vets to see you both, ( Labor or Liberal ) turn up to the funerals of our current young vets for a photo opportunity, to  be seen to be "caring " in the public eye, but only to turn your backs on them all,  when they need you ??? (Just ask Breanna Till  an Afghanistan Soldier's  wife, how CARING this government is !!!)

And in light of what you DON'T do  for our Vets .......Let's talk about Multiculturalism .....People come here from other countries, for a better life, for more years than I have been alive  ( I am 65 years old !) ... my own family migrated here in 1883, from Germany , and did find a better life ...

Pre & Post war immigrants have came for a better life, and settled in and became wonderful contributors to this country, as did those who came here after the Vietnam War,  ... all have contributed to the rich diversity of this country, and some descendants have even fought FOR this country, and they have become Australians and were glad to be ..and they had NO handouts from our Government either, ...they worked hard for everything!

I have never before had a problem with all, or any, race of immigrants  coming here ...

.......However , I DO NOW !!!

Please tell me why we have  areas  like  Lakemba, where police do NOT,  & will NOT go, for fear of their life ?
Please tell me why we can no longer have religion in schools, for fear of "OFFENDING" someone ? (The latest little gem is that they are not having, or being funded, for  "chaplains " any more , but "Counsellors "?)
Please tell me why religious Christmas observances are no longer allowed in some schools for fear of OFFENDING someone ?
Please tell me HOW Christmas decorations in some stores might OFFEND someone ?
Please tell me why we have to have segregated days in some swimming centres, for fear of "OFFENDING" someone ?
Please tell me why we have some RADICAL clerics demanding Sharia Law in this country ... when if we were in THEIR country, this would NEVER be allowed ?
Please tell me why our laws need to be changed, so as not to OFFEND someone ?
Please tell me why we are fast becoming a MINORITY voice, in our own country, because of POLITICAL CORRECTNESS ?
Please tell me WHY Australians cannot legally wear a face covering bike helmet into a bank ..and yet it is ok to wear a Burqa which covers the whole face ?
And please tell me WHY, when those people who want asylum here, can wreck our detention centres, as in Villawood , and STILL be accepted here ?

SO , in light of the above, WILL BOTH OF YOU .....Please tell me WHY, when some of our Vietnam Veterans FINALLY received (in the last 6 months) the recognition that they should have had after the Vietnam War, (and which they received from the USA & South Vietnam,  during and immediately after the Vietnam War), that the families of those Veterans,  were refused assistance by this Government, to attend that award ceremony, and yet this Government ....flew , accommodated , and even took on bus tours , to the the families of asylum seekers, after the funerals of those who were killed in the boat which sunk off Christmas Island ? 

What does that say,  about just who are this government's priorities ?

The Australian people that I speak to have genuine concerns about becoming a second class minority in our own country, and the reasons for it,  are some of the above,  ..... Are you so blind that you cannot see this ?

And no , I am NOT racist !!!..(if I did not like Catholics or Protestants would I be considered racist ?) Of course not !

Why is it, that if we object to what is happening in our country ... we are immediately labelled RACIST, in an attempt to shut us up ?

We are fighting Radical Muslims, in Afghanistan & Iraq , are we not ?I hear you say, yes but the Muslims we have here are "Not like that " .. well how would we know ? ...do we hear ANY of them coming out & speaking AGAINST radicals ??  I haven't ...have you ???

Islam is not compatible with ANY of the values that we hold here in Australia ! .....Are not the experiences of Britain , France , and the Netherlands an example of that?   Why do you think it would be any different here ?  We even have an Australian born "radical ", whose message is that Australia WILL become a Muslim country, under Sharia Law, & that we had "better get used to it ".

Will both of you grow some "Balls ", and start sticking up for this country and its people ???

We are the people who put you where you are, and PAY you to look after our interests ! ... And you are NOT doing that, by any stretch of the imagination !!!

I would appreciate an answer, from both of you, if only to convince me that once again, I am not talking to a brick wall !!!!!

In case it has escaped both of you ..I would like to remind you that, in Australia the Government ... is FOR THE PEOPLE, OF THE PEOPLE,  & BY THE PEOPLE ...
never forget that......because you sure have up till now !!!

Mrs Jenny Bell
20 Helene St
Nuriootpa
S.A.
0885623753


----------



## Julia (2 July 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*

For those thinking an election, making Mr Abbott Prime Minister, will mean an end to all the misery, here's a timely reminder of the complications to be negotiated first:

http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/no-easy-path-to-abbotts-carbon-tax-referendum/


----------



## sptrawler (2 July 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*



Julia said:


> For those thinking an election, making Mr Abbott Prime Minister, will mean an end to all the misery, here's a timely reminder of the complications to be negotiated first:
> 
> http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/no-easy-path-to-abbotts-carbon-tax-referendum/




That was interesting, however if the next election is a reflection of the N.S.W and Queensland elections(also you can throw in W.A as a given). There will be no need for a double dissolution, the overwhelming concensus of the vote, will make the upper house toe the line.


----------



## Glen48 (2 July 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*

Will the carbon tax affect who you vote for?






*83229*





*22597
*MSN poll




​


----------



## drsmith (3 July 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's 2-year anniversary as PM*



Glen48 said:


> In case it has escaped both of you ..I would like to remind you that, in Australia the Government ... is FOR THE PEOPLE, OF THE PEOPLE,  & BY THE PEOPLE ...
> never forget that......because you sure have up till now !!!
> 
> Mrs Jenny Bell
> ...



The political leader and party that needs to take the greatest note of the above, she hasn't addressed her letter to.


----------



## noco (14 July 2012)

Will the truth ever come out with Gillard? 

McClelland is certainly trying hard.

The way Gillard has lied during the past couple of years, she is most likely trying hard to cover up her association with Wilson and the AWU. It is a wonder Howes has not joined in as well.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...on-funds-scandal/story-fn59niix-1226425771932


----------



## sails (14 July 2012)

noco said:


> Will the truth ever come out with Gillard?
> 
> McClelland is certainly trying hard.
> 
> ...





Noco - that link is behind the paywall, however, Andrew Bolt has some of it on his blog:

McClelland confronts Gillard again with the AWU scandal


----------



## drsmith (14 July 2012)

The paywall can be bypassed by doing a Google search of the headline. 

Select news and Bob's your uncle.


----------



## Julia (14 July 2012)

sails said:


> Noco - that link is behind the paywall, however, Andrew Bolt has some of it on his blog:
> 
> McClelland confronts Gillard again with the AWU scandal



The journalist who wrote the article for "The Australian" is Hedley Thomas, someone worthy of considerable respect.  If he's seeing fit to follow up on this, he must be convinced there is more to be uncovered.



> Hedley Thomas is The Australian’s national chief correspondent. He writes across the newspaper, specialising in investigative reporting with a particular interest in legal issues, the judiciary, public administration, corruption and politics. He is the author of Sick to Death, a book revolving around surgeon Dr Jayant Patel who was tried for manslaughter and grievous bodily harm in Brisbane after working as a director of surgery in Queensland. Dr Patel was convicted in July 2010. Hedley was responsible for uncovering his appalling background, leading to a public outcry and the criminal prosecution. Hedley is the winner of the inaugural Sir Keith Murdoch award in 2005 for his body of work on Dr Patel. Hedley, 43, first joined The Australian in 2006 after working for The Courier-Mail, The South China Morning Post and the Gold Coast Bulletin. All of his journalism has been with News Limited publications. Hedley has won five Walkley awards including the Gold Walkley, in 2007, for his investigations into the fiasco surrounding the Australian Federal Police investigations of Dr Mohamed Haneef.


----------



## sails (14 July 2012)

drsmith said:


> The paywall can be bypassed by doing a Google search of the headline.
> 
> Select news and Bob's your uncle.




Thanks Dr Smith - obviously the trick is to select "news"...


----------



## sails (20 July 2012)

noco said:


> Will the truth ever come out with Gillard?
> 
> McClelland is certainly trying hard.
> 
> ...





Interesting interview with Michael Smith discussing this issue (Michael Smith was the radio presenter who lost his job with 2UE over this same issue):

http://www.2gb.com/index2.php?option=com_newsmanager&task=view&id=13667

Or for some written excerpts with links:  http://theclimatescepticsparty.blogspot.com.au/2012/07/julia-gillard-and-bruce-wilson-and.html


----------



## dutchie (20 July 2012)

Anyone that pays union dues is as dumb as Gillard.


----------



## noco (20 July 2012)

sails said:


> Interesting interview with Michael Smith discussing this issue (Michael Smith was the radio presenter who lost his job with 2UE over this same issue):
> 
> http://www.2gb.com/index2.php?option=com_newsmanager&task=view&id=13667
> 
> Or for some written excerpts with links:  http://theclimatescepticsparty.blogspot.com.au/2012/07/julia-gillard-and-bruce-wilson-and.html




OMG how in the hell is this Gillard getting away with all this?

Surely it must come to a head to tip this fool of a Prime Minister over the cliff.

I still believe Oakeshots will be the catalyst and soon I hope.


----------



## noco (20 July 2012)

dutchie said:


> Anyone that pays union dues is as dumb as Gillard.




Yes dumb and dumber. Is it no wonder union membership has fallen and after all the lastest happenings with HSU and the AWU it will fall further. Only the rusted on Labor supporters will continue to be sucked into paying.


----------



## joea (20 July 2012)

dutchie said:


> Anyone that pays union dues is as dumb as Gillard.




I worked for a sugar mill and although I was not required to be in a union, the majority were.
Only staff exempt.
Although legally you were not required to be in a union, the end result was all were.
Why. Well anybody moving into a job which required training, was "cold shouldered".

The rank and file were threatened with, "we got you a pay rise, now you join".

When I was a young guy, training to be a sugar chemist I was only there during the season.
Because I could not buy "half a year" ticket I was threatened by them stopping the mill if I did not.

You will never hear about this, but by mouth. But I ensure you it happens and on every site.(mill).
There are ways that a person can be persuaded for most anything. "especially in unions".
However  a strong union person may "change his spots" if he moves to "Greenfield site".

Later in my career I was involved in Enterprise Agreements, and our company had to 
get a commissioner up on more than a few occasions. 
joea


----------



## joea (20 July 2012)

dutchie said:


> Anyone that pays union dues is as dumb as Gillard.




Tony Sheldon was "cloned" in some way, and his presence and attitude is appealing to many.
However as they retire the numbers are diminishing

It gave me GREAT PLEASURE at the QLD state election  to see some people of strong union belief
refuse to take a ticket from Labor..

Having made these two post, I also believe the unions of the past, (not the present) had
a number of benefits for their members..
These have been posted on this thread because the above statement(of dutchie) is correct
with the present day work force with the likes of Gillard and Sheldon.
joea


----------



## Julia (20 July 2012)

sails said:


> Interesting interview with Michael Smith discussing this issue (Michael Smith was the radio presenter who lost his job with 2UE over this same issue):



If that's accurate reporting (and it seems detailed, justified and checkable) that's pretty damning for Ms Gillard.
No wonder the issue has never actually gone away.
Craig Thompson's efforts, in comparison, seem petty.


----------



## sails (20 July 2012)

Julia said:


> If that's accurate reporting (and it seems detailed, justified and checkable) that's pretty damning for Ms Gillard.
> No wonder the issue has never actually gone away.
> Craig Thompson's efforts, in comparison, seem petty.





Michael Smith certainly comes across extremely credible and seems to have put a fair bit of effort into some forensic type detective work.

If the account is correct, I find it incredible that an Australian PM would threaten any media in the way this has been reported.  That is not the Australian way, imo.  It makes Bligh look pretty tame by comparison.


----------



## joea (20 July 2012)

sails said:


> Michael Smith certainly comes across extremely credible and seems to have put a fair bit of effort into some forensic type detective work.
> 
> If the account is correct, I find it incredible that an Australian PM would threaten any media in the way this has been reported.  That is not the Australian way, imo.  It makes Bligh look pretty tame by comparison.




If it is correct it will make a hit in the election campaign!!
joe


----------



## sptrawler (20 July 2012)

She may not inspire confidence, but she certainly proves Aussies love to be whipped.


----------



## joea (21 July 2012)

sptrawler said:


> She may not inspire confidence, but she certainly proves Aussies love to be whipped.




Aussies are holding back the "ouch" for a little way down the track.
The sound will be then expressed across the nation.
You may hear a whimper in Melbourne this weekend.
joea


----------



## Logique (21 July 2012)

It's dangerous to your tenure to raise these matters, Smith, Milne, McClelland...



> http://www.pressdisplay.com/pressdisplay/viewer.aspx
> The case flared sensationally last year when Ms Gillard’s conduct was raised by Sydney radio broadcaster* Michael Smith and The Australian’s columnist Glenn Milne, both of whom lost their jobs *after a furious response from Ms Gillard..
> 
> ..Mr Cambridge proposed a pecuniary interests register for union officials: ‘‘Quite frankly, *I am now certain the Victorian affair goes a lot deeper* than I had first suspected and I am afraid that underlying the whole mess may be issues of serious corruption.’’
> ...


----------



## dutchie (21 July 2012)

I think Julia has a lot of questions to answer.

More will come out after the next election.


----------



## noco (21 July 2012)

How can Gillard inspire confidence in the Austrlian voters when she can't inspire confidence in her own team let alone the unions.

This Labor Government under Gillard is in absolute chaos, turmoil and disfunctional. In the meantime, the public and business are confused and suffering from the lack of good management of the economy and the affairs of the Nation

She has no genuine concern in the National interest, only her own survival and she must go now. 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...leadership-noise/story-e6frgd0x-1226431210293


----------



## dutchie (21 July 2012)

Can anyone point me to an instance where Julia Gillard has answered a question to the subject and honestly.

I just want evidence of *one*!


----------



## MrBurns (21 July 2012)

Cant find it now but there was an article by Pickering outlining Gillards past, when she was working as a solicitor, the handling of money into a slush fund etc etc

Well......................I heard from what I consider an impecable source that there's a lot of truth in that article, Gillard is a nasty piece of work and unfit to be PM.


----------



## joea (22 July 2012)

noco said:


> How can Gillard inspire confidence in the Austrlian voters when she can't inspire confidence in her own team let alone the unions.
> 
> This Labor Government under Gillard is in absolute chaos, turmoil and disfunctional. In the meantime, the public and business are confused and suffering from the lack of good management of the economy and the affairs of the Nation
> 
> ...




noco
From that link, one would think the top three are going to be Rudd, Shorten and Cream.
I just wonder then what order.?
Well no doubt there will be some activity when the by - election is finalized.
 joea


----------



## joea (22 July 2012)

Informal vote in the by -  election is 8.48% at present.

http://www.vec.vic.gov.au/Results/StateBy2012resultMelbourneDistrict.html

joea


----------



## noco (23 July 2012)

joea said:


> noco
> From that link, one would think the top three are going to be Rudd, Shorten and Cream.
> I just wonder then what order.?
> Well no doubt there will be some activity when the by - election is finalized.
> joea




I think it will be Rudd if the AFP find the leaked explicit video has come from Gillard's office. Her past history shows she is well and truly capable of it.

If she is found out, she may well finish up like 'humpty dumpty'.

The AFP state they are confident of tracking down the source of origin.


http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...er-julia-gillard/story-fndo1uez-1226431655585


----------



## joea (23 July 2012)

noco said:


> I think it will be Rudd if the AFP find the leaked explicit video has come from Gillard's office. Her past history shows she is well and truly capable of it.
> 
> If she is found out, she may well finish up like 'humpty dumpty'.
> 
> ...




Mark Arbib has made a statement that Julia Gillard will cease to be the PM of Australia by the end
 of September.
joea


----------



## noco (23 July 2012)

joea said:


> Mark Arbib has made a statement that Julia Gillard will cease to be the PM of Australia by the end
> of September.
> joea




That is interesting coming from Arbib.

Do you think it will be as a result of the AFP probe?

Do you think she will be axed or resign?


----------



## joea (23 July 2012)

noco said:


> That is interesting coming from Arbib.
> 
> Do you think it will be as a result of the AFP probe?
> 
> Do you think she will be axed or resign?




noco
I honestly cannot answer question 1.
I am pretty sure I heard it on the radio.
The radio announcer did not say what was behind it.
I was on a tractor hauling a bin of sugar cane at 37klm/hr, and I know when i heard it the tractor
 got a bit of a wobble up.
I can answer question 2. She will be axed, or forced to resign. Basically the same thing. However with 
a resignation she could explain why and where her future lies.(more honorable)

joea.  when I heard it you could have knocked me over with a feather.


----------



## drsmith (23 July 2012)

joea said:


> Mark Arbib has made a statement that Julia Gillard will cease to be the PM of Australia by the end
> of September.
> joea



This got a brief mention on the predictions and observations segment of Insiders this morning.

http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/


----------



## joea (23 July 2012)

drsmith said:


> This got a brief mention on the predictions and observations segment of Insiders this morning.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/




yeah!
Arbib and Gillard do not hit it off, so could be sour grapes.
joea


----------



## noco (24 July 2012)

I would say this latest poll won't help her cause either.

Gillard is doing the limbo rock.  HOW LOW CAN SHE GO?


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...labor-vote-slump/story-fn59niix-1226433394520


----------



## drsmith (24 July 2012)

For this government, running the country comes a distant fourth.



> But the caucus member said it was hard to see how a leadership transition would occur due to three factors.
> 
> The first was the Prime Minister had expended too much personal capital to stay in the post and would not voluntarily stand down.
> 
> ...




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ator-mark-bishop/story-fn59niix-1226433738200


----------



## Logique (24 July 2012)

drsmith said:


> For this government, running the country comes a distant fourth.
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ator-mark-bishop/story-fn59niix-1226433738200



Tragic (for the nation), but that article is on the mark Dr Zacchary. 

This is what the party of Curtin, Chifley, Bowen and Hawke, and (once) a journalist called Bolt, and (once) a poster called Logique, has become. The plaything of the Crown St (Sydney)/Lygon St (Melb) young, tenured and white collared and (all too often) scatterbrained. And the Union bosses to keep them in line.


----------



## drsmith (24 July 2012)

Logique said:


> Tragic (for the nation), but that article is on the mark Dr Zacchary.



We can only hope that the increasing chaos within the Gillard government will soon bring it down.

Labor senator Mark Bishop's efforts today, first with The Australian and second with the shutters up (below) makes me think there's serious movement behind the scenes. 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-07-24/latest-poll-creates-new-wave-of-labor-concern/4151794

One by one, Kevin's supporters are clearly beating the war drums.


----------



## noco (24 July 2012)

drsmith said:


> We can only hope that the increasing chaos within the Gillard government will soon bring it down.
> 
> Labor senator Mark Bishop's efforts today, first with The Australian and second with the shutters up (below) makes me think there's serious movement behind the scenes.
> 
> ...




Geez Doc, we have all been saying it for months but Gillard just seems to be glued on and it must be bloody good glue at that.
I must confess though it has to be getting close by the day.


----------



## drsmith (24 July 2012)

Her political corpse appears glued on because their only other option is the corpse they executed and have since buried.


----------



## noco (25 July 2012)

drsmith said:


> Her political corpse appears glued on because their only other option is the corpse they executed and have since buried.




Doc, Gillard is a walking corpse that just will not lie down as Janet Alrechtsen writes.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...ime-for-pm-to-go/story-e6frg7bo-1226434215826


----------



## drsmith (25 July 2012)

noco said:


> Doc, Gillard is a walking corpse that just will not lie down as Janet Alrechtsen writes.



They rarely do.

It's made worse this time beacuse Labor's alternative is limited to resurrecting Kev's charred remains from the grave.

If they can hang on, they'll replace Julia with a different face close to the election to salvage as much furniture as they can.


----------



## waza1960 (26 July 2012)

I was just thinking today how F**ked the labor party is as an organisation when you look back at recent history its obvious that their incestous relationship with the unions have made them yesterday's political party.
  BTW I'm not unhappy about this situation however we do always need a competent opposition IMO.

  When I think about it the rot started when they put up Latham as a leader ( I think we dodged a massive bullet there) 
  And look at their leaders since then................. say no more.

 Although I don't agree with their politics I thought Crean and Beazley were at least "decent people"


----------



## noco (3 August 2012)

It looks like the truth about the Gillard/Wilson affair is about to be revealed if Ralph Blewitt is given immunity against criminal charges.

The problem may be the influence Gillard has on the AFP to squash the investigation.



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...an-ralph-blewitt/story-fn6tcs23-1226441845982


----------



## dutchie (3 August 2012)

waza1960 said:


> I was just thinking today how F**ked the labor party is as an organisation when you look back at recent history its obvious that their incestous relationship with the unions have made them yesterday's political party.
> BTW I'm not unhappy about this situation however we do always need a competent opposition IMO.
> 
> When I think about it the rot started when they put up Latham as a leader ( I think we dodged a massive bullet there)
> ...




+1



Yes we certainly missed a bullet with Latham, luckily we got Rudd (the cannon ball) instead.


----------



## MrBurns (3 August 2012)

noco said:


> It looks like the truth about the Gillard/Wilson affair is about to be revealed if Ralph Blewitt is given immunity against criminal charges.
> 
> The problem may be the influence Gillard has on the AFP to squash the investigation.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...an-ralph-blewitt/story-fn6tcs23-1226441845982





This will be HUGE, a mate of mine has connections with first hand knowledge of what she was up to and it's devastating stuff.

The truth is in here somewhere - 

http://lpickering.net/


----------



## noco (3 August 2012)

noco said:


> It looks like the truth about the Gillard/Wilson affair is about to be revealed if Ralph Blewitt is given immunity against criminal charges.
> 
> The problem may be the influence Gillard has on the AFP to squash the investigation.
> 
> ...




Here lies more on the Gillard/ Wilson saga. It is obvious Blewitt has a wealth of information buried in his memory.

I hope he is now under police protection, if not I would have doubts about his safety.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/scandal-refuses-to-die/story-e6frg6z6-1226441777462


----------



## joea (3 August 2012)

Luxbet.
ALP leader...... Rudd $1.90, Gillard $2.65

joea


----------



## noco (4 August 2012)

Harry Nowicki is the one pushing Blewitt to open up on Wilson and the AWU. 

Nowicki states he is not being influence by any polical party or from anyone in the Labor Party, so why is he doing it?

Good question.

I wonder how Ms. Gillard is feeling this morning?



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...e-wilson-charged/story-fn6tcs23-1226442634336


----------



## Julia (4 August 2012)

Good to see "The Australian" has Hedley Thomas on this.  If anyone will ferret out and follow up, he will.


----------



## noco (4 August 2012)

This whole affair is starting to smell like rotten week old prawn shells and it is not going to go away any time soon.

Maybe big Robbie is after pay back.

The problem is will Gillard make threats like she did last year which cost Milne his job?


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...omments/the_scandal_that_now_demands_answers/


----------



## MrBurns (4 August 2012)

The wolves are circling, question time wil be prime time viewing



> Detectives investigating an alleged $400,000 union fraud in the 1990s wanted to prosecute a former boyfriend of Julia Gillard over the matter, it's been reported.
> 
> The Weekend Australian says internal police documents into a union funds scandal in the 1990s show that detectives wanted to prosecute former Australian Workers' Union boss Bruce Wilson and an associate, Ralph Blewitt, over the affair.
> 
> ...





http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/8510575/gillards-ex-a-crook


----------



## drsmith (26 August 2012)

*Julia Gillard's union slush fund*

After Julia Gillard's stealthy move on the media last week, is the fire still smoldering underneath.

No specifics, but the SMH's Paul Daley seems to think so,



> Meanwhile, as Gillard bedded in the carbon tax and found a pragmatic solution to the political problem of asylum seekers, it appeared she might finally have been regaining support within her party and the electorate. *But new details about her time as a solicitor with the law firm Slater & Gordon, specifically about her conduct relating to a then client, pose a new threat to her authority and reputation.*
> 
> This story has a very long tail. Many allegations have been made in many forums since the mid-1990s. Despite all the malicious and often false allegations that were magnified with the advent of the internet, no wrongdoing has been proven. But there are now legitimate questions that will, at best, distract her.
> 
> ...




http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/pm-like-abbott-in-the-headlights-20120825-24t28.html

It would be interesting to know what he's referring too there. 

My bolds.


----------



## sptrawler (26 August 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's union slush fund*



drsmith said:


> After Julia Gillard's stealthy move on the media last week, is the fire still smoldering underneath.
> 
> No specifics, but the SMH's Paul Daley seems to think so,
> 
> ...




There is one thing for sure doc, she hasn't become this nasty overnight and there has to be a reason why everyone in the labor party is $hit scared of her.


----------



## drsmith (26 August 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's union slush fund*

Andrew Bolt has dug up a copy of a cheque for ~$68k supposedly drawn on accounts attached to said slush fund.

According to Andrew bolt,



> Gillard was at the auction and knew the house was for Blewett and that her boyfriend would live in it.




http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/

There's also this, again from the SMH,



> Mr Wilson and Ms Gillard were together until 1995 when Ms Gillard discovered she had been deceived by Mr Wilson and she said she ended the relationship.
> 
> Mr Blewitt, who now lives in Asia, broke a 17-year silence to say he was willing to tell all he knows about the union scam so the chapter could finally be closed.




http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...idnt-know-i-had-home-loan-20120825-24t6o.html


----------



## sptrawler (26 August 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's union slush fund*



drsmith said:


> Andrew Bolt has dug up a copy of a cheque for ~$68k supposedly drawn on accounts attached to said slush fund.
> 
> According to Andrew bolt,
> 
> ...




The problem is with labor, it goes back to the biblical saying "let he has not sinned, throw the first stone" so then it becomes the survival of the nastiest.
This is where all the crying and grovelling and falling in behind the leader comes to the fore. It will be interesting to see how they polish up a #urd.IMO.
I may be completely wrong in my assuption, but I don't think you can polish a #urd.LOL Maybe So_Cynical and IFocus can run classes.


----------



## drsmith (27 August 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's union slush fund*

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...omments/michael_smith_releases_the_documents/



> Michael Smith, the 2UE broadcaster who lost his job after asking the Prime Minister too many questions about the AWU scandal, has promised to put up all the relevant documents so readers can make up their own minds.




http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/


----------



## white_goodman (28 August 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's union slush fund*



drsmith said:


> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...omments/michael_smith_releases_the_documents/
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/




shes been done in by her own handwriting... these are the type of people that spring up in politics from the union crowd


----------



## Miss Hale (28 August 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's union slush fund*

This whole thing stinks to high heaven IMO 

This post from Tim Blair's blog sums it up for me:


http://blogs.news.com.au/dailyteleg...dailytelegraph/comments/credit_where_its_due/


----------



## Crom (28 August 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's union slush fund*

Gillard lies so easily it is difficult to know when she is telling the truth, if ever!

I don't know if the rest of the party are scared of her, I think it is more that no one else wants to hold the reins when the ALP are facing a right off at the next election.  After the election there will be many new contenders.

Sadly in the meantime, this wonderful country of ours continues to have the many opportunities the resources boom could have provided, being squandered.

History will not be kind to this Gov't and Gillard in particular!


----------



## Calliope (28 August 2012)

*Re: Julia Gillard's union slush fund*



white_goodman said:


> shes been done in by her own handwriting... these are the type of people that spring up in politics from the union crowd




Michael Smith's blog will be well worth following. She cost him his job. Revenge will be sweet. I live for the day when Gillard will be exposed and we can all exact revenge for all the damage this mendacious and malicious woman has done to this country.

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/


----------



## noco (8 November 2012)

I watched Miss Gillard on TV a couple of nights ago during her visit to Laos and I must say I was very unimpressed with her attire when she stepped down from the Air Force jet.

She was dressed in a drab black pants suit that looked like it was fresh out of Vinnies.

Sorry but it did not inspire confidence in me one iota.

I compared her with other female world leaders attire and I think she should get a new fashion designer.

Maybe the $17,000 from the AWU slush fund has ran out.


----------



## dutchie (8 November 2012)

noco said:


> Maybe the $17,000 from the AWU slush fund has ran out.




LOL


----------



## Miss Hale (8 November 2012)

I think I'm one of the few people who has no problem with her clothes at all, I think she dresses quite well and appropriately.  The only thing I did notice that on this trip she was wearing flat shoes, possibly to avoid the another fall like the one in India.


----------



## drsmith (10 November 2012)

> Ms Gillard has said she was unaware that there was anything untoward going on until the issue of corruption in the AWU emerged in mid-1995.
> 
> The Prime Minister was asked in Parliament on October 11 about her statement that “once I became aware that I had been deceived I ended my relationship with Mr Wilson”.
> 
> ...



I'd suggest that Julia Gillard cut Bruce Wilson loose, but beyond that turned a blind eye.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out in parliament next week.

http://afr.com/p/national/what_gillard_knew_about_the_slush_JbGcILLo9O59yt3QGFT68H


----------



## noco (10 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> I'd suggest that Julia Gillard cut Bruce Wilson loose, but beyond that turned a blind eye.
> 
> It will be interesting to see how this plays out in parliament next week.
> 
> http://afr.com/p/national/what_gillard_knew_about_the_slush_JbGcILLo9O59yt3QGFT68H




I feel sure Julie Bishop has been working overtime since the last sitting.

What a good move to indulge a female from the opposition. At least Gillard won't be game to bring up that MISOGYNY crsp again.


----------



## noco (14 November 2012)

I am sure Miss Gillard alias (Sargent Schultz) will say "I know nothing".

But she is really digging a deeper hole for herself by not answering the questions.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...to-julia-gillard/story-fng5kxvh-1226516225346


----------



## noco (14 November 2012)

noco said:


> I am sure Miss Gillard alias (Sargent Schultz) will say "I know nothing".
> 
> But she is really digging a deeper hole for herself by not answering the questions.
> 
> ...




Here is more to digest on Miss Gillard's activities in Slater and Gorden with Mark Latham trying to defend her. 


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...how_latham_twisted_a_quote_to_defend_gillard/


----------



## drsmith (14 November 2012)

noco said:


> But she is really digging a deeper hole for herself by not answering the questions.



It's the last line of defence.


----------



## drsmith (14 November 2012)

The Craig Thomson defence.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...fresh-awu-claims/story-fn3dxiwe-1226516400870


----------



## Julia (14 November 2012)

drsmith, your link produced this:
404-Page not found
Could you perhaps copy and paste the headline so it can be accessed via Google?


----------



## drsmith (15 November 2012)

Julia said:


> drsmith, your link produced this:
> 404-Page not found
> Could you perhaps copy and paste the headline so it can be accessed via Google?



It eas another denial from Julia Gillard.

I now can't find it on The Australian, but the SMH have the same story.

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-new...aim-just-another-smear-pm-20121114-29bae.html

Not sure what's happened to The Australian's version. It was either pulled or I didn't copy all the web link.


----------



## sptrawler (15 November 2012)

It really doesn't seem to matter wether she did anything wrong or not, the same with Thomson.
It doesn't even matter that they have blown Australia's debt out to never seen before levels and it is still blowing out.
It doesn't matter that personal tax rates are going up and new taxes that impact on Australians living standards have been introduced.
It doesn't matter that they have lifted the penson age to 67 and limited how much older workers can put into super, to force them to stay working.

No, what matters is Tony doesn't come over well on T.V.
I think Australia deserves all it gets.LOL 
Best of luck to all. Cheers


----------



## noco (22 November 2012)

I wonder whether our Kevvie is behind the putsch.

He has been very active with the media of late.

I reckon he is sitting back grinning from ear to ear.

Don't forget to read the extra links.

http://kangaroocourtofaustralia.com...bruce-wilson-julia-gillard-awu-fraud-scandal/


----------



## noco (22 November 2012)

Ralph Blewitt speaks out in an interview today.

A lot he refused to comment on untill after the police interview at 10 am tomorrow.

No kidding we will see plenty of fire works in Parliament next week. Gillard might take a sickie and stay home with Tim for some pampering.



http://www.2gb.com/article/ralph-blewitt-speaks


----------



## drsmith (23 November 2012)

noco said:


> No kidding we will see plenty of fire works in Parliament next week. Gillard might take a sickie and stay home with Tim for some pampering.



Unless she can substantially discredit what Nick Styant Brown has presented, she won't make it to Parliament next week, at least not as PM.

As for poor Tim, I wouldn't like to be her cat or her partner tonight.


----------



## sptrawler (23 November 2012)

noco said:


> I am sure Miss Gillard alias (Sargent Schultz) will say "I know nothing".
> 
> But she is really digging a deeper hole for herself by not answering the questions.
> 
> ...




The I know nothing stratergy didn't work for Carmen Lawrence.


----------



## sptrawler (23 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> Unless she can substantially discredit what Nick Styant Brown has presented, she won't make it to Parliament next week, at least not as PM.
> 
> As for poor Tim, I wouldn't like to be her cat or her partner tonight.




You think there could be a hissy fit in the Lodge tonight?


----------



## noco (23 November 2012)

Sooner or later Miss Gillard is going to come unstuck with continued denials.

The dogs are barking.

Whether she survive next week's sitting of parliament will be interesting.


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/aw...you-need-to-know/story-e6frf7jo-1226522812935


----------



## drsmith (23 November 2012)

noco said:


> Sooner or later Miss Gillard is going to come unstuck with continued denials.



She's now reduced to the Carmen Lawrence defence.



> “What this boils down to is that 17 years ago, I couldn't recall events that happened two and a half years earlier,” the Prime Minister said in Melbourne.




She couldn't remember it before she left Slater & Gordon either.

The sound of those dogs is deafening.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...e-in-awu-scandal/story-fng5kxvh-1226522882679


----------



## sptrawler (23 November 2012)

Yes doc, apparently she thinks it is a smear campaign.
Would that be similar to the campaign she has been running against Abbott.


----------



## drsmith (23 November 2012)

The attached audio outlines where Julie Bishop might go with some of her questions next week.

http://www.3aw.com.au/blogs/breakin...ie-bishop-demands-answers/20121123-29yfp.html

She sounds like a predator about to make the kill.


----------



## Julia (23 November 2012)

Neither of the links from that work for me.  I've tried googling it but it just goes to the same article.
Could you summarise it, or maybe you might have a different link?


----------



## sptrawler (23 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> The attached audio outlines where Julie Bishop might go with some of her questions next week.
> 
> http://www.3aw.com.au/blogs/breakin...ie-bishop-demands-answers/20121123-29yfp.html
> 
> She sounds like a predator about to make the kill.




Gillard is as sharp as a tack and Bishop will have to be good to pin her.

The Carmen Lawrence issue was brought to head and highlighted by a very sad set of circumstances, that even Carmen couldn't talk her way out of.
Gillard won't be taken down by innuendo, she will just brazen face deny it and move on.

I think Labor will be in panic mode because Abbott said, the running of unions requires investigation.
That would have caused a lot of Labor members, who were union organisers and are now on the boards of many industry super funds, to $#it themselves.IMO


----------



## sptrawler (24 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> She's now reduced to the Carmen Lawrence defence.




I think Carmen Lawrence said it was the low point of her political career. 
I personaly know we lost a wonderfull careing person for some misguided political advantage. RIP Penny.

It is sad when honesty takes a back seat to polical survival.


----------



## noco (24 November 2012)

Sooner or later this Prime Minister of ours must fall on her sword.

She just can't keep saying she has done nothing wrong and that it is just a smear campaign.

The evidence is starting to roll in and all she can say is I don't recall it.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...erial-in-awu-row/story-fncvk70o-1226523140956


----------



## noco (24 November 2012)

The Labor caucas are now so very concerned and have no idea what next will bring for Julia Gillard.

The more she denies accuastions, the worse it will be for her.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...unsettles-caucus/story-e6frg75f-1226523108206


----------



## noco (24 November 2012)

How I woild like to be a fly on the wall at the Lodge this weekend.

Tim will be saying, NO Julia don't tear out that red hair of yours because I just spent so much time getting it right for your next camera shoot.


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...wu_scandal_kelty_adds_to_pressure_on_gillard/


----------



## sptrawler (24 November 2012)

noco said:


> How I woild like to be a fly on the wall at the Lodge this weekend.
> 
> Tim will be saying, NO Julia don't tear out that red hair of yours because I just spent so much time getting it right for your next camera shoot.
> 
> ...




Sometimes the nearest and dearest cop the flack, I wouldn't want to be in Timmy's shoes.


----------



## MrBurns (24 November 2012)

sptrawler said:


> Sometimes the nearest and dearest cop the flack, I wouldn't want to be in Timmy's shoes.




She'd probably get the leather and whip out but he'd enjoy it too much


----------



## sptrawler (24 November 2012)

MrBurns said:


> She'd probably get the leather and whip out but he'd enjoy it too much





I didn't want to say that, but I did think it.LOL


----------



## noco (24 November 2012)

Bruce Wilson says Gillard is innocent.

How could anyone trust the integraty of this Wilson fellow after what he has done.


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...candal_bruce_wilson_says_gillard_is_innocent/


----------



## drsmith (24 November 2012)

noco said:


> Bruce Wilson says Gillard is innocent.



I wonder why he has popped up. He can only do her harm.

Meanwhile, the smear of Nick Styant-Browne has begun.



> Mr Swan described Mr Styant-Browne as "disgruntled".




http://www.news.com.au/top-stories/...laims-wayne-swan/story-e6frfkp9-1226523276029


----------



## drsmith (25 November 2012)

Like a child with a plastic bucket and spade on the beach, Labor is now trying to stop the tide coming in.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...-wilson-comments/story-fng5kxvh-1226523587180

This argument is so weak that one wonder's whether Labor itself is setting Julia Gillard up for a fall this week.


----------



## IFocus (25 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> Like a child with a plastic bucket and spade on the beach, Labor is now trying to stop the tide coming in.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...-wilson-comments/story-fng5kxvh-1226523587180
> 
> ...




The opposition desperate for an issue seem to be going all in I guess we will see next week how it pans out but with Wilson's statement it would seem to have run its course.


----------



## drsmith (25 November 2012)

IFocus said:


> The opposition desperate for an issue seem to be going all in I guess we will see next week how it pans out but with Wilson's statement it would seem to have run its course.



Wilson is clearly no more trustworthy than Blewitt and him entering the frey will only fan the flames.

Many in Labor would understand this. A move on the crippled prime ministership of Julia Gillard is afoot from within.


----------



## MrBurns (25 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> Wilson is clearly no more trustworthy than Blewitt and him entering the frey will only fan the flames.
> 
> Many in Labor would understand this. A move on the crippled prime ministership of Julia Gillard is afoot from within.




Exactly, who would trust Wilsons word any more than Gillards ? He's a thief and a cheat and should be behind bars.


----------



## dutchie (25 November 2012)

noco said:


> Bruce Wilson says Gillard is innocent.
> 
> How could anyone trust the integraty of this Wilson fellow after what he has done.
> 
> ...




Obviously their relationship was purely sexual (Yuk) and there was no pillow talk.

"I know nothing"


----------



## drsmith (25 November 2012)

> Foreign Minister Bob Carr said he didn’t know Mr Wilson so couldn’t comment on the credibility of his defence of Ms Gillard.



http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...ing-up-gillard-tale-burke-20121125-2a13p.html

Start here Mr Carr.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AWU_scandal


----------



## IFocus (25 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> Wilson is clearly no more trustworthy than Blewitt and him entering the frey will only fan the flames.
> 
> Many in Labor would understand this. A move on the crippled prime ministership of Julia Gillard is afoot from within.





Exactly Blewitt is a real shonky disowned by his own family but you lot quote him as though he is credible.


Clearly Blewitt is being funded but by who?


----------



## drsmith (25 November 2012)

IFocus said:


> Clearly Blewitt is being funded but by who?



In the past, the same as Bruce Wilson. Corporations by extortion and union members.

You keep defending Julia Gillard and her government as being credible. 

Where have I defened Blewitt as credible ?

In my post that you have quoted above, I have clearly indicated otherwise.


----------



## drsmith (25 November 2012)

Julie Bishop welcomes Bruce Wilson's contribution.



> On Sunday, Ms Bishop said Mr Wilson’s comments did not clear the Prime Minister’s name. “His defence of Julia Gillard does not coincide with the recollection of many others and is certainly not supported by the documents we have seen.”
> 
> Ms Bishop urged Mr Wilson to confess his involvement with the alleged fraud to the police.
> 
> “This is a welcome development,” Ms Bishop told Sky News. “For the first time in 17 years, Bruce Wilson has admitted there was a fraud.”




http://www.afr.com/p/national/politics/mps_defend_gillard_from_bishop_attack_fyOh6UzeFqkgAFw2hIfQxK


----------



## Julia (25 November 2012)

IFocus said:


> Exactly Blewitt is a real shonky disowned by his own family but you lot quote him as though he is credible.



I'd say the level of shonkiness (if that's a word) existing in Blewitt and Wilson would be pretty much on a par.




> Clearly Blewitt is being funded but by who?



Funded for what?  So far, one air fare unless I'm missing something.

The police are not stupid.  They will assess whether what he says is credible.  And presumably he will be able to point to some sort of paper trail somewhere, e.g. the CBA letter to Julia Gillard produced by Nick Styant Brown this week.

The characters involved in this seedy situation give an insight into the graft and corruption which appears endemic in the union movement.  I'm damned if I can understand why they have such power when you consider the small proportion of workers who actually belong to a union.


----------



## noco (25 November 2012)

IFocus said:


> Exactly Blewitt is a real shonky disowned by his own family but you lot quote him as though he is credible.
> 
> 
> Clearly Blewitt is being funded but by who?




Just maybe our Kevvie?????????? He and Terise have plenty of what it takes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Calliope (25 November 2012)

IFocus said:


> Exactly Blewitt is a real shonky disowned by his own family but you lot quote him as though he is credible.
> 
> 
> Clearly Blewitt is being funded but by who?




You seem to forget Focus that the three shonkies who pulled off this massive scam, Blewitt, Wilson and Gillard, are "your lot." However, you still have time to recant before the:fan. But time is running out.


----------



## moXJO (25 November 2012)

IFocus said:


> Exactly Blewitt is a real shonky disowned by his own family but you lot quote him as though he is credible.
> 
> 
> Clearly Blewitt is being funded but by who?




Not sure if its true or not, but apparently one of his mates was touched up by union thugs recently and he came back to drop them all in the stink. But really who knows with this guy.


----------



## noco (25 November 2012)

This Patrick Keane, appointed by Julia Gillard, does not have a very good reputation.

Perhaps he can throw some light on the missing files.

http://kangaroocourtofaustralia.com...the-awu-scandal-as-high-court-judge/#comments


----------



## Calliope (25 November 2012)

Wilson said:

"They can go on a witch-hunt for as long as they like, and they will find nothing that will do her (Gillard) any harm."

I doubt if she can ever live down her Bonny and Clyde relationship with him. An everlasting character stain for life and an indication of stupidity or gullibility or worse. Hardly a suitable CV for a head of state.


----------



## noco (25 November 2012)

Be prepared for a lot of reading on this link. It is all starting to unfold "BIG TIME".

http://kangaroocourtofaustralia.com...attack-and-drops-the-boot-into-julia-gillard/


----------



## IFocus (25 November 2012)

Insiders covered this today and in particular Laura Tingle who has actually looked at the paper work involved and trolled over the facts some thing missing from this thread.

The point made was the politics rather than any thing Gillard will go to jail over.


----------



## bellenuit (25 November 2012)

IFocus said:


> The opposition desperate for an issue seem to be going all in I guess we will see next week how it pans out but with Wilson's statement it would seem to have run its course.




If it does run its course and nothing can be found against Gillard, it will be because she is good at covering her tracks and because she and her mates stick together rather than let the truth be known.

Although all circumstantial, the evidence would suggest that she is deeply involved in the whole rotten affair. If this were not so politicised, any dispassionate observer would conclude that she was a knowing participant. It is beyond credulity to conclude that she knew nothing of what was going on. She was in an intimate relationship with the main perpetrator of the fraud. She did not disclose to her employer the activities relating to the legal work she was doing on behalf of her lover and did not open a client file which prevented subsequent discovery and investigation of her activities. She put political pressure on newspapers to have their key reporters drop the story. The only questions she answered on the affair were part of an "ambush" press conference which she called without disclosing what was to be discussed, ensuring that those attending did not have prepared questions and also ensuring that key reporters who were on top of the story were not in attendance. When some documentary evidence came out (the CBA letter) proving some of her statements to be false, she resorted to the "I can't recall" defence and stated that one would hardly expect her to remember if she had worked on a mortgage issue 2 1/2 years prior to those false statements. Understandable if were just some client mortgage, but this was the mortgage on a house bought by her lover at an auction she also attended.


----------



## sails (25 November 2012)

IFocus said:


> ...Clearly Blewitt is being funded but by who?




Apparently, most of it is being paid for by HARRY Nowicki, an affluent, retired personal injury lawyer from Melbourne with an interest in the history of the union movement in Australia.  I don't think Nowicki is a liberal - but happy to be corrected if that's incorrect...

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...a-union-intrigue/story-fn59noo3-1226441801095


And if you are trying to insinuate that the libs are on a witch hunt, don't forget it all started again publicly when one of Gillard's own ministers [Robert McClelland] raised it in Parliament. This link discusses those who are pushing for the truth on this matter:

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/the-men-behind-pms-hellish-week-20120825-24t6y.html


----------



## Julia (25 November 2012)

noco said:


> This Patrick Keane, appointed by Julia Gillard, does not have a very good reputation.
> 
> Perhaps he can throw some light on the missing files.
> 
> http://kangaroocourtofaustralia.com...the-awu-scandal-as-high-court-judge/#comments



Your Kangaroo Court correspondent does not explain how Justice Keane 'had responsibility for the missing files".
I doubt he had clerical duties relating to how paperwork was filed.
I have no idea who this Kangaroo Court person is, but I'm surprised he's not more worried about libel.
Justice Keane's appointment has been widely praised by all sides of politics.




Calliope said:


> Wilson said:
> 
> "They can go on a witch-hunt for as long as they like, and they will find nothing that will do her (Gillard) any harm."
> 
> I doubt if she can ever live down her Bonny and Clyde relationship with him. An everlasting character stain for life and an indication of stupidity or gullibility or worse. Hardly a suitable CV for a head of state.



This goes to a subtle influence on the minds of the electorate.  However much Ms Gillard claims innocence in this tawdry affair, the very fact that for some years her chosen companions (and her lover) were crooks has to taint her.  



bellenuit said:


> If it does run its course and nothing can be found against Gillard, it will be because she is good at covering her tracks and because she and her mates stick together rather than let the truth be known.
> 
> Although all circumstantial, the evidence would suggest that she is deeply involved in the whole rotten affair. If this were not so politicised, any dispassionate observer would conclude that she was a knowing participant. It is beyond credulity to conclude that she knew nothing of what was going on. She was in an intimate relationship with the main perpetrator of the fraud. She did not disclose to her employer the activities relating to the legal work she was doing on behalf of her lover and did not open a client file which prevented subsequent discovery and investigation of her activities. She put political pressure on newspapers to have their key reporters drop the story. The only questions she answered on the affair were part of an "ambush" press conference which she called without disclosing what was to be discussed, ensuring that those attending did not have prepared questions and also ensuring that key reporters who were on top of the story were not in attendance. When some documentary evidence came out (the CBA letter) proving some of her statements to be false, she resorted to the "I can't recall" defence and stated that one would hardly expect her to remember if she had worked on a mortgage issue 2 1/2 years prior to those false statements. Understandable if were just some client mortgage, but this was the mortgage on a house bought by her lover at an auction she also attended.



Excellent summary.


----------



## noco (26 November 2012)

Be ready for fireworks in Parliament Question time today.

The rift between Blewitt and Wilson appears to be widening.

I believe a Royal Commission into the unions and in particular the AWU and the HSU in general should be called immediately.


http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...-blewitt-demands/story-fndo1uez-1226523805065


----------



## Calliope (26 November 2012)

Tony Windsor said:

”I haven’t seen anything that remotely resembles some sort of wrongdoing,”

This puts him on a par with Bruce Wilson as a lowlife. This is the man who called Abbott an "absolute disgrace."


----------



## dutchie (26 November 2012)

Calliope said:


> Tony Windsor said:
> 
> ”I haven’t seen anything that remotely resembles some sort of wrongdoing,”
> 
> This puts him on a par with Bruce Wilson as a lowlife. This is the man who called Abbott an "absolute disgrace."




He fits into the Labor Party beautifully.


----------



## sptrawler (26 November 2012)

noco said:


> I believe a Royal Commission into the unions and in particular the AWU and the HSU in general should be called immediately.




That would send a shock wave through Australia, what a massive fallout that would cause.
No way would you only focus on the AWU and HSU. The broader the terms of reference, the quicker the cracks would appear.IMO
It would keep the newspapers busy for years, bring it on.LOL


----------



## sptrawler (26 November 2012)

Calliope said:


> Tony Windsor said:
> 
> ”I haven’t seen anything that remotely resembles some sort of wrongdoing,”
> 
> This puts him on a par with Bruce Wilson as a lowlife. This is the man who called Abbott an "absolute disgrace."




I can't understand why he gets quoted, he must actively chase the press.
Well I don't think we will have to hear from him much longer, the election isn't far away.


----------



## drsmith (26 November 2012)

Tony Windsor's own political career and the long term survival of the carbon tax is wedded to the survival of the Gillard Government. That's why he's with them to the bitter end.

As for Julia Gillard herself, she's been clever enough to get to the top by lies and deceit. She knows no other way. Her problem is that it's very, very hard to cover all the tracks. 

EDIT:

Julia Gillard is going to try and head off today's question time at the pass. She's called a press conference for 1pm.

Will The Australian's Hedley Thomas be there ?


----------



## dutchie (26 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> Tony Windsor's own political career and the long term survival of the carbon tax is wedded to the survival of the Gillard Government. That's why he's with them to the bitter end.
> 
> As for Julia Gillard herself, she's been clever enough to get to the top by lies and deceit. She knows no other way. Her problem is that it's very, very hard to cover all the tracks.




I personally sometimes wonder which other husbands she may have slept with to advance her career.

(is that a low blow or could that be a possibility ??)


----------



## Calliope (26 November 2012)

dutchie said:


> I personally sometimes wonder which other husbands she may have slept with to advance her career.
> 
> (is that a low blow or could that be a possibility ??)




I think Craig Emerson was divorced, with three children, when Julia shacked up with him for two years from 2002. Like Bruce Wilson, he has stayed loyal to her and has an almost puppy-like devotion.


----------



## drsmith (26 November 2012)

She didn't wear the press gallery out this time.

She's wound up now, to face the house.


----------



## noco (26 November 2012)

Wilson was still drawing money from the slush fund as late as early 1996 after he had been kicked out of the AWU and Gillard and Slater and Gordon still had not notified the AWU of the said slush fund.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...nt-end-awu-fraud/story-fng5kxvh-1226523852732


----------



## bellenuit (26 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> She didn't wear the press gallery out this time.
> 
> She's wound up now, to face the house.




I only had time to listen to the end of the press conference and the first question from Bishop in Question Time. That question related to setting up the slush fund without having or seeing the resolution from the AWU authorising it to be set up (a legal requirement if I am correct). Gillard declined to answer, referring Bishop instead to the minutes of the just completed press conference where a similar question was asked by a reporter, whose name I can't recall.

But I saw that part of the press conference. Gillard didn't directly answer the question asked, but instead addressed some side issue. When the reporter tried to clarify exactly what he was asking, she cut him off and went to another reporter for a new question. 

So much for accountability.


----------



## bellenuit (26 November 2012)

Interesting!

*Note to editors/journalists - Julia Gillard is currently facing very serious allegations and Victoria Police are investigating those allegations*

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...-very-serious-allegations-and-victoria-p.html


----------



## drsmith (26 November 2012)

bellenuit said:


> Interesting!
> 
> *Note to editors/journalists - Julia Gillard is currently facing very serious allegations and Victoria Police are investigating those allegations*
> 
> http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...-very-serious-allegations-and-victoria-p.html



Julia Gillard was vague today regarding when she was asked witnessing the power of attorney personally, relying on a general comment about many coming across her desk. 

That one wouldn't have come across her desk, unless it went to Perth with her. 

The outcome of Michael Smith's faith in Ralph Blewitt will be ineresting. My response to Julia Gillard's point about trust between Ralph and herself is that I wouldn't trust either of them.


----------



## sails (26 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> Julia Gillard was vague today regarding when she was asked witnessing the power of attorney personally, relying on a general comment about many coming across her desk.
> 
> That one wouldn't have come across her desk, unless it went to Perth with her.
> 
> The outcome of Michael Smith's faith in Ralph Blewitt will be ineresting. My response to Julia Gillard's point about trust between Ralph and herself is that I wouldn't trust either of them.




As an industrial lawyer, it seems strange  that POAs would be so frequent. 

And this POA would have likely had some special significance as it was helping her lover buy his house.

And, if she is as innocent as she states, then why isn't she actively locating those lost files that would possibly help her to clear her name?


----------



## Julia (26 November 2012)

Extract from item in "Business Spectator" today:


> Ms Gillard said she did not remember $5000 being put into her Commonwealth bank account and her attempts to recover bank records had been unsuccessful.



I have never, ever heard of it being impossible to access bank records.
Perhaps I am ill informed.  Does this statement from Ms Gillard seem reasonable?

She did get one thing right in the remarks I heard her making today:  that is that the present Liberal Party bears little resemblance to the Liberal Party in the time of John Howard.


----------



## bellenuit (26 November 2012)

Julia said:


> I have never, ever heard of it being impossible to access bank records.
> Perhaps I am ill informed.  Does this statement from Ms Gillard seem reasonable?




I'm sure she said sometime today that the Commonwealth Bank claimed they do not have records going back that far. I would accept that at face value as all it would require is one inquisitive clerk to prove her lie and that would be too much of a risk for her to take.


----------



## drsmith (27 November 2012)

Yesterday, Julie Bishop was only warming up. 

Today promises to be more interesting.



> Deputy Opposition Leader Julie Bishop is ramping up her attack on Julia Gillard's conduct as a lawyer in the 1990s, accusing the Prime Minister of creating the ''stolen vehicle that the bank robbers took to the bank''.
> 
> Ms Bishop told reporters in Canberra on Tuesday that when Ms Gillard was a partner with Slater & Gordon, she set up a union association, which saw money siphoned out by her then boyfriend Bruce Wilson and fellow AWU official, Ralph Blewitt.
> 
> ''The reason [Ms Gillard] didn't open a file within Slater & Gordon ... was because she and Wilson and Blewitt wanted to hide from the AWU the fact that an unauthorised entity was being set up...'' Ms Bishop said.




http://m.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/bishop-unleashes-the-bank-robbers-20121127-2a4e3.html


----------



## Calliope (27 November 2012)

After her poisonous spray against her old confederate Ralph Blewitt, Gillard poses the question;

*'’His word against mine: make your mind up.”*

Going on form, Blewitt is more believable. Any lies Blewitt might tell, pale into insignificance beside Gillard's  *one big lie*. 

I like Julie Bishop's analogy that Gillard.  "created the stolen vehicle that the bank robbers took to the bank, to rob the bank.''


----------



## pixel (27 November 2012)

What use is all this bitching about incidents that happened last century?
Doesn't the Parliament have anything better to discuss?

Utterly disgusting!


----------



## Knobby22 (27 November 2012)

My parents in law, rusted on Lib voters, said they were disgusted with the Libs on this issue when they watched the news last niht after the cricket. Are the Libs doing any polling??


----------



## drsmith (27 November 2012)

Calliope said:


> *'’His word against mine: make your mind up.”*



A very strange thing for her to say. 

Many would conclude neither of them.


----------



## dutchie (27 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> A very strange thing for her to say.
> 
> Many would conclude neither of them.






or *His*


----------



## drsmith (27 November 2012)

Knobby22 said:


> My parents in law, rusted on Lib voters, said they were disgusted with the Libs on this issue when they watched the news last niht after the cricket. Are the Libs doing any polling??



I hope they were even more disgusted when Labor tried to go Tony Abbott over an alleged punch of a wall from his university days.


----------



## noco (27 November 2012)

We need to know a lot more.

Miss  Gillard is concealing so much.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...y-so-little-said/story-e6frgd0x-1226524510234


----------



## Knobby22 (27 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> I hope they were even more disgusted when Labor tried to go Tony Abbott over an alleged punch of a wall from his university days.




They probably were. What is getting their goat is that Parliament no longer appears to deal with running the country, just chucking mud. 
My parents in law are obviously reasonably old and my father in law listens to Parliament. They are Liberal members! They dislike Bishop in particular.
I just think that if this activity continues for the next two weeks, Abbots popularity will hit new lows, even if he isn't in parliament making the accusations but is instead hiding away.

Why can't they attack Labor on policy?


----------



## Knobby22 (27 November 2012)

I never thought Queensland would turn around- it was a basket case. the Lib tactics are woeful. They need to hire me! Sure I have no background in this field but blind Freddy could better. I don't understand how they could get it so wrong. Labor should be done and dusted.

_But the dramatic lift suggests Labor would only lose its most marginal seat, Moreton, if the result was replicated evenly across the state._

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...ts-in-queensland/story-e6freon6-1226457731449


----------



## drsmith (27 November 2012)

Knobby22 said:


> I just think that if this activity continues for the next two weeks, Abbots popularity will hit new lows, even if he isn't in parliament making the accusations but is instead hiding away.



Making accusations or asking questions ?



Knobby22 said:


> I never thought Queensland would turn around- it was a basket case. the Lib tactics are woeful. They need to hire me! Sure I have no background in this field but blind Freddy could better. I don't understand how they could get it so wrong. Labor should be done and dusted.
> 
> _But the dramatic lift suggests Labor would only lose its most marginal seat, Moreton, if the result was replicated evenly across the state._
> 
> http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...ts-in-queensland/story-e6freon6-1226457731449



Old news.


----------



## Calliope (27 November 2012)

Knobby22 said:


> I just think that if this activity continues for the next two weeks, Abbots popularity will hit new lows, even if he isn't in parliament making the accusations but is instead hiding away.




It is not surprising that in a country which made Ned Kelly a hero, Gillard's very questionable activities and lifestyle have elevated her acceptance as PM well above Abbott.

Abbott can't win. If he took Bishop off the case, Labor would call him a "misogynist pig."


----------



## pixel (27 November 2012)

Knobby22 said:


> They probably were. What is getting their goat is that Parliament no longer appears to deal with running the country, just chucking mud.
> My parents in law are obviously reasonably old and my father in law listens to Parliament. They are Liberal members! They dislike Bishop in particular.
> I just think that if this activity continues for the next two weeks, Abbots popularity will hit new lows, even if he isn't in parliament making the accusations but is instead hiding away.
> 
> Why can't they attack Labor on policy?




+1

Abbot is good at hiding:
behind Julie, to let her do the dirty work
behind his family, to let them tell what a softie he really is
and a tiny budgie nobody cares to see anyway...

Bring back Turnbull


----------



## bellenuit (27 November 2012)

I must admit that I have only seen short bits of Question Time, but after seeing Bishop ask about the $5K cheque this morning with Gillard giving the predictable response that she gave, it is clear that the AWU issue is dead in the water (at least in Question Time) unless the coalition can come up with something new that is provable. 

The coalition needs to change tactics quickly or they will just be seen as whining. However, they cannot change tactics and move to some other hot issue like the boat people, because they have (as usual) painted themselves into a corner by publicly declaring they would pursue the AWU issue every day until the end of this parliamentary week. Changing tactics now would be seen as admitting defeat.


----------



## drsmith (27 November 2012)

The ABC have been knocking on Bruce Wilson's door.



> Hours after the Slater & Gordon statement emerged, a TV crew from ABC's 7.30 arrived at Mr Wilson's home at Nelsons Bay, on NSW's Central Coast.
> 
> The two-camera crew arrived with a journalist about 11am and told The Australian they were “trying to line up an interview”.
> 
> ...




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...st-in-awu-affair/story-fng5kxvh-1226524816160

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...ut-on-awu-affair/story-fn6tcs23-1226524893679


----------



## Julia (27 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> I hope they were even more disgusted when Labor tried to go Tony Abbott over an alleged punch of a wall from his university days.



And oh, how the media, especially the ABC, ran with that for weeks!



Knobby22 said:


> I never thought Queensland would turn around- it was a basket case. the Lib tactics are woeful. They need to hire me! Sure I have no background in this field but blind Freddy could better. I don't understand how they could get it so wrong. Labor should be done and dusted.
> 
> _But the dramatic lift suggests Labor would only lose its most marginal seat, Moreton, if the result was replicated evenly across the state._



_
I'm not surprised.  Campbell Newman and Jeff Seeney are behaving badly.
It's a large mess all round, contrary to our expectations when Labor was voted out.
Clive Palmer has been a very destabilising influence and will continue to be in an attempt to assuage his humiliation at not being preselected for either Federal or State parliament.

He has achieved some sort of folksy popularity, with a Galaxy poll apparently recording many Queenslanders would like to see him start his own party!!
(As if things are not wacky enough already here with Bob Katter's Australian Party.)

One State government MP has gone, another is considering his position.  More are clearly unhappy, seemingly at the dictatorial manner of Newman and Seeney.
So foolish of them.



pixel said:



			+1

Abbot is good at hiding:
behind Julie, to let her do the dirty work
		
Click to expand...


If he makes any criticism of Gillard, he's accused of misogynistic attacks, regardless of the validity of the criticism.  That is simply the strategy Labor has decided on and they are much encouraged at its success so far.
Therefore, obviously, it needs to be a female who takes the questions up to Gillard.




			behind his family, to let them tell what a softie he really is
		
Click to expand...


Oh, please.  What about all the fluff about Gillard's, um, partner running her bath and making cups of tea etc.
Quite nauseating.




			and a tiny budgie nobody cares to see anyway...
		
Click to expand...


You are entitled to your political preference but I'm surprised you would so stoop, as the politicians you despise, to such a nasty personal remark.




bellenuit said:



			I must admit that I have only seen short bits of Question Time, but after seeing Bishop ask about the $5K cheque this morning with Gillard giving the predictable response that she gave, it is clear that the AWU issue is dead in the water (at least in Question Time) unless the coalition can come up with something new that is provable. 

The coalition needs to change tactics quickly or they will just be seen as whining. However, they cannot change tactics and move to some other hot issue like the boat people, because they have (as usual) painted themselves into a corner by publicly declaring they would pursue the AWU issue every day until the end of this parliamentary week. Changing tactics now would be seen as admitting defeat.
		
Click to expand...


Yes, agree.  Yesterday I found myself thinking "I hope the Libs know what they're doing here."
They should be leaving it to the police investigations._


----------



## IFocus (27 November 2012)

Hmmm Bishop is starting to do damage to the Coalition as its goes on with absolutely no smoking gun of clear evidence other than repeating smear.

The Coalition have also changed / moved the goal posts now on their demands form Gillard

I think if they keep this up they could lose the un-lose-able election

Every time Gillard gets to look strong in front of the press pack Abbott shrinks an inch or two.

Shows they cannot compete in discussion on policy.

All quite extraordinary really


----------



## drsmith (27 November 2012)

IFocus said:


> The Coalition have also changed / moved the goal posts now on their demands form Gillard



To what ?

As for taking Labor apart on policy, Scott Morrison in Parliament after todays question time was well worth listening to.


----------



## IFocus (27 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> To what ?
> 
> As for taking Labor apart on policy, Scott Morrison in Parliament after todays question time was well worth listening to.





Didn't see Morrison was he explaining why the Coalitions border protection policy the government is using isn't working?

Quote from Abbott "all the prime minister has to do is pick up the phone and call the president of Naru" end of quote.

Hilarious


----------



## drsmith (27 November 2012)

IFocus said:


> Didn't see Morrison was he explaining why the Coalitions border protection policy the government is using isn't working?



What the government is doing is not strictly the Coalition's full range of policies, but taking the above comment at face value, it just highlights the government's lack of ability to implement policy.

When one considers the consequences and inparticular the human cost, it's far from hilarious.


----------



## sptrawler (28 November 2012)

IFocus said:


> Didn't see Morrison was he explaining why the Coalitions border protection policy the government is using isn't working?
> 
> Quote from Abbott "all the prime minister has to do is pick up the phone and call the president of Naru" end of quote.
> 
> Hilarious



They wouldn't want to push that boat, so to speak, 30,000 in 5 years
Hard to dispute the numbers, lets not consider the $


----------



## moXJO (28 November 2012)

IFocus said:


> Didn't see Morrison was he explaining why the Coalitions border protection policy the government is using isn't working?
> 
> Quote from Abbott "all the prime minister has to do is pick up the phone and call the president of Naru" end of quote.
> 
> Hilarious




Oh you mean the policy that worked that labor changed and now back flipped over. You mean like any policy Labor touches and then has to either abandon or backflip on because they create such a mess.
Labor would have a hard time organizing flies on $hit. They only seem to know how to make a policy fail. How long is the list now?


----------



## noco (28 November 2012)

It would appear that 8 Ministers and several Labor back benchers are also losing confidence in Julia Gillard. 


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...nd-media-reforms/story-fn59niix-1226525302723


----------



## MrBurns (28 November 2012)

moXJO said:


> . How long is the list now?




You mean this list ? Not quite up to date, they're adding to it too fast.

This might be easier, the other was a bit small, there are plenty of references on Google.


----------



## drsmith (28 November 2012)

Julia Gillard is fighting battles on more than one front.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-11-28/opposition-seizes-on-palestine-issue/4395832

What though is Bill Shorten holding in the hand behind his back ?


----------



## MrBurns (28 November 2012)

Just watching Gillard in question time, it has to be said that she is an arrogant, rough as guts, cow of a woman, she really is:bad:


----------



## MrBurns (28 November 2012)

The speaker is an idiot, letting Gillard get away with insults instead of answers.:frown:


----------



## drsmith (28 November 2012)

MrBurns said:


> Just watching Gillard in question time, it has to be said that she is an arrogant, rough as guts, cow of a woman, she really is:bad:



She's treating the speaker with contempt with her responses. Michael Smith has also copped a serve.

The contrast with the way in which Julia Bishop is asking the questions is stark.


----------



## drsmith (28 November 2012)

MrBurns said:


> The speaker is an idiot, letting Gillard get away with insults instead of answers.:frown:



She's very much not in control.


----------



## MrBurns (28 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> She's very much not in control.




She is blatantly biased.


----------



## drsmith (28 November 2012)

MrBurns said:


> She is blatantly biased.




From The Pulse's Katharine Murphy (SMH),



> Speaker Burke, an optimist, a dreamer, a hoper.
> 
> _The Prime Minister will return to the question_.




I hope Bob Katter doesn't have a heart attack before the end of his sespension of standing orders.


----------



## IFocus (28 November 2012)

Shock horror how did you guys and girls miss this



> Bishop can't rule out speaking to Blewitt twice
> 
> The Deputy Opposition leader, Julie Bishop, cannot rule out speaking to Ralph Blewitt by telephone last week, only that she never rang him and he never rang her.
> 
> Ms Bishop, the chief inquisitor of Julia Gillard over the AWU slush fund saga, said on Tuesday that she had spoken to Mr Blewitt just once and that was at a face-to-face meeting in Melbourne on Friday last week.








Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...ewitt-twice-20121128-2acr6.html#ixzz2DVDs9xvS


----------



## IFocus (28 November 2012)

Hang then there is this



> Bishop bluster loses wind in an obvious absence of evidence
> 
> JULIE BISHOP started the day alleging the Prime Minister was like a bank robber's knowing accomplice who had benefited from the heist - a Bonnie to her then boyfriend, Bruce Wilson's, Clyde. ''She provided the stolen vehicle, she drove him to the bank and she looked away while he robbed the bank,'' she told her party room, according to the official party spokesman.
> 
> But by day's end the deputy Liberal leader was trying to make her own get-away from her defamatory and unproven allegations. No, she was not alleging that the Prime Minister had benefited personally from the fraud perpetrated by her then boyfriend. No, she was not even suggesting the Prime Minister had been a ''knowing party'' to it.








Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...of-evidence-20121127-2a5ud.html#ixzz2DVEg3CAm


Bishop cannot remember what she said hours apart but demands answers to issues 20 years old


----------



## moXJO (28 November 2012)

IFocus said:


> Hang then there is this
> 
> Bishop cannot remember what she said hours apart but demands answers to issues 20 years old




Must be the bimbo thing


----------



## dutchie (28 November 2012)

Aahh ...  the good old misogynist days.


Note the handbag group photo at 1:34


----------



## sptrawler (28 November 2012)

I would have thought talking to Blewitt and Wilson, would be a pre requisite to asking questions of Gillard.


----------



## sails (28 November 2012)

sptrawler said:


> I would have thought talking to Blewitt and Wilson, would be a pre requisite to asking questions of Gillard.





lol - it just gives laborites another straw to clutch and yet another feeble attempt to create a storm in a teacup.

They must think their fellow Aussies are pretty stupid - it's very clear where the real elephant in the room is.


----------



## bellenuit (28 November 2012)

*Document contradicts Gillard fund claims*

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/po...dicts-gillard-fund-claims-20121128-2aep3.html


----------



## bellenuit (28 November 2012)

bellenuit said:


> *Document contradicts Gillard fund claims*
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/po...dicts-gillard-fund-claims-20121128-2aep3.html




*Fresh claims Julia Gillard argued for union body*

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...d-for-union-body/story-e6freuy9-1226526145357


----------



## bellenuit (29 November 2012)

*Transcript of Brandis' outline of Gillard's illegalities*

http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo...ds/a313cbaa-0111-489d-96e4-ef24e85fa333/0055"


----------



## bellenuit (29 November 2012)

It's starting to get interesting......

*Witnesses quizzed over AWU scandal*

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/witnesses-quizzed-over-awu-scandal/story-e6frea6u-1226526127202


----------



## bellenuit (29 November 2012)

More on the same......

*Proof: PM told firm what she won't tell parliament*

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...04b794446d392665c259f487#.ULYPHyMpoDc.twitter


----------



## bellenuit (29 November 2012)

Damned by her own words.  She stated several times that she was not involved in the incorporation of the fund, but only gave advice.....

_JG: Slater & Gordon didn't have anything, did not have anything to do with setting up bank accounts for that association. *We attended to the incorporation*.

PG: *Can I ask you then following the last thing that we did to setting up the incorporation*, which appears from the file to be the letter arguing that it ought to be not construed as a trade union, did you have anything personally to do with that incorporated association afterwards?
_
*Young Gillard answers the boss*

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...answers-the-boss/story-fng5kxvh-1226526112699

I've just listened to Emerson on Lateline vehemently denying that Gillard had anything to do with the incorporation of the fund, other than offering advice  as Gillard had said. Won't he feel a right twit tomorrow.


----------



## bellenuit (29 November 2012)

Sorry for more of the same, but every paper is running with it. The story is hot on Twitter with by my calculations about 80% relishing these new revelations vs 60% pro Gillard only a day ago. Could this be the end for her?

Although still not damning, the importance of this new story IMO is to prove that Gillard lied in some parts of her statements of the last week. Proving just one statement to be a lie makes everything else she said questionable.

*Gillard ‘cut and pasted’ slush fund rules*

http://afr.com/p/national/gillard_cut_and_pasted_slush_fund_xeS8RbK8FfuaCQv1xWccbJ


----------



## Calliope (29 November 2012)

I won't be long before Gillard is dragged off kicking and screaming to jail. This is a preview.


----------



## Calliope (29 November 2012)

bellenuit said:


> I've just listened to Emerson on Lateline vehemently denying that Gillard had anything to do with the incorporation of the fund, other than offering advice  as Gillard had said. Won't he feel a right twit tomorrow.




Craig Emerson has a problem with opposition women who tell lies, saying that is a sackable or resignation offence. He has told quite a few porkies himself in defence of his darling Julia. No doubt he will be calling today for Gillard's resignation.


----------



## dutchie (29 November 2012)

I was friends, for 4 years, with two fraudsters - I was young and naive
I helped set up a slush fund - I was young and naive
I falsified documents in WA - I was young and naive
$5000 suddenly appeared in my bank account - I don't remember or I was young and naive
I slept with married men - I was young and naive
I witnessed a signature from a very loooooooong distance - I was young and naive
I kept secrets from my clients and employers - I was young and naive
I was a partner in a high profile Slater & Gordon - I was young and naive???


----------



## drsmith (29 November 2012)

Michael Smith on Bruce Wilson's media interview on Tuesday.

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...wilsons-admissions-on-abc-730-last-night.html

He was spot on about more from Julia Gillard's exit interview being able to be released by Nick Styant-Browne.(early in the audio) now Bruce Wilson has come to her defence. Nick obviously didn't wait long.

Without doubt, it would have been another sleepless night at the house of Labor last night.


----------



## pixel (29 November 2012)

My ultimate contribution to this sordid saga

If a member can't remember if she's spoken once or twice
to this Blewitt, and she knew it that he wasn't true or nice,
is it then fittin' that she's hittin' on a redhead nonetheless?
Or will she turn himbo's bimbo, wading deeper in the mess?

'Twould be better if those elected let the past be past and took
on the job of planning for the future by the book.
We, the peepull, in elections, vote to advance Australia fair,
but all they do is get erections or, like cats, in each other's hair.

Stop the bitching itching twitching! Start and do a decent job,
or we'll start a massive ditching, smack you bogans in the gob,
take away your lurks and perks and chauffeured limos you're not worth,
build a great big catapult and fire you 'round the Universe.


----------



## Calliope (29 November 2012)

pixel said:


> My ultimate contribution to this sordid saga




Yes. It's time for Gillard luvvies to take their heads out of the sand and face up to the facts, if they wish to retain a little credibility.


----------



## Logique (29 November 2012)

A President came to the point of impeachment once, who also had trouble remembering things. And evidence went missing then too.



> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4524025...-shed-no-light-watergate-tape-gap-grand-jury/
> "It's Nixon being Nixon," historian Stanley Kutler said after his initial review found no bombshells. "It's a virtuoso performance. How about $10 for every time he says, I don't recall?"
> 
> ..Nixon's memory lapses were frequent when he was grilled about whether he used the Internal Revenue Service to pursue his political opponents, which would be illegal. Yet he gave credence to a theory that he had done just that with Democratic donors..
> ...


----------



## noco (29 November 2012)

Miss Gillard will try to run but she sure can't hide any more.

She must come clean or somebody will take her to the cleaners against her will.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...-dig-up-the-dirt/story-fnahw9xv-1226526087396


----------



## MrBurns (29 November 2012)

On the Ninemsn web site, that site is the destination of the average voter I would think.

Is the PM telling the truth about the AWU 'slush fund'?

*YES - 8618

NO -  31506*


----------



## IFocus (29 November 2012)

Mean while but where the adults analyse politics



> Amid dramatic claims that the Prime Minister had acted corruptly and Coalition demands for her resignation, this morning the opposition rushed into Parliament to move a suspension of standing orders.
> The suspension, one assumed, would be to demand the Prime Minister resign, or to call a vote of no confidence to test the Prime Minister's support, or at least demand she front the chamber and explain herself. It turned out to be to:
> "... enable this Parliament to take action to deny people smugglers a product to sell before the Parliament rises and the onset of the monsoon season ..."
> So with claims of "smoking guns"* and the most serious accusations that can be made in Australian politics, the opposition preferred to chase monsoons rather than do what you'd expect they'd do if they had a skerrick of belief in what they were alleging about the PM.




Bernard Keane from Crikey


----------



## Calliope (29 November 2012)

> *Julia Gillard enabled the incorporation of a union slush fund from which her then boyfriend later stole hundreds of thousands of dollars by formally denying to authorities that it was a trade union organisation.
> *



Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/po...tradicts-pm-20121128-2aegm.html#ixzz2Dai6yg93

*Wilson and Blewitt knew why the slush fund was being set up*, and these two misogynist rogues used the "young and naive" Julia Gillard (& Wilson's lover) to set it up. Shame on them to take advantage of the love of a young and doting 35 year-old, inexperienced in politics and ways of the world.


----------



## drsmith (29 November 2012)

IFocus said:


> Mean while but where the adults analyse politics
> 
> Bernard Keane from Crikey



Kevin Rudd's been very quiet this week.

Perhaps he's been busy taking calls from his Labor colleagues begging him to resume the leadership and from Wayne Swan begging for forgiveness.


----------



## IFocus (29 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> Kevin Rudd's been very quiet this week.
> 
> Perhaps he's been busy taking calls from his Labor colleagues begging him to resume the leadership and from Wayne Swan begging for forgiveness.





I think Abbott's desperation running the smear campaign will enhance Gillards status and lower his own particularly after the smoking gun shot Bishop in the mouth.......I mean foot. 

Certainly some of the most tasteless behaviour by an opposition that I have seen before.


----------



## drsmith (29 November 2012)

The file's been found, but the contents are missing,



> DOCUMENTS allegedly sent by Prime Minister Julia Gillard to Western Australia's Commissioner for Corporate Affairs 20 years ago relating to the AWU affair may never have been archived by the State Records Office (SRO).




http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/br...-empty-all-along/story-e6frf7kf-1226526928303

-----------------------------------------

Labor have ended with the week with a politically dead PM whose bubble is getting smaller by the day and that's as difficult for Labor to remove as Adolf Hitler was as the leader of Nazi Germany in the final months of WW2.

She's well and truely shooting from the bunker now and perhaps has decided that if she goes down, the party goes down with her.

The Opposition couldn't have hoped for better.


----------



## drsmith (29 November 2012)

IFocus said:


> I think Abbott's desperation running the smear campaign will enhance Gillards status and lower his own particularly after the smoking gun shot Bishop in the mouth.......I mean foot.
> 
> Certainly some of the most tasteless behaviour by an opposition that I have seen before.



I'm sure Kevin Rudd's still behind her.

I just can't see how far, or what he's holding.


----------



## IFocus (29 November 2012)

Mike Sccombe from the Global Mail writes a wonderful woven piece



> If I were to say, for example, that Deputy Leader of the Opposition Julie Bishop’s allegations against the Prime Minister over the AWU slush fund matter were mendacious, it could simply mean they were false.
> 
> But if I were to say Bishop herself were mendacious, it could mean one thing only: that I was calling her a liar.
> 
> ...






> Well, on Monday Climate Change Minister Greg Combet arranged for himself to be asked a friendly question about this.
> 
> In answering he noted that 150 days after the implementation of the carbon-pricing measure, unemployment was still low, business investment still strong, and interest rates still low.
> 
> Combet went on to repeat a statistic cited earlier by Trade Minister Craig Emerson, *that polling now shows the carbon tax with a higher approval rating than Abbott*.




http://www.theglobalmail.org/blog/when-you-cant-say-liar/498/


----------



## moXJO (29 November 2012)

drsmith said:


> I'm sure Kevin Rudd's still behind her.
> 
> I just can't see how far, or what he's holding.




Obeid, Thompson and Slipper must be  thanking their lucky stars they are out of the spotlight


----------



## sails (29 November 2012)

IFocus said:


> I think Abbott's desperation running the smear campaign will enhance Gillards status and lower his own particularly after the smoking gun shot Bishop in the mouth.......I mean foot.
> 
> Certainly some of the most tasteless behaviour by an opposition that I have seen before.




Hang on a minute... labor's own McClelland was the first to raise this in parliament to the best of my knowledge!

Pull your head in, IF - some of this info seems to be coming from some within labor. Blewitt would hardly be a liberal voter either.

And, it is not smear tactics to ascertain if ANY PM is fit for the highest office of the land.  If Abbott had the same number of documents floating around that put questions on his integrity, I think it highly likely you would be on your high moral horse calling for his resignation even as leader of the opposition.

And laborites smear Abbott for very much less as it is.  It is the sociopathic way to accuse others of your own problems.  If the cap fits, wear it.


----------



## sptrawler (29 November 2012)

IFocus said:


> I think Abbott's desperation running the smear campaign will enhance Gillards status and lower his own particularly after the smoking gun shot Bishop in the mouth.......I mean foot.
> 
> Certainly some of the most tasteless behaviour by an opposition that I have seen before.




Wouldn't you say it is only a mirror image of the smear campaign the government has been running on Abbott for about 6 months. 
I must say, you seem to be selective on your definition of smear.
It's o.k for a Prime Minister to stand up and with no basis in fact, slag off at the opposition leader, because he is a male.
But then you call it smear, when a known scam and missappropriation of money that involves the Prime Minister is pursued.
I can see why Thomson sits back with a smirk on his face. He obviously knows how the general public like to be treated.
Like someone once said, you get the government you deserve. 

By the way, were you a union organiser in your working life?


----------



## Calliope (29 November 2012)

If ever a picture invited karma it's this one of the Gillard smirk.


----------



## sptrawler (30 November 2012)

And now back to the norm, the Gillard smear campaign. What a hoot.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/sexist-abbott-unfit-to-rule-pm-20121129-2aisd.html

If the voters are so dumb, as to vote for this goon show, they deserve everything they get.

Hello Greece, here we come.LOL


----------



## IFocus (30 November 2012)

Abbott fails to produce evidence and make a case what a true coward

What a grubby lot the Liberals are

Abbott baulks as Gillard throws gauntlet



> As Parliament sat for the final time this year, Ms Gillard ignored calls for her resignation and pre-empted another barrage of opposition questions over the slush fund saga by suspending question time and daring Mr Abbott to back his claim she had been ''in breach of the law''.
> 
> During a 15-minute speech, the Opposition Leader could not,




Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...ws-gauntlet-20121129-2aise.html#ixzz2DeRASGhw


----------



## sptrawler (30 November 2012)

IFocus said:


> Abbott fails to produce evidence and make a case what a true coward
> 
> What a grubby lot the Liberals are
> 
> ...




It's very hard to produce evedence, when people are witholding it to cover their ar$es, hence the call for an enquiry.
It will be interesting when the Libs get in and call a Royal Commission into unions.LOL


----------



## IFocus (30 November 2012)

sptrawler said:


> It's very hard to produce evedence, when people are witholding it to cover their ar$es, hence the call for an enquiry.
> It will be interesting when the Libs get in and call a Royal Commission into unions.LOL




I would expect some thing so Work Non Choices MKII could be bought in.


----------



## noco (30 November 2012)

Gillards castle is starting to crumble as her troops are not so brave any more.

Gillard thought it was all done and dusted in the last parliamentry sitting of the year, but how wrong she will be proven. If she has done no wrong as she says, what has she got to fear with a Judicial enquiry.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...oops-not-as-keen/story-e6frg75f-1226527013583


----------



## noco (30 November 2012)

Oh dear, what a tangled web we weave. 

It is all about DOG EAT DOG and I would certainly not want to be in Gillrads shoes.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...oops-not-as-keen/story-e6frg75f-1226527013583


----------



## sptrawler (30 November 2012)

Barrie Cassidy, makes a good point on the "Drum" (thanks MrBurns) he draws similarities to a failed accustion against the Clintons. He then concludes that the outcome will be neutral or a backlash against Abbott.
I wonder why he didn't ponder the outcome if proof is forthcoming, maybe then he could draw similarities to the Nixon accusations.
At this point the outcome is not definative, funny he should play his hand, isn't he a reporter? Shouldn't he report?


----------



## bellenuit (30 November 2012)

I read a lovely quote today in relation to Gillard and the fund she helped set up. "She may have done nothing wrong, but she certainly did nothing right".


----------



## pixel (30 November 2012)

bellenuit said:


> "She may have done nothing wrong, but she certainly did nothing right".




Even on that score, opinions will be divided - probably along party lines.

The unholy alliance of Bishop and Abbott has definitely succeeded in no more than slinging mud, hoping that some of it might stick. And going by the large number of hateful comments, it has distracted enough people from more important issues: May she indeed have done something right? And if not, what positive suggestions do her critics offer that could improve perceived or real shortcomings?

Mistakes have arguably been made by governments of every persuasion. Any politician, let alone lawyer, who claims never to have lied, is doing so at the very instant. Get over it, folks!


----------



## noco (30 November 2012)

If this organisation can find out all this information, why has  the Police in Victoria and Western Australia not used it.

Connect to the link of Ian Cambrgidge affidavit which shows all the bank accounts operated by the AWU and note the numbers accounts connected to Wilson and Blewitt. Miss Gillard also gets a mention.


http://kangaroocourtofaustralia.com...-a-serious-indictable-offence-in-awu-scandal/


----------



## sptrawler (30 November 2012)

pixel said:


> Even on that score, opinions will be divided - probably along party lines.
> 
> The unholy alliance of Bishop and Abbott has definitely succeeded in no more than slinging mud, hoping that some of it might stick. And going by the large number of hateful comments, it has distracted enough people from more important issues: May she indeed have done something right? And if not, what positive suggestions do her critics offer that could improve perceived or real shortcomings?
> 
> Mistakes have arguably been made by governments of every persuasion. Any politician, let alone lawyer, who claims never to have lied, is doing so at the very instant. Get over it, folks!




What more important issue, than endemic corruption in a major political party, if it is proven correct.
I would think the unions and Labor party will go into "hyperdrive", as Abbott has said there will be an enquiry.
Actually I think I heard the sound of Bum$ slamming shut at my place, the wife said it was just a sonic boom.LOL
There will be a fund drive soon, around the rank and file, to pay for a MASSIVE repeat MASSIVE advertising campaign.
The last thing anyone wants is a Royal Commission into unions.


----------



## sptrawler (30 November 2012)

Even in this spray by Michelle, she says "The sharp end of the battle is Gillards time at Slater and Gordon".
Talk about missing the plot, the sharp end of the battle is union corruption and the possible affiliation to the government, funny she should miss that.:1zhelp:

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/gillard-winged-but-still-flying-20121129-2aimg.html


----------



## Julia (30 November 2012)

To me Michelle Grattan's article is pretty reasonable and even handed.
She has, imo, appropriately criticised both sides:


> This being said, Gillard should have dealt with the issue of the letter before Thursday's reports forced her to do so. If she could not remember sending it (and she says she has no copy of the Slater & Gordon transcript that contains the reference) she should have said so. It's obvious Gillard was guilty of poor legal practice in her dealings in the AWU affair. She failed to open a file; she did not consult others in Slater & Gordon; it was screamingly bad to be giving professional advice to someone with whom she had a personal relationship. She was mixing with dubious characters. She cut corners.


----------



## drsmith (30 November 2012)

sptrawler said:


> Even in this spray by Michelle, she says "The sharp end of the battle is Gillards time at Slater and Gordon".
> Talk about missing the plot, the sharp end of the battle is union corruption and the possible affiliation to the government, funny she should miss that.:1zhelp:
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/gillard-winged-but-still-flying-20121129-2aimg.html



Problems will continue to occur on this front as they are deep rooted and I think the Coalition will be quiet happy with a slow burn of the PM.

That being said, Julie Bishop's contact with Ralph Blewitt was a poor move and it backfired on her in more ways than one. If documentation was what she was after, she could have found out whether Ralph Blewitt had anything useful from Michael Smith.

The voting public are still stuck with a choice between a party in office that's not fit to govern and an opposition that's not ready to govern.


----------



## drsmith (30 November 2012)

> She cut corners.



She's done that a lot a PM as well.

She thinks she will always come out of and walk away from the resultant wreckage leaving someone else to pay the price.


----------



## sptrawler (30 November 2012)

Julia said:


> To me Michelle Grattan's article is pretty reasonable and even handed.
> She has, imo, appropriately criticised both sides:




Your probably right, this may have helped her.

http://afr.com/p/national/media_face_bans_for_leaking_parliament_DuZt3umTctakeEWXHJDnFL

Nothing like a good whipping to get everything "ship shape"


----------



## noco (30 November 2012)

Listen very carefully to this interview between Alan Jones and Julie Bishop form your own opinion.

http://www.2gb.com/article/julie-bishop-awu-affair


----------



## drsmith (30 November 2012)

Any eager legal beaver want to go over the following,

http://michaelsmithnews.typepad.com/files/301112-pressconference.pdf

It's a transcript of GEORGE BRANDIS's press conference today.


----------



## IFocus (1 December 2012)

One of your mob Peter Hartcher writes an adult summery of the week




> Julia Gillard is tougher than diamonds, and has cowed even the notorious political streetfighter Tony Abbott.



This is the telling bit



> the opposition did not even attempt to move a motion of censure against her or, more seriously, a motion of no confidence.







Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...another-day-20121130-2amng.html#ixzz2DkQjYCmn


----------



## IFocus (1 December 2012)

Mike Carlton

My bold



> Even in quiet times the Oz's Canberra political coverage has a hectoring tone. Obsessive, bombastic, endlessly repetitive, it is a newspaper with Asperger's. Platoons of reporters, columnists and commentators, all grandly titled - chief this, national that - tumble over each other in furious agreement with their proprietor's view that only* nice Mr Abbott *can save the nation from the perdition to which Labor is leading us.







> This week they soared to dizzy new heights. What I suppose we must call the Gillard/AWU Affair whipped them to a frenzy, to page after page of grey print that bellowed and howled like some lunatic chained in a padded cell. It seems every hack on the payroll has lunged into the fray, save for the golfing writer and the food editor so far as I can gather, but sooner or later even they will be expected to join this News Ltd stampede to crucify the Prime Minister. It's the group-think way the joint works. HOPELESS JULIA DOUBLE-BOGEYS 18TH. PM's COQ AU VIN POISONS CAT. With the federal election due next year, the creative possibilities are endless.






> Yes, she once had a dud boyfriend, until she dropped him like a hot brick. Show me a woman her age who hasn't. *Even the
> 
> sanctimonious but risibly ineffectual Julie Bishop might have to plead guilty to that heinous offence.*






Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/stirring-this-storm-in-a-teacup-20121130-2alxv.html#ixzz2DkTETLw0


----------



## moXJO (1 December 2012)

IFocus said:


> One of your mob Peter Hartcher writes an adult summery of the week
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Wollongong  local labor council thrown out due to corruption.
Nsw state labor corruption.
Fed labor corruption.
There is a long list of people happy to turn a blind eye to it or try and play it down.
Abbott wanting to give the unions the once through isnt a bad idea. 
Gillards character is dodgy, her actions have proven that to be true.


----------



## noco (1 December 2012)

Gillard was influenced by Communism in the early 90's and most likely still leans in that direction.

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...ything_gillard_says_the_socialist_forum_case/


----------



## Calliope (1 December 2012)

It's nice to see that Gillard still inspires confidence in IFocus, Mike Carlton, and Laurie Oakes. 

Oakes said; "No impropriety has been pinned on the PM."



> *impropriety, noun.* -  bad taste, improper action, improper behavior, imprudence, inappropriate behavior, inappropriateness, incongruousness, incorrectness, indecorousness, indecorum, indelicacy, inelegance, inexpedience, inexpediency, inopportuneness, lack of good taste, misbehavior, peccadillo, quod indecorum est, tactlessness, unaptness, unfitness, unfittingness, unseemliness, unsuitability, unsuitable accion, unsuitableness, untimeliness, want of caution, want of circumspection
> Associated concepts: crime, violation





None so blind as a rusted-on lunar leftie.


----------



## drsmith (1 December 2012)

noco said:


> Listen very carefully to this interview between Alan Jones and Julie Bishop form your own opinion.
> 
> http://www.2gb.com/article/julie-bishop-awu-affair



She lays it out very clearly, doesn't she.


----------



## drsmith (1 December 2012)

She doesn't like all this at all.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/na...union-corruption/story-fndo317g-1226527799306


----------



## Julia (1 December 2012)

Typical spray from Mr Carlton who is known for his hatred of the conservative side of politics.

The reporting on the AWU matter has been led by Hedley Thomas for The Australian.
I went looking for what journalistic awards had been won by Carlton and Thomas respectively.
Nothing I could find for Mr Carlton.  Mr Thomas's name, however, brings up the following:



> Hedley Thomas is The Australian’s national chief correspondent. He writes across the newspaper, specialising in investigative reporting with a particular interest in legal issues, the judiciary, public administration, corruption and politics.
> 
> Hedley, 43, first joined The Australian in 2006 after working for The Courier-Mail, The South China Morning Post and the Gold Coast Bulletin.
> 
> ...




I know which of the two I'd regard as the more thorough and proven investigative journalist.


----------



## sails (1 December 2012)

drsmith said:


> She doesn't like all this at all.
> 
> http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/na...union-corruption/story-fndo317g-1226527799306




What a nasty snarl...lol

And I wish she didn't wear pink - she is an embarrassment and insult to decent women, imo.

And I agree with Bolt that she is using the "sexism" thing as a weapon. Also the most smear and inuendo isn't coming from the opposition - she is spitting out plenty all on her own.



> *It is evidence of how Gillard uses sexism as both an accusation and a weapon. She screams “sexism” at Abbott, hoping to be excused as a woman the scrutiny and criticism any Prime Minister should face. *




Read more:
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/gillard_returns_shouting/


----------



## Tink (1 December 2012)

Agree, sails, not a very nice person at all. She isnt coping too well with her past being rehashed, is she?
Those loud sarcastic laughs say it all.

As for that pink outfit, does not suit her at all. 
Feminine?  pffft.


----------



## MrBurns (1 December 2012)

Tink said:


> Agree, sails, not a very nice person at all. She isnt coping too well with her past being rehashed, is she?
> Those loud sarcastic laughs say it all.
> 
> As for that pink outfit, does not suit her at all.
> Feminine?  pffft.




Agree, notice how she reacts when backed into a corner ? Like the weasel she is.
Very nasty piece of work is Gillard, probably backstabbed throughout her life to get ahead...it worked though BUT the Karma train is coming


----------



## sptrawler (1 December 2012)

Is this the same Mike Carlton, or just someone with the same name?

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...e-carlton-sacked/story-e6frg6n6-1111117335029

As an aside, the flack from the unions is going to be unbelievable, now Abbott has announced an investigation into unions.
The proverbial is going to hit the fan, like nothing we have seen before.IMO


----------



## Julia (1 December 2012)

sptrawler said:


> Is this the same Mike Carlton, or just someone with the same name?



The same person.


----------



## sptrawler (1 December 2012)

Well that would explain his stance, wouldn't it.
Like I said, IMO this is going to go feral as the unions close ranks.
Abbott has taken on a major fight here, it will be a defining moment in Australian politics, if it plays out.


----------



## Julia (2 December 2012)

Ms Gillard has said she cannot remember whether $5000 was deposited into her bank account.
She says she has checked with the bank and they do not have records going back that far.

This seems at odds with Hedley Thomas's contention in "The Weekend Australian", where he discusses a potential judicial inquiry, as follows:


> Banking records first obtained when the AWU's national leadership called for a royal commission into this scandal in 1996 remain readily available.




I suppose the difference might be that the banking records were obtained back then and kept in some file on the AWU since.  It needs clarification imo.


----------



## drsmith (2 December 2012)

sails said:


> What a nasty snarl...lol



A very dangerous place to stand is between Julia Gillard and power. That's where Kevin Rudd found himself and where Tony Abbott currently finds himself.

The conclusion I've reached is that she is obsessed by power and prepared to sacrifice anything in her quest to both obtain and maintain power. It's a fundemantal character flaw that I think is a large contributer to Labor's policy failures. Amongst it all, she has maintained her prime-ministership and the power trip that provides her.

The question is the cost, to both the Labor movement and the the country as a whole while Labor remains in office under her leadership. This is certainly something she does not care about.

It's a character flaw and Labor has had a recent history of elevating flawed characters to leaders. Mark Latham is essentially little more than a thug and a bully and Labor's own assessment on Kevin Rudd speaks for itself. 

Tony Abbott and the Coalition won't win with trench warfare if the playing field is not level. Rather than just shooting, the Coalition need to level the playing field by targeting her character weaknesses and not her strengths. Even though there have been stumblesw along the way, the past week in Parliament may be a sign that the Coalition have realised the above.


----------



## drsmith (2 December 2012)

Julia said:


> Ms Gillard has said she cannot remember whether $5000 was deposited into her bank account.



She won't catagorically deny it which in itself raises suspicisions. One does not remember every transaction, but if something has been done that is naughty, one is more inclined to remember.

Her defence is simple. Produce the hard evidence. This is fine in an enquiry or a court of law, but there, people are complelled to answer questions. She's avoiding them in the hope that in the court of public opinion, she will survive. Personally, she can only lose by coming clean and she will defend herself in the above manner to her last political breath.

Labor faces a difficult choice. She is ultimately poison to the party, but her power is such that there is little they can do about it at the present time, whether they want to or not. If all else was to fail, I would hope there's are a growing number of politicians on the Labor side hoping for a shallow election defeat, enough to facilitate her removal as leader but not send the party to electoral oblivion. If Labor can't see and ultimately act on the monster it has nurtured, then it has well and truely lost its way.


----------



## sails (2 December 2012)

From Bolt's Blog:



> Julia Gillard is very keen to decry her critics as sexists and misogynists. Strange, then, that so many of her critics would have thrilled to another female leader.
> 
> Perhaps it really is just about character, not gender.






http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/.../the_kind_of_female_leader_we_sexists_admire/


----------



## noco (2 December 2012)

Peter Costello, please come back into politics and take over the leadership of the Coalition.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaVD-Kc7nPw&feature=player_embedded


----------



## MrBurns (2 December 2012)

sails said:


> From Bolt's Blog:
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/.../the_kind_of_female_leader_we_sexists_admire/




Excellent, such a contrast to what we have.


----------



## Julia (2 December 2012)

drsmith said:


> A very dangerous place to stand is between Julia Gillard and power. That's where Kevin Rudd found himself and where Tony Abbott currently finds himself.
> 
> The conclusion I've reached is that she is obsessed by power and prepared to sacrifice anything in her quest to both obtain and maintain power. It's a fundemantal character flaw that I think is a large contributer to Labor's policy failures. Amongst it all, she has maintained her prime-ministership and the power trip that provides her.
> 
> ...






drsmith said:


> She won't catagorically deny it which in itself raises suspicisions. One does not remember every transaction, but if something has been done that is naughty, one is more inclined to remember.
> 
> Her defence is simple. Produce the hard evidence. This is fine in an enquiry or a court of law, but there, people are complelled to answer questions. She's avoiding them in the hope that in the court of public opinion, she will survive. Personally, she can only lose by coming clean and she will defend herself in the above manner to her last political breath.
> 
> Labor faces a difficult choice. She is ultimately poison to the party, but her power is such that there is little they can do about it at the present time, whether they want to or not. If all else was to fail, I would hope there's are a growing number of politicians on the Labor side hoping for a shallow election defeat, enough to facilitate her removal as leader but not send the party to electoral oblivion. If Labor can't see and ultimately act on the monster it has nurtured, then it has well and truely lost its way.



+1 to both above.


----------



## MrBurns (3 December 2012)

Did you see Gillard on the news yesterday, being quizzed on the latest polls ? She looked very, very unsure of herself, the words were there but the face told the dstory, I think she's gone.


----------



## noco (3 December 2012)

MrBurns said:


> Did you see Gillard on the news yesterday, being quizzed on the latest polls ? She looked very, very unsure of herself, the words were there but the face told the dstory, I think she's gone.




I watched her on Meet the Press with John Bonjorno and she was like a broken record. ABBOTT, ABBOTT, ABBOTT, SLEAZE AND SMEAR, SLEAZE AND SMEAR, SLEAZE AND SMEAR.

I think Abbott is really getting under her skin. 

I also noted she would attempt to talk over Bonjorno and the panel just to avoid questions.


----------



## drsmith (3 December 2012)

Some interesting polls in this weeks Essential Media. No change in 2PP support, but AWU Slushfundgate has had a net negative impact on Julia even though the Coalition was rated poorly on how they have handled the issue.

http://essentialvision.com.au/category/essentialreport


----------



## Calliope (3 December 2012)

it would have been interesting to see the serve poor Tim would have received last Thursday night when he met his Julia at the door with her slippers, following her sleaze and smear tirade against Abbott that day.

The air would have been blue with all the foul language she had bottled up, but couldn't use in parliament.







*You Poor Fool. I'll See Your Pathetic Sleaze and Smear and I'll Double It.*


----------



## drsmith (3 December 2012)

A reporter at Newscorp will be getting a serious finger waved at them,



> Asked about the impact of their view of the prime minister, 59 per cent said it made this more positive or no different, while 38 per cent said they now had a more negative view.




Seperate out negative from no difference and it's 11% more positive, 48% little or no difference and 38% more negative. 

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/br...r-coalition-poll/story-e6frf7kf-1226529136174


----------



## drsmith (3 December 2012)

Calliope said:


> it would have been interesting to see the serve poor Tim would have received last Thursday night when he met his Julia at the door with her slippers, following her sleaze and smear tirade against Abbott that day.
> 
> The air would have been blue with all the foul language she had bottled up, but couldn't use in parliament.
> 
> ...



I didn't see parliament that day, but i did read a report about her pulling some very strange expressions.

She's a fruit loop.


----------



## Julia (4 December 2012)

Interesting comments from Gary Johns re the questions that *should have been asked* by 7.30 in their interview with Bruce Wilson.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-questions-asked/story-e6frgd0x-1226529237757


----------



## noco (4 December 2012)

Julia said:


> Interesting comments from Gary Johns re the questions that *should have been asked* by 7.30 in their interview with Bruce Wilson.
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-questions-asked/story-e6frgd0x-1226529237757




What would you expect from the biased ABC? 

They will do anything to protect Gillard.


----------



## Calliope (4 December 2012)

Ponting;



> He didn't shed a tear, not until he was outside and in the arms of his wife Rianna. Then he broke down and sobbed



.

Our deposed leaders usually go out blubbering. This won't be the case with our Julia. She will depart the stage cursing and kicking and still screaming abuse at Tony Abbott.


----------



## drsmith (4 December 2012)

Calliope said:


> Our deposed leaders usually go out blubbering. This won't be the case with our Julia. She will depart the stage cursing and kicking and still screaming abuse at Tony Abbott.



I still think she'll be politically assasinated by her own party at some point before the next election, unless she beats them to the punch with an early election.


----------



## noco (5 December 2012)

Janet Albrechtsen sums up Julia Gillard very nicely.

I think Julia is only half samrt and will eventually fall from grace.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...-to-tricky-julia/story-e6frg7bo-1226530030131


----------



## drsmith (5 December 2012)

noco said:


> Janet Albrechtsen sums up Julia Gillard very nicely.
> 
> I think Julia is only half samrt and will eventually fall from grace.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...-to-tricky-julia/story-e6frg7bo-1226530030131




From the above article,



> Rather than shut down the scandal, Gillard's denials and Wilson's intervention invited former Slater & Gordon partner Nick Styant-Browne to release more sections from her exit interview.




On Q&A on Monday last week, Janet suggested this would happen.


----------



## noco (5 December 2012)

drsmith said:


> From the above article,
> 
> 
> 
> On Q&A on Monday last week, Janet suggested this would happen.





Janet did put up a good case. Tony Jones tried to make fun of it and  Penny Wong sat there like a stunned mullet.


----------



## noco (6 December 2012)

Holy hell. Pack you bags everyone and lets get the hell off Earth.

Julia Gillard believes the world is about to end.


http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...-world-is-coming/story-fndo20i0-1226531023530
V


----------



## noco (6 December 2012)

I can't help but think our Prime Minister is skating on thin ice and is about fall into very cold water.

She certainly has less support now as she had in the last challenge by Kevein Rudd.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...ds-are-revolting/story-fnahw9xv-1226530777853


----------



## sails (6 December 2012)

noco said:


> Holy hell. Pack you bags everyone and lets get the hell off Earth.
> 
> Julia Gillard believes the world is about to end.
> 
> ...




Haha - if she's doing that to make people like her more, she should think again.  Here are the results of a ninemsn poll:



> *Does Gillard's spoof video make you like her more?
> 
> YES.....7,603
> 
> NO....37,312*




http://ninemsn.com.au/


----------



## noco (6 December 2012)

sails said:


> Haha - if she's doing that to make people like her more, she should think again.  Here are the results of a ninemsn poll:
> 
> 
> 
> http://ninemsn.com.au/




You can't help but see the funny side. One does have to have a sense of humour.


----------



## IFocus (6 December 2012)

I think Gillard should go to Brisbane get into a truck and drive to NSW's, we need more stunts.


----------



## sails (6 December 2012)

noco said:


> You can't help but see the funny side. One does have to have a sense of humour.





It might have been funny if one could get past the awful drone.  I lasted a few seconds hit pause and then read the comments on Michael Smith page - that's where I found the msn poll - much more interesting than listening to Gillard drone on...yet again.

Here's the latest poll results:



> *Does Gillard's spoof video make you like her more?
> YES - 13,022
> NO -- 64,247*




http://ninemsn.com.au


----------



## bellenuit (6 December 2012)

Would have much preferred if she spent her time properly answering questions put to her in parliament then wasting time on this sideshow.


----------



## drsmith (6 December 2012)

sails said:


> Haha - if she's doing that to make people like her more, she should think again.  Here are the results of a ninemsn poll:



I think one of Kevin Rudd's advisors has infiltrated her office.


----------



## MrBurns (7 December 2012)

Every time I was watching a report on the passing of that wonderful lady Elisabeth Murdoch it was utterly ruined by Gillard droning on about it
I really wish she could just get her face and voice off TV she is simply an irritant and I think her poll results will show that next time we get a report


----------



## sails (7 December 2012)

MrBurns said:


> Every time I was watching a report on the passing of that wonderful lady Elisabeth Murdoch it was utterly ruined by Gillard droning on about it
> I really wish she could just get her face and voice off TV she is simply an irritant and I think her poll results will show that next time we get a report





I wouldn't hold your breath on that one, MrBurns!  The opinion polls are no longer getting it close to the real election results.  NT and ACT showed the libs to be very much stronger result than predicted.

Have the polling companies been told to get a particular result?  Have phone calls been made there too? Questions that need answers, however, I suspect like questions about slush funds, these questions would also be stonewalled.

I suppose I am a mysognist for even wondering...lol.  What childish stupidity.  Whoever voted for such a pathetic government which resorts to name calling, smear and inuendo?


----------



## Julia (7 December 2012)

sails said:


> Have the polling companies been told to get a particular result?  Have phone calls been made there too?



That's pretty insulting toward independent polling companies, isn't it?
A couple of months ago, can't now remember on which thread, I responded to a similar allegation by contacting the CEO of Newspoll, Martin O'Shannessy, and posted the clarifying email he sent me after our conversation.
You should find it and read it.

Maybe consider also that Newspoll is only published in "The Australian".  Are they really likely to be associated with an organisation that is biddable by the government?  I don't think so.

Maybe also consider that some polls simply do reflect present voter feeling, however unpalatable and incredible that might be.


----------



## MrBurns (7 December 2012)

Julia said:


> That's pretty insulting toward independent polling companies, isn't it?
> A couple of months ago, can't now remember on which thread, I responded to a similar allegation by contacting the CEO of Newspoll, Martin O'Shannessy, and posted the clarifying email he sent me after our conversation.
> You should find it and read it.
> 
> ...




Well I wonder WHO they are polling, I've never met anyone who's been approached, I sometimes wonder if they poll in Canberra too much.


----------



## Julia (7 December 2012)

MrBurns said:


> Well I wonder WHO they are polling, I've never met anyone who's been approached, I sometimes wonder if they poll in Canberra too much.



Well, I've been polled at least twice and then I think another time about state politics and other stuff.

Don't you think it's even remotely possible that respondents actually might not all share your absolute conviction that only the Libs can run the country?

Sails, here is the earlier mentioned thread re Martin O'Shannessy's comments.  I thought  you'd have seen it at the time.
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...5788&highlight=Martin O\'Shannessy#post735788


----------



## MrBurns (7 December 2012)

Julia said:


> Well, I've been polled at least twice and then I think another time about state politics and other stuff.
> 
> Don't you think it's even remotely possible that respondents actually might not all share your absolute conviction that only the Libs can run the country?
> 
> ...




I said I've never met anyone who's been asked, you're the first.

In answer to your question, I believe the polling shows a disproprtionate amount of voters who would still vote for Labor under the circumstances, and as was previously stated the election will probably bear that out.


----------



## MrBurns (7 December 2012)

Furthermore I simply don't believe the numbers quoted showing Gillard as preferred PM or even near it.


----------



## drsmith (7 December 2012)

MrBurns said:


> Furthermore I simply don't believe the numbers quoted showing Gillard as preferred PM or even near it.



Less and less believe in their promised surplus as well.

http://www.afr.com/p/national/labor_prepares_to_ditch_the_budget_0faluRAHRJcGf375qLtrYL

Although Julia Gillard still prefers to cling to denial, at least superficially.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-07/gillard-says-still-on-track-for-surplus/4414482


----------



## sails (7 December 2012)

Julia, I simply asked a couple of questions.  You can take a deep breath now and settle down as I did not accuse them of anything to cause you to defend them so profoundly.

It's not the results that have made me question them. It's the fact that some polls were predicting a close result in the NT and a comfortable win for labor in the ACT as per the media and yet the actual results showed how much they got that wrong.

When one casually joins those dots, it raises questions.  I am not accusing polling companies, but I am questioning why they got it so wrong in the last two state elections.  Polling companies need to get it close to maintain credibility - so what happened in the last two state elections?


----------



## Julia (7 December 2012)

sails said:


> Julia, I simply asked a couple of questions.  You can take a deep breath now and settle down as I did not accuse them of anything to cause you to defend them so profoundly.



What you said was


> Have the polling companies been told to get a particular result? Have phone calls been made there too?




The implication is pretty obviously that the polling companies are subject to political influence.
I objected, simply because I don't think it's fair or right to cast such aspersions on independent businesses without any basis.  



> It's not the results that have made me question them.



Well, I don't recall your questioning them in the slightest when the Libs were looking better in the polls.


----------



## sails (7 December 2012)

Julia said:


> What you said was
> 
> 
> The implication is pretty obviously that the polling companies are subject to political influence.
> ...




No Julia - I voiced my questions.  I did not accuse.  Don't try and make something out of it that isn't. 

You did not answer the basis of my questioning - why were the polls so far out for NT and ACT elections?  Again they had labor more in front than they were in reality.  

No, I didn't question them because they lined up with what was happening in other state elections.

Stop making assertions about me and my reason for questioning.  I see a consistent divergence between actual elections and the polls in general.  

End of this conversation with you.  I have trouble understanding your constant attack mode and the crazy personal assertions you come up with.  I think the ignore button is the answer.


----------



## sails (7 December 2012)

Julia, while you accuse me of not complaining when the libs were more in front, neither did I complain about the polls favouring labor in 2007.  Sentiment was clearly against the libs and the polls confirmed it.  This is not about what I want...

This is about the polls in general that are diverging from perceived strong sentiment which is frustrated and fed up with this government.  I don't think I have heard anyone actually like listening to Gillard and many, if not most, mute their TVs or change channels if she comes on.  I have read of some having soft toys handy to throw at her when on TV in utter frustration.

And this is about the polls in general diverging from the real results in the last few weeks in the last two state elections.

Something is not adding up.  No assertions, just questions.


----------



## IFocus (7 December 2012)

poll of poll on the Insiders (wont see that on Bolt info-iiberal-mercial) worth a look


http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/2012/s3645528.htm


----------



## drsmith (7 December 2012)

IFocus said:


> poll of poll on the Insiders (wont see that on Bolt info-iiberal-mercial) worth a look
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/2012/s3645528.htm



The Coalition are still in front and that's where they'll be at the next election.

Labor will suffer the apocalypse it needs to reform.


----------



## drsmith (7 December 2012)

Labor's problems can't be wished away.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...aig-thomson-case/story-fndsip4d-1226532207814


----------



## noco (7 December 2012)

IFocus said:


> poll of poll on the Insiders (wont see that on Bolt info-iiberal-mercial) worth a look
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/2012/s3645528.htm




IFocus, I would not place too much credence in Barrie Cassidy as he is a typical Julia Gillard brown nose.


----------



## drsmith (7 December 2012)

noco said:


> IFocus, I would not place too much credence in Barrie Cassidy as he is a typical Julia Gillard brown nose.



Poor Barrie Cassidy faces the prospect of mourning the slow and tortuous death of Gillard Labor for almost another 12 months.

The looming budget outcome may well prove the mercy rule for him.


----------



## Julia (7 December 2012)

sails said:


> Julia, while you accuse me of not complaining when the libs were more in front, neither did I complain about the polls favouring labor in 2007.  Sentiment was clearly against the libs and the polls confirmed it.  This is not about what I want...
> 
> This is about the polls in general that are diverging from perceived strong sentiment which is frustrated and fed up with this government.  I don't think I have heard anyone actually like listening to Gillard and many, if not most, mute their TVs or change channels if she comes on.  I have read of some having soft toys handy to throw at her when on TV in utter frustration.



I totally understand how you feel.  I also absolutely detest this government.

That isn't a good reason to toss objectivity away and imagine that the polls are somehow politically influenced.
Don't you think there are Labor supporters out there who - just as you are an ardent Liberal supporter - are prepared to support the government despite all their stuff ups?

Having worked for Australia's largest market research company some years ago, I'm very conscious of the rigorous attention to methodology to ensure the sampling and questions are without bias.
These companies exist purely on their reputation for integrity:  they are not going to jeopardise that.
If there were anything odd going on, don't you think the 'losing' political party would be all over them with accusations of bias?
On the contrary.  I have never, ever heard any politician from any side question the integrity of the major polling companies.

If you think about it, most of us associate with others who have a similar philosophy both generally and politically.
I  had some friends here today and we indulged in a mutual session of agreement of how much we wanted the government gone.  We pretty naturally are attracted to reinforcement of our existing views and are resistant to considering an alternative.

Maybe consider that rusted on Labor supporters behave in exactly the same way as rusted on Liberal supporters, endorsing the government despite all its stuff ups.  These people would have been as upset about the Howard government as you are about Gillard's reign, and would also naturally gravitate in their daily lives to others who share their political philosophy.
I don't run into too many Labor supporters either, can't actually think of more than a couple, but I attribute that to my choice of company.




> And this is about the polls in general diverging from the real results in the last few weeks in the last two state elections.



I can't comment on that.  I only take notice of Federal and Queensland polls.
Perhaps people changed their minds on polling day.  No idea.




IFocus said:


> poll of poll on the Insiders (wont see that on Bolt info-iiberal-mercial) worth a look



Very interesting.  Those simple graphics make very clear what has been happening.
Largely it seems the Libs built support on the back of Tony Abbott's campaign against the carbon tax which was immensely successful.  But people are now perceiving the reality of the tax to be less of an impost on their lives than Mr Abbott had suggested.  Thus, pretty reasonably, Mr Abbott's credibility has seen a downturn.
The government's ridiculous accusations of misogyny have probably also had an effect on some swinging voters.

(This is, of course, leaving aside the Prime Minister's current hypocritical suggestion that she is going to save all Australians $250 p.a. on their power bills.  Well, Ms Gillard, just remove the damn tax instead of insisting what you call 'gold plating' be discontinued, something that will likely result in black outs on hot days.)



noco said:


> IFocus, I would not place too much credence in Barrie Cassidy as he is a typical Julia Gillard brown nose.




Noco, the analysis in the excerpt posted by IFocus wasn't of Barrie Cassidy's confection.  It was a graphically presented analysis of the year's polls which anyone of a mind to do so could check for accuracy.


----------



## Calliope (8 December 2012)

if the Labor internal poll is credible, it appears the Queensland swinging voters are on the move. But why would they release this research?:dunno:



> internal Labor Party research that showed the government's primary vote had slipped back to 33 per cent and it faced a catastrophic result in western Sydney. The poll showed Labor would pick up two seats in Queensland, and possibly one each in Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia. But it would lose three in Tasmania and up to 10 in NSW




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...er-cost-shifting/story-fn59niix-1226532535358


----------



## MrBurns (8 December 2012)

This may be the first move toward replacing Gillard


----------



## Calliope (8 December 2012)

in the old days Julia would have been a candidate for the Dunking Stool for Scolds.


----------



## bellenuit (8 December 2012)

It occurred to me after hearing about the London nurse who committed suicide yesterday that in spite of whatever mental problems she already had there will always be a hint of blame attached to the 2 radio hosts who did the prank. Even though nobody could have predicted that something like this would happen, nevertheless it was a reckless thing to do as they had no idea what effect it might have on vulnerable people.

When Family Radio host Harold Camping predicted the Rapture would occur sometime last year, many of his followers who believed such nonsense ended up penniless after giving all their possessions away and I think there was even one lady who committed suicide, believing she was undeserving and would be left behind to face the horrible fate awaiting those who were not chosen.

So did Gillard and her advisors think through the possible consequences of her Tripple J prank last week when she confirmed that the Mayan calendar predictions were correct and that the end of the world will happen this month? Of course one would have to be stupid not to know that it was a farce, but there are many stupid people out there and it reached a worldwide audience through YouTube. There are also many smart people out there who are always looking for ways to make a quick buck. 

So are we going to see lots of vexatious lawsuits and perhaps even a few genuine ones blaming Gillard for some detrimental consequence that resulted from them believing or pretending to believe what she said. Are we, the Australian people, going to have to foot the bill to settle these claims as that may be a cheaper option than fighting them in court (as was one of the cases brought on by Slipper's accuser). After all, it isn't Gillard's money and we know how reckless she can be with other people's money.


----------



## Miss Hale (8 December 2012)

I had the same thought myself bellenuit re Gillards 'end of the world' speech in the light of the nurse's suicide.  I also heard a lady ring into ABC radio last week practically in tears about global warming and it occured to me that if people get so worked up about this and someone (heaven forbid) were to commit suicide would the likes of Tim Flannery and Al Gore be held to blame?


----------



## Gringotts Bank (8 December 2012)

Miss Hale said:


> I had the same thought myself bellenuit re Gillards 'end of the world' speech in the light of the nurse's suicide.  I also heard a lady ring into ABC radio last week practically in tears about global warming and it occured to me that if people get so worked up about this and someone (heaven forbid) were to commit suicide would the likes of Tim Flannery and Al Gore be held to blame?




Gillard should know that you only p1ssfart around with stuff like that when things are going *very *well, if at all.  Her primary job, as the title of the thread suggests, is to inspire confidence.  Doing this crap, even though it's plainly in jest, will cause an association between *bad news* and *her on screen*.  This association will enter the collective unconscious and push national confidence to new lows, and that will be reflected in the numbers......later on.  What a fr1ggin idiot, seriously.  She has no idea.


----------



## drsmith (8 December 2012)

Gringotts Bank said:


> Her primary job, as the title of the thread suggests, is to inspire confidence.  Doing this crap, even though it's plainly in jest, will cause an association between *bad news* and *her on screen*.  This association will enter the collective unconscious and push national confidence to new lows, and that will be reflected in the numbers......later on.  What a fr1ggin idiot, seriously.  She has no idea.



Can you imagine John Howard or any other PM doing that ?

It demeans the office of Prime Minister, but then, she's found many ways to do that.


----------



## dutchie (8 December 2012)

drsmith said:


> Can you imagine John Howard or any other PM doing that ?
> 
> It demeans the office of Prime Minister, but then, she's found many ways to do that.





She should have got Emerson to do it.

"End of the world on my TV screen"

"End of the world on my TV screen"

"End of the world on my TV screen"

"Shocking me right out of my brain"



Both of them are dills.


----------



## Julia (8 December 2012)

This, from "The Punch" is a pretty good summary of Julia Gillard's year.
Some of the comments from the public that follow are worth reading also.
http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/gillard-survived-but-she-didnt-fix-anything/


----------



## bellenuit (9 December 2012)

From Michael Smith News today.....

*This is immensely important. The AWU-WRA was a union. No wonder the Commissioner would not register it.*

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...r-the-commissioner-would-not-register-it.html


----------



## Julia (9 December 2012)

Some of the comments following Michael Smith's remarks are interesting, e.g.



> I'm not full of formal qualifications or degrees, I have a few life experiences. I find all this legal stuff boring and tedious to follow.
> All I have heard from Wilson, was the parrot parody interview with abc. He doesn't strike me as the sort of bloke who has the patience or intellect to dream up this whole scam taking government money. He seems more likely to grab some muscle, and storm the beach head (or rig) . I believe the whole scheme was the idea of someone far more intellectual, patient, and devious. Was there anybody like that within his social circle?


----------



## sydboy007 (10 December 2012)

Unfortunately I don't think any of our politicians inspire confidence.

I am sick of the whole AWU issue.  Either Dr No has to provide some damning evidence to the police, or please start debating on the issues that are important to the country  We're facing a mining investment cliff next year, and unless the banks can con first home buyers to pay over inflated prices for new property there's not going to be another engine of growth till the AUD drops off its Reserve status perch.

After experiencing the NBN at my parents house I will say at least Labor have a coherent and beneficial strategy for providing a 21st century telecomms network to all of the country.  I still don't know what the LNP are going to do.  Even MT can't make up his mind if he has a fully costed or not policy, but he can build it quicker and cheaper, even though he says you need to do a BCA.

These days I'm reminded of Brewsters Millions and Vote for NONE OF THE ABOVE.  That's pretty much how I feel now


----------



## MrBurns (10 December 2012)

sydboy007 said:


> IEither Dr No has to provide some damning evidence to the police, or please start debating on the issues that are important to the country




I think having a crook as PM is important enough, where there's smoke there's fire and Gillard is looking very guilty, you cant associate with the types she has without being involved.
And Dr No as you put it is just one of a majority of Australians that say "no" to corruption and incompetance.

The rest of your post is interesting, I wonder what's in store for the economy next year.

I'll tell you something if the "experts" don't know the whole thing is a guessing game.


----------



## sails (10 December 2012)

Sydboy, Dr No wouldn't have to be so negative if this government were competent, handling taxpayer funds prudently (including strong border control) and passing good economic policy.

I suppose on the same basis you would also call police prosecutors negative?

Once again, it is labor trying to make any down turn in the economy Abbott's fault for "talking it down" rather than placing the blame on their own economically damaging policies, spending sprees and incompetence.

Over $250 billion in debt (after inheriting $20 billion in savings just five years ago) and they want to blame it on something Abbott says.  Get real!

This Dr No and Noalition nonsense is absolutely pot, kettle, black stuff.


----------



## Calliope (10 December 2012)

sydboy007 said:


> I am sick of the whole AWU issue.  Either Dr No has to provide some damning evidence to the police, or please start debating on the issues that are important to the country




If asking for an enquiry, to look into union officials and politicians conspiring to defraud union members, is *negative*, then I think you could count most Australians as *negative.*

Is it *negative* to want a corruption-free government? There is no issue more urgent than this.


----------



## drsmith (10 December 2012)

Julia said:


> Some of the comments following Michael Smith's remarks are interesting, e.g.




And this,



> I made a comment elsewhere that Fairfax has come to this party because it does not want to miss out on what will turn out to be the biggest political story to ever hit this country.
> 
> I have just done a google search for Nick Styant-Browne and what did I find:
> 
> ...




http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...gation-phase-of-the-awu-scandal.html#comments


----------



## IFocus (10 December 2012)

drsmith said:


> And this,
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...gation-phase-of-the-awu-scandal.html#comments




More nasty vexatious rumour the Coalition had the opportunity to prosecute the case after talking and dealing with low life's under privilege and failed to do so, so badly Bishop is now in hiding.


----------



## sails (10 December 2012)

IFocus said:


> More nasty vexatious rumour the Coalition had the opportunity to prosecute the case after talking and dealing with low life's under privilege and failed to do so, so badly Bishop is now in hiding.




lol - I wouldn't write it off yet.  Michael Smith is still waiting on more documents with FOI.  I think the net is slowly closing .

With some documents on this issue mysteriously gone missing, it would have to be making it more difficult.  Now, if Ms Gillard wants to prove her innocence, surely she would be frantically hunting down those missing documents that would clear her name.  Instead she resorts to name calling.  Not a good look.


----------



## MrBurns (10 December 2012)

IFocus said:


> More nasty vexatious rumour the Coalition had the opportunity to prosecute the case after talking and dealing with low life's under privilege and failed to do so, so badly Bishop is now in hiding.




She's as guilty as all those she associates with and protects, Craig Thompson, Peter Slipper, a nice bunch of low lifes they are and you'll find in the end so is Juliar...........


----------



## drsmith (10 December 2012)

IFocus said:


> More nasty vexatious rumour the Coalition had the opportunity to prosecute the case after talking and dealing with low life's under privilege and failed to do so, so badly Bishop is now in hiding.



What you need to accept is that when it comes to poor judgement, Julia Gillard has a very, very long history.

Just look at a couple of her judgements as PM. Standing behind Craig Thompson and supporting Peter Slipper as speaker to the end. It is her judgements, both past and present that will ultimately be her undoing. It's only a question of time. 

The sad truth for Labor is that it will be the Labor Party itself that pays the highest political price.


----------



## IFocus (11 December 2012)

drsmith said:


> What you need to accept is that when it comes to poor judgement, Julia Gillard has a very, very long history.
> 
> Just look at a couple of her judgements as PM. Standing behind Craig Thompson and supporting Peter Slipper as speaker to the end. It is her judgements, both past and present that will ultimately be her undoing. It's only a question of time.
> 
> The sad truth for Labor is that it will be the Labor Party itself that pays the highest political price.




The only person who ran a slush fund and lied about it was and is Abbott......from which he arranged for Hanson to be jailed on a technicality what a dog.


----------



## MrBurns (11 December 2012)

IFocus said:


> The only person who ran a slush fund and lied about it was and is Abbott......from which he arranged for Hanson to be jailed on a technicality what a dog.




A technicality ??? you mean he was right ??? OK then


----------



## noco (11 December 2012)

Well, I guess Julia Gillard can fool half the people some of the time , some the peolpe half the time but not all the people all the time. 

Her chickens are now coming home to roost.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...takes-toll-on-pm/story-e6frg75f-1226534067179


----------



## dutchie (11 December 2012)

Last night Ms Gillard hosted about 25 female bloggers and web writers - whose sites reach about 2.5 million people - at Kirribilli House, as she gears up to use gender issues to maximum advantage in the coming election year.

Labor strategists increasingly see gender working for Ms Gillard and against Mr Abbott, especially since the PM's ''misogyny'' speech in October, which received international coverage.


I think Julia is on a winner here. I hope she continues to divide the nation by gender. You go for it, girl.


----------



## Miss Hale (11 December 2012)

dutchie said:


> Last night Ms Gillard hosted about 25 female bloggers and web writers - whose sites reach about 2.5 million people - at Kirribilli House, as she gears up to use gender issues to maximum advantage in the coming election year.
> 
> Labor strategists increasingly see gender working for Ms Gillard and against Mr Abbott, especially since the PM's ''misogyny'' speech in October, which received international coverage.
> 
> ...




How utterly bizarre  I can honestly say when I choose to read a blog the gender of the writer never even crosses my mind.  She really does inhabit a different universe to most people


----------



## Calliope (11 December 2012)

dutchie said:


> Last night Ms Gillard hosted about 25 female bloggers and web writers - whose sites reach about 2.5 million people - at Kirribilli House, as she gears up to use gender issues to maximum advantage in the coming election year.




The presence of a roomful of trousered, hairy arm-pitted bull dykes, oozing testosterone and baying for male blood,  would have scared the daylights out of poor Tim who had to wait on them.


----------



## sails (11 December 2012)

dutchie said:


> Last night Ms Gillard hosted about 25 female bloggers and web writers - whose sites reach about 2.5 million people - at Kirribilli House, as she gears up to use gender issues to maximum advantage in the coming election year.
> 
> Labor strategists increasingly see gender working for Ms Gillard and against Mr Abbott, especially since the PM's ''misogyny'' speech in October, which received international coverage.
> 
> ...





Ninemsn poll doesn't agree that gender is working for Ms Gillard - in fact I think decent women are embarrased by her stupid name calling.  Most unbecoming for any PM, let alone a female.





> Is Gillard a good role model for Australian women?
> 
> yes - 15,638
> *NO - 47,005*




That's around 75% say NO and, especially as a female, I agree with them.

http://ninemsn.com.au


----------



## sails (11 December 2012)

Miss Hale said:


> How utterly bizarre  I can honestly say when I choose to read a blog the gender of the writer never even crosses my mind.  She really does inhabit a different universe to most people




Agree Miss Hale!  

And just imagine the fury of the left if Abbott had dared to host a dinner just for 25 male bloggers.

We would never hear the end of such a sexist, misogynist stunt.

Talk about pot, kettle, black with this PM.


----------



## MrBurns (11 December 2012)

sails said:


> Ninemsn poll doesn't agree that gender is working for Ms Gillard - in fact I think decent women are embarrased by her stupid name calling.  Most unbecoming for any PM, let alone a female.
> 
> That's around 75% say NO and, especially as a female, I agree with them.
> 
> http://ninemsn.com.au




I agree......


----------



## Julia (11 December 2012)

noco said:


> Well, I guess Julia Gillard can fool half the people some of the time , some the peolpe half the time but not all the people all the time.
> 
> Her chickens are now coming home to roost.



About time.  She will now be experiencing for herself the effect of the direct campaign against her via the AWU matter so successfully hammered in the last week of parliament by Julie Bishop.
That at least was based on facts, in contrast to the accusations of misogyny with Tony Abbott.



sails said:


> Ninemsn poll doesn't agree that gender is working for Ms Gillard - in fact I think decent women are embarrased by her stupid name calling.  Most unbecoming for any PM, let alone a female.



Agree.  But there will still be some women, mostly younger, who are impressed by her rantings.
They will be the same group who sneer at Germaine Greer who genuinely did so much for the equality of women.


----------



## drsmith (11 December 2012)

Julia Gillard practicing her concession expression for her day of reckoning.


----------



## Calliope (11 December 2012)

What a grisly array. God help us.:shake:




http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...was-scorcher-says-gillard-20121210-2b5q5.html


----------



## Miss Hale (11 December 2012)

Calliope said:


> What a grisly array. God help us.:shake:
> 
> View attachment 49912
> 
> ...




Urggh! There is quite a few there I would cross the road to avoid 

Shame they never include people like Dame Elisabeth Murdoch on such lists (recently passed away sadly).  I believe she was very influential to a lot of people in a quiet non-nonsense kind of way.


----------



## MrBurns (11 December 2012)

Miss Hale said:


> Urggh! There is quite a few there I would cross the road to avoid
> 
> Shame they never include people like Dame Elisabeth Murdoch on such lists (recently passed away sadly).  I believe she was very influential to a lot of people in a quiet non-nonsense kind of way.




Agree entirely, Elisabeth Murdoch has more class than that entire list, which is , by the way, utter rubbish.


----------



## Julia (11 December 2012)

Miss Hale said:


> Urggh! There is quite a few there I would cross the road to avoid
> 
> Shame they never include people like Dame Elisabeth Murdoch on such lists (recently passed away sadly).  I believe she was very influential to a lot of people in a quiet non-nonsense kind of way.



Agree.  She was a great example to some of the arch feminists on that list.

A couple on the list I do support:  Sarah Ferguson - she has brought us some fearless and enlightening television journalism.
Germaine Greer:  sadly she has become a target for the sneering current day feminists who have no idea what life was once like for women before Germaine and her ilk shook everything up.  She has unfortunately not grown old gracefully, but women today should be forever grateful for what she did for us.

Anne Summers was once a woman of reason and objectivity.  She has become a rabid, ultra left nutter of extreme and anti-male views.


----------



## JTLP (11 December 2012)

Calliope said:


> What a grisly array. God help us.:shake:
> 
> View attachment 49912
> 
> ...




Seems like a lesbian filled lefty top 20...what's up with that?


----------



## bellenuit (11 December 2012)

*New AWU slush fund revealed*

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/new-awu-slush-fund-revealed-20121211-2b7zo.html


----------



## tigerboi (12 December 2012)

*Re: Does Gillard inspire confidence? yeah confident she will get kicked to the gutter*



MrBurns said:


> She's as guilty as all those she associates with and protects, Craig Thompson, Peter Slipper, a nice bunch of low lifes they are and you'll find in the end so is Juliar...........




cant wait to put this trash out with all the other labour rubbish.

dont forget her greeny scum mates too...tb


----------



## drsmith (12 December 2012)

JTLP said:


> Seems like a lesbian filled lefty top 20...what's up with that?



I'm suprised Carbon Tax Cate or the female Greens didn't get a mention.


----------



## drsmith (16 December 2012)

Crocodile tears from Julia Gillard for Peter Slipper.



> IN A warning aimed at hard-hitting negative political campaigns, Prime Minister Julia Gillard has aired her concern about the emotional toll faced by Peter Slipper in the fallout from the accusations levelled against the former speaker.




She had no such concerns for Kevin Rudd, but then, he was the real enemy.

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/po...emotional-toll-on-slipper-20121215-2bgho.html


----------



## Julia (16 December 2012)

Gillard warning of the emotional toll of 'negative campaigns'????
What the **** does she think her very personal misogynist campaign against Tony Abbott was!

Poor Mr Slipper.  If she's so sorry for him, she could ameliorate his hurt feelings by putting him back in the Speaker's chair.


----------



## Calliope (16 December 2012)

drsmith said:


> Crocodile tears from Julia Gillard for Peter Slipper.




What a ratbag she is!!! Only Fairfax would print such drivel without comment.

*She has no doubts as to who was to blame for the ''brutal'' year in politics*, which included the Craig Thomson affair, the drawn-out asylum seeker issue, the Peter Slipper-James Ashby case and the AWU slush fund saga.

*''All of it was the decision and style of the opposition under Tony Abbott,*'' she said. ''They will always go for the negative and go in hard against the individuals. I think Australians are heartily sick of politics and next year will offer voters a real choice.


----------



## drsmith (16 December 2012)

Calliope said:


> What a ratbag she is!!! Only Fairfax would print such drivel without comment.



I think the ABC may have finally seen the light.

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2012/s3655073.htm


----------



## sails (16 December 2012)

drsmith said:


> I think the ABC may have finally seen the light.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2012/s3655073.htm




I'll wait for the transcript...


----------



## MrBurns (16 December 2012)

drsmith said:


> I think the ABC may have finally seen the light.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2012/s3655073.htm




She's had it.

Don't know how she can hang on any longer.


----------



## noco (16 December 2012)

drsmith said:


> I think the ABC may have finally seen the light.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2012/s3655073.htm




ABBOTT, ABBOTT, ABBOTT. Yes doc, 24 times. Poor old Tim will be saying to Juliar first thing in the morning, Ha Jools, what gives with this guy Abbott you kept mentioning him in your sleep last night??

Have you got a crush on him or something?

Abba Dabba  do.


----------



## Calliope (16 December 2012)

noco said:


> ABBOTT, ABBOTT, ABBOTT. Yes doc, 24 times. Poor old Tim will be saying to Juliar first thing in the morning, Ha Jools, what gives with this guy Abbott you kept mentioning him in your sleep last night??
> 
> Have you got a crush on him or something?
> 
> Abba Dabba  do.




It's called Obsessive Compulsive Disorder.



> Obsessions are distressing thoughts, images or impulses that occur on a regular basis and cause lots of anxiety to sufferers. Whereas people who do not suffer from OCD can dismiss these types of thoughts without too much difficulty, this is not the case in OCD. *Instead, they persist in the minds of sufferers until they can often think of little else.* Any attempts to suppress or ignore the intrusions usually end in failure.




http://www.ocdsymptoms.co.uk/common-ocd-obsessions.html


----------



## sptrawler (16 December 2012)

I hope she keeps the same tack, it worked in the U.K. I think it will backfire here


----------



## noirua (16 December 2012)

Julia Gillard has modeled herself on the former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher (1979 - 1992) who was weakened early on but recovered brilliantly on her handling of the Falklands war in 1982; it gave her 10 more years in office.

Australia is bumbling along still and I feel a second and third term in office by Gillard would be good news. Up and at 'em and handbag them if necessary.


----------



## drsmith (16 December 2012)

The only war Julia Gillard will have will be with her own party.

She won't win.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (16 December 2012)

drsmith said:


> The only war Julia Gillard will have will be with her own party.
> 
> She won't win.




Thanks doc, a moot point.

I actually feel sorry for JG. 

Her whole life has been laid out for public consumption in sordid detail, and there is no guarantee that there is not more to come.

It is arguable that soon she will have been done more harm to, than she has done harm.

Her main failing though is that she has played the vituperative game as a man would, and she will be judged as a woman.

A few airbrushed pages in Womans Weekly or New Idea will not deflect the female vote in Western Sydney or Queensland outside Brisbane.

Such is life, as Ned said.

gg


----------



## banco (16 December 2012)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Thanks doc, a moot point.
> 
> I actually feel sorry for JG.
> 
> ...




She seems to be doing ok (according to the polls) with the female bogan vote.  It's the male bogan vote that she's struggling with.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (16 December 2012)

banco said:


> She seems to be doing ok (according to the polls) with the female bogan vote.  It's the male bogan vote that she's struggling with.




A good point banco.

The female bogan vote regionally is equal to the metro luvvies female vote plus the metro luvvies male vote.

However, in regional and rural areas the mainstream female vote is strongly against her, as it is in the cities.

And this is larger than the luvvie / bogan vote.

Most non luvvie males will vote against her nationwide.

She is in trouble.

gg


----------



## Julia (16 December 2012)

noirua said:


> Julia Gillard has modeled herself on the former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher



What?  She has an utterly different philosophy (insofar as she has any philosophy apart from her own personal survival) and absolutely lacks the persona and dignity that Thatcher offered.
I cannot think of a more unlikely comparison.


----------



## sails (16 December 2012)

noirua said:


> Julia Gillard has modeled herself on the former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher (1979 - 1992) who was weakened early on but recovered brilliantly on her handling of the Falklands war in 1982; it gave her 10 more years in office.
> 
> Australia is bumbling along still and I feel a second and third term in office by Gillard would be good news. Up and at 'em and handbag them if necessary.




good grief - do you want Australia in even more debt than we have now with practically nothing to show for it?

Do you want our borders to remain unprotected for  another 6 years?  Do you want sharia law to become law here?  Perhaps you don't have grand children who will likely lose their freedom in the future.

Do you want our freedom of speech to continue to be eroded for another 6 years where possibly only government propaganda will be permitted?

If you want all that, then why don't you choose to live in a repressive communist country somewhere instead of wishing this on us here?  It is bizarre for any caring Australian to want our freedoms to be so eroded and our economy sent down the toilet.

Yes, Australia is bumbling along in the wrong direction, imo.  It needs to be stopped urgently.  Thanks goodness the majority of Aussie voters do not share your un-Australian ideas.

And you are wrong about Gillard being anything remotely like Margaret Thatcher.  And neither does she have Thatcher's policies.

Margaret Thatcher said (and it would be good if Gillard took note):



> "...and Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They [socialists] always run out of other people's money. It's quite a characteristic of them."




http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Margaret_Thatcher


----------



## Julia (17 December 2012)

Noirua, at one stage you were living in the UK which would explain your apparent lack of comprehension of the reality of Gillard's behaviour.  Are you still there?


----------



## noirua (17 December 2012)

drsmith said:


> The only war Julia Gillard will have will be with her own party.
> 
> She won't win.




I don't think that matters as Margaret Thatcher was accused of breaking the bats of some in her own team. If they can't take it, boot them out and bring in those who can.


----------



## noirua (17 December 2012)

Julia said:


> Noirua, at one stage you were living in the UK which would explain your apparent lack of comprehension of the reality of Gillard's behaviour.  Are you still there?




I thought you were a Kiwi Julia?


----------



## noirua (17 December 2012)

Julia Gillard's speech to US Congress PART 1of3 March 09, 2011 - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1K8CYsKr9XA

Speech to Joint Houses of Congress | Margaret Thatcher Foundation
http://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/111277

Guys, I rest my case, they are very similar.


----------



## Calliope (17 December 2012)

noirua said:


> Julia Gillard's speech to US Congress PART 1of3 March 09, 2011 - YouTube
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1K8CYsKr9XA
> 
> Speech to Joint Houses of Congress | Margaret Thatcher Foundation
> ...




You are very naive noirua, if you think you have a case to rest on.



> Thatcher was committed to reducing the power of the trade unions, whose leadership she accused of undermining parliamentary democracy and economic performance through strike action. Several unions launched strikes in response to legislation introduced to curb their power, but resistance eventually collapsed. Only 39% of union members voted for Labour in the 1983 general election. According to the BBC, Thatcher "managed to destroy the power of the trade unions for almost a generation."



Wikipedia

Gillard on the other runs a government which is controlled by the unions.


----------



## dutchie (17 December 2012)

Julia said:


> What?  She has an utterly different philosophy (insofar as she has any philosophy apart from her own personal survival) and absolutely lacks the persona and dignity that Thatcher offered.
> I cannot think of a more unlikely comparison.




Chalk and cheese.
Thatcher had a bit of class, Gillard would not know the meaning of the word.


----------



## Julia (17 December 2012)

noirua said:


> I thought you were a Kiwi Julia?



I was born in New Zealand, yes.
I am an Australian citizen and have been living here for twenty years.
You haven't enlightened us as to whether you are actually living in Australia yourself.


----------



## IFocus (17 December 2012)

noirua said:


> Julia Gillard has modeled herself on the former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher (1979 - 1992) who was weakened early on but recovered brilliantly on her handling of the Falklands war in 1982; it gave her 10 more years in office.
> 
> Australia is bumbling along still and I feel a second and third term in office by Gillard would be good news. Up and at 'em and handbag them if necessary.





Sheezies your entering the snake pit making comments like that here Noirua hope you have plenty of antivenene handy


----------



## MrBurns (17 December 2012)

John Howard, Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin all die and go to hell.

While there, they spy a red phone and ask what the phone is for. The Devil tells them it is for calling back to Earth.

Putin asks to call Russia and talks for 15 minutes. When he is finished the Devil informs him that the cost is a million dollars, so Putin writes a cheque. 

 Obama calls the US and talks for an hour. When he is finished the Devil informs him that the cost is 4 million dollars, so he writes a cheque.

Finally John Howard gets his turn and talks for 4 hours.  When he is finished the Devil informs him that the cost is 20 cents.  Howard just smiles.  

Obama and Putin go ballistic, and ask the Devil why Howard got to call Australia  for only 20 cents??





are you ready?





scroll down ……………






a bit further ............ 










The devil smiles and replies:

"Since Julia Gillard took over, the whole country has gone to hell.  It's a local call."


----------



## Calliope (17 December 2012)

IFocus said:


> Sheezies your entering the snake pit making comments like that here Noirua hope you have plenty of antivenene handy




That's right. Just the thought of mentioning Thatcher as being comparable with their beloved Julia is enough to drive our lefties round the bend.


----------



## Logique (17 December 2012)

*The real 20 Most Influential women of 2012 *
by: By Annette Sharp From: The Daily Telegraph December 15, 2012 : http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/en...al-women-of-2012/story-e6frewz0-1226537097606

This is closer to the real list for mine. It includes Gina Rinehart and Gail "male bank tellers" Kelly. I think Gai Waterhouse rates much higher than shown here.  I still think Heather Ridout and Miranda Devine should be on any such list. Also where is Julie Bishop.


----------



## noco (17 December 2012)

Gillard should not be worried about ABBOTT, ABBOTT, ABBOTT as much as she should about her caucas and cabinet. She has reak
l problems in that sector.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...a-problem-for-pm/story-fnbcok0h-1226537935181


----------



## drsmith (17 December 2012)

Calliope said:


> That's right. Just the thought of mentioning Thatcher as being comparable with their beloved Julia is enough to drive our lefties round the bend.



Thatcher would turning in her grave at the mere implication.

Gillard is closer to Stalin than Thatcher. The only real difference is that Julia Gillard limits her purges to the political. There, as we all know, no one is safe. Not even a serving PM from the same side in his first term.


----------



## MrBurns (17 December 2012)

Lets face it Gillard is a screeching fishwife and a dangerous vindictive one at that, I simply just don't believe the polls having her a preferred PM.


----------



## Julia (17 December 2012)

Logique said:


> *The real 20 Most Influential women of 2012 *
> by: By Annette Sharp From: The Daily Telegraph December 15, 2012 : http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/en...al-women-of-2012/story-e6frewz0-1226537097606
> 
> This is closer to the real list for mine. It includes Gina Rinehart and Gail "male bank tellers" Kelly. I think Gai Waterhouse rates much higher than shown here.  I still think Heather Ridout and Miranda Devine should be on any such list. Also where is Julie Bishop.



I don't think much of that list.  I've never heard of some of them.  Agree in particular about Heather Ridout who should rate a higher mention than e.g. Katie Page.  



MrBurns said:


> Lets face it Gillard is a screeching fishwife and a dangerous vindictive one at that, I simply just don't believe the polls having her a preferred PM.



Perhaps consider that she is preferred PM simply because much of the electorate dislikes Abbott.
If there were to be a more popular leader of the Libs that stat would change, as would imo the overall rating of the Liberal Party.


----------



## MrBurns (17 December 2012)

Julia said:


> Perhaps consider that she is preferred PM simply because much of the electorate dislikes Abbott.
> If there were to be a more popular leader of the Libs that stat would change, as would imo the overall rating of the Liberal Party.




I find it hard to believe that people dislike Abbott more than they dislike Gillard, I just don't buy it.


----------



## Julia (17 December 2012)

MrBurns said:


> I find it hard to believe that people dislike Abbott more than they dislike Gillard, I just don't buy it.




Your choice to believe or otherwise, of course.  But when we feel strongly about someone, it's very difficult to imagine that others feel utterly differently.

By disbelieving you are rubbishing all the polls from various companies over a sustained period.  Pretty hard to believe they are all wrong.


----------



## sptrawler (18 December 2012)

John Howard polled badly, also Colin Barnett was blasted in the polls. Funny how the polls can get it wrong.
Who knows, maybe the polls will be more accurate, if Abbott gets in and an inquiry into the unions follows?


----------



## moXJO (18 December 2012)

Small business isn't so happy



> The looming federal election is already shaping as the key news event for Australia’s political and business sectors in 2013, and the SME community has given a blunt verdict on who it’s backing ahead of the poll.
> 
> The third bi-annual SME Direction survey, sponsored by Australia’s top SME accounting and financial services firm WHK Group & Crowe Horwath, polled 520 business owners and managers. It found that 57.3% would back the Coalition if the poll was held now, compared to just 11.2% supporting Labor and only 5.6% backing the Greens.



http://www.smartcompany.com.au/economy/053287-smes-back-coalition-ahead-of-2013-election-expect-economy-will-be-flat-sme-directions-survey.html?utm_source=SmartCompany&utm_campaign=4ddcae8f79-Thursday_6_December_201206_12_2012&utm_medium=email


----------



## sails (18 December 2012)

Unbelievable... 



> I read this in Christopher Pearson’s column and even then it took me half a day to appreciate what it said. I had probably heard the same before but hadn’t really thought about its significance. This is what he wrote:
> 
> McTernan is credited with writing Gillard’s misogyny speech and with her gender wars campaign.
> 
> Gillard’s misogyny speech was written by a man! Come on, it was written by a man!





Read more:
Gillard’s misogyny speech was written by a man


----------



## sptrawler (18 December 2012)

Well I think our Julia has mentioned the pommie spin doctor on a number of occassions.
He will trip over his own BS, just watch.LOL


----------



## sails (19 December 2012)

sptrawler said:


> Well I think our Julia has mentioned the pommie spin doctor on a number of occassions.
> He will trip over his own BS, just watch.LOL




It has been said that he failed with this approach in the UK, so why would Gillard would hire someone who has a track record of failure?

Perhaps she is hoping that Aussies are more easily fooled than the Poms...


----------



## dutchie (19 December 2012)

sails said:


> It has been said that he failed with this approach in the UK, so why would Gillard would hire someone who has a track record of failure?




Because he would fit right in!


----------



## noco (19 December 2012)

Miss Gillard may not be out of the woods yet in relation to the AWU scandal.

According to a well know QC in WA she may have a prima-facie-case to answer on.

It is all about legal interpretation.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...to-answer-on-awu/story-e6frgd0x-1226539989208


----------



## drsmith (19 December 2012)

noco said:


> Miss Gillard may not be out of the woods yet in relation to the AWU scandal.



She's far from out of the woods, but, the electorate or the Labor Party itself will likely decide her fate before this comes to a conclusion.


----------



## noco (20 December 2012)

How embarrassing this is for our deceitful Prime Minister. A Prime Minister who has broken so many promises it is a wonder she can lay stright in bed.

You can bet the rusted on Labor supporters and the ABC will praise her for admitting she can't keep her promise and the brave decision she has made to drop the budget surplus.

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...et_promise_exposed_for_the_con_it_always_was/


----------



## noco (21 December 2012)

noco said:


> How embarrassing this is for our deceitful Prime Minister. A Prime Minister who has broken so many promises it is a wonder she can lay stright in bed.
> 
> You can bet the rusted on Labor supporters and the ABC will praise her for admitting she can't keep her promise and the brave decision she has made to drop the budget surplus.
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...et_promise_exposed_for_the_con_it_always_was/





And here it is well and truly confirmed by the Courier Mail.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...get-surplus-axed/story-fndo1wyv-1226541455402


----------



## MrBurns (21 December 2012)

noco said:


> And here it is well and truly confirmed by the Courier Mail.
> 
> http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...get-surplus-axed/story-fndo1wyv-1226541455402




And the ABC is awash with how right it was to abandon the surplus ambition ............ (not that they had any choice mind you)

It was right to abandon the surplus but it was very wrong to PROMISE one for 2 years...........rank amateurs


----------



## moXJO (21 December 2012)

MrBurns said:


> And the ABC is awash with how right it was to abandon the surplus ambition ............ (not that they had any choice mind you)
> 
> It was right to abandon the surplus but it was very wrong to PROMISE one for 2 years...........rank amateurs




They swallowed their own BS in believing their fairy tale economics would come good. Labor simply does not live in the real world and has no idea. And now they back flip once again. The list is now so long it makes you wonder what labor hasn't failed at.


----------



## sails (21 December 2012)

Gillard has failed dismally on three major promises:

1.  There will be no carbon tax under a government she leads.

2.  She promised to stop the boats

3.  She promised a surplus (which is usually the result of strong economic policy and management)

Massive fail on all counts.


----------



## MrBurns (21 December 2012)

sails said:


> Gillard has failed dismally on three major promises:
> 
> 1.  There will be no carbon tax under a government she leads.
> 
> ...




The ABC is protecting them like they're brothers, or should I say comrades


----------



## noco (21 December 2012)

MrBurns said:


> The ABC is protecting them like they're brothers, or should I say comrades





No doubt there will be some ethnic cleansing in the ABC after the next election.

There will be quite a few looking for a new job.


----------



## explod (21 December 2012)

MrBurns said:


> I find it hard to believe that people dislike Abbott more than they dislike Gillard, I just don't buy it.




Just have to go with the flow.

Bishop would be far superior to Abbott and Swannie would be better than Gillard by far.

What are their stakes anyone?


----------



## MrBurns (21 December 2012)

explod said:


> Just have to go with the flow.
> 
> Bishop would be far superior to Abbott and Swannie would be better than Gillard by far.
> 
> What are their stakes anyone?




No it has to be a perfect mix of ability and charisma.


----------



## Julia (21 December 2012)

explod said:


> Just have to go with the flow.
> 
> Bishop would be far superior to Abbott and Swannie would be better than Gillard by far.



Interesting comment.  Could you tell us why you think this?


----------



## Calliope (21 December 2012)

noco said:


> it is a wonder she can lay stright in bed.




Stright? Careful noco, you are starting to talk like her.


----------



## explod (22 December 2012)

Julia said:


> Interesting comment.  Could you tell us why you think this?




For a start their backgrounds seem to be clean, they are consistent (perform well in the Parliament), well liked by their constituents and handle the press well too.  

Bishop attacks very well and to the point.  Swan is diligent. 

I am not a supporter of either, it is just my humble view as an outsider.


----------



## noco (22 December 2012)

A bit more $hit hits the fan for Gillard by implication.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...-in-law-joe-trio/story-fng5kxvh-1226542152787


----------



## noirua (22 December 2012)

Margaret Thatcher In Hospital After Bladder Operation
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...icid=maing-grid7|uk|dl1|sec1_lnk2&pLid=142676


----------



## noco (24 December 2012)

What a mob of hill billies the previous Queenslan Labor Government was and now Gillard has cheated Queensland out of $millions in an effort to achieve a surplus.

What an utter lot of hypocrites they are and note the unions are deafening with with their silence on the matter.



http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...-springborg-says/story-e6freon6-1226473222125


----------



## sails (24 December 2012)

A spot on article by Amanda Vanstone who says, "On the issue of trashing rivals, the PM says one thing and does another.":



> LAST week our national leader decided to sum up the year by announcing that, due to Tony Abbott's efforts, we were blessed with a parliament of filth.
> 
> Julia Gillard decided, it seems, that to use her position to make some positive and uplifting remarks was a little too passe.




Read full article: *It's Gillard who's slinging mud in this 'parliament of filth'*


----------



## noco (30 December 2012)

Cash splash for school kids or more money for grog and poker machines.

She'll be right Julia, spend the money for votes before the next election, the coalition will pick up the tab.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...hool-cash-splash/story-e6freon6-1226545151043


----------



## Ijustnewit (30 December 2012)

A selective appearance by our wonderful PM. Where was she when Swan was making his announcement ?

http://www.news.com.au/national/pri...tival-queensland/story-fndo4ckr-1226545263265


----------



## Julia (30 December 2012)

Ijustnewit said:


> A selective appearance by our wonderful PM. Where was she when Swan was making his announcement ?



It's smart of her to make such appearances.  Mr Abbott needs to do likewise.  Mr Turnbull has done his own session of spouting wisdom at Woodford, as has the now ancient Bob Hawke.

It's entirely possible that Labor will be re-elected purely on the basis of engaging in clever tactics like this, while the Coalition is left wondering why.  They need their own version of John McTiernan.


----------



## dutchie (30 December 2012)

Ijustnewit said:


> A selective appearance by our wonderful PM. Where was she when Swan was making his announcement ?
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/national/pri...tival-queensland/story-fndo4ckr-1226545263265




I would say *gutless* non appearance rather than *selective* appearance.


----------



## dutchie (31 December 2012)

dutchie said:


> I would say *gutless* non appearance rather than *selective* appearance.




At one of her "selective" appearances she said that the introduction of the Carbon Tax was the highlight of her year.

So a lie is her highlight??? Thats what she thinks of the Australian public!


----------



## sails (31 December 2012)

Julia said:


> It's smart of her to make such appearances.  Mr Abbott needs to do likewise.  Mr Turnbull has done his own session of spouting wisdom at Woodford, as has the now ancient Bob Hawke....





I suspect the rock star style welcome is because it is mostly labor/green people there.  It would not be the best place for Abbott, however, agree that he does need to get out more to these sort of things.

But then again, I often see on his facebook where he is doing things but it is not reported by the media.  Is the media trying to win the next election for labor?  Voters need to see through all these tactics.


----------



## Julia (31 December 2012)

sails said:


> I suspect the rock star style welcome is because it is mostly labor/green people there.  It would not be the best place for Abbott, however, agree that he does need to get out more to these sort of things.



Yes, you're quite right, sails.  I'd overlooked the likely political leaning of people going to music festivals.



> But then again, I often see on his facebook where he is doing things but it is not reported by the media.  Is the media trying to win the next election for labor?  Voters need to see through all these tactics.



I expect you can definitely say that with respect to the ABC which is where I heard about the politicians who had been at Woodford.  Don't know if it was reported anywhere else?


----------



## noco (10 January 2013)

Gillards greatest blunder of the year. THE CARBON DIOIXDE TAX and what has it done for climate change? Zilch.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/med...nder-of-the-year/story-e6frg996-1226551323923


----------



## Julia (10 January 2013)

Interesting.  Thanks, noco.
Let's hope they still feel that way when it comes to voting time.


----------



## sptrawler (10 January 2013)

I have thought about this question a lot and have also research the hypothesis that there has been mitigating factors involved.
However after extensive research and allowing for poor performance variables that are outside her control.
The answer I come up with is NO, she doesn't inspire confidence.
Best to ask this question of prospective boat people if you want an affimative answer.


----------



## noco (22 January 2013)

TRUTH CLOSES IN ON PM

LARRY PICKERING
Caucus members are reaching for the Mylanta as the AWU fraud scandal is set to derail McTernan's dirty plans for Gillard's re-election.
It seems not only the PM has used the off-season to correct a few bodily imperfections. Julia may have bumped into Joe Hockey as he was coming out of lap band surgery.
Both sides are taking this coming election extremely seriously but physical appearances are likely to take a back seat when it comes to the gangrenous AWU scandal.
Hedley Thomas, a rare investigative bloodhound of the Press, today reported Victoria police spent two days interviewing former paralegal with Slater & Gordon, Olivia Palmer (referred to by Julia Gillard as Olive Brosnahan).
Julia Gillard's newly discovered sweet smile will disappear when she reads this morning's The Australian.
The naysayers of the Press were trusting the scandal would be lost in Xmas cheer. But why would an honest journo revisit the matter over Xmas? It would receive little attention in the haze of goodwill and alcohol.
Two days spent interviewing one legal secretary indicates the serious nature of the investigation. It is also indicative of the value of Ralph Blewitt's disclosures.
It would have been easy to dismiss Blewitt's statement as 17 year-old rumour but it wasn't dismissed and there are many other witnesses to corroborate his claims.
Olivia Palmer will not lie to protect Gillard nor will ex AWU Secretary Tim Daly who is holding extensive documented evidence.
Nor will Bill the Greek Telikostoglou (or "Bill the bull**** artist" as Gillard refers to him as).
Bill, who is returning from Greece to be interviewed by the Victoria police, was the former bodyguard of Bruce Wilson.
A 6" 2' tall ex AWU heavy with a pony tail, Telikostoglou scarpered to Greece when the scam was discovered in 1995. He was also accused of defrauding thousands from the Victorian Greek community.
Telikostoglou may well escape prosecution on other matters by telling the truth.
But there are other 'persons of interest' on the Victoria police list:
Federal Court Judge Bernard Murphy, Bruce Wilson, Marie Murray, Robyn Macleod, Bill Shorten, Nicola Roxon, Bob Carr, Robert Rae, Graham Richardson and Bill Ludwig may well be expected to lie.
FWA Commissioner Ian Cambridge says he will stand by his affidavit. Mmm, let's see.
Bob Kernohan will certainly not lie, nor will Rob McClelland.
And Julia Gillard? Well, she is certainly not averse to telling the odd lie but it will be impossible for her to know what other witnesses have said. If police decide to interview the PM, she appears a gonner either way.
One thing is clear, police are taking this matter seriously and the cloud of suspicion will rain on all of Gillard's coming election parade.
Can Caucus replace her and escape the worst of it? No, not really, they have punted every last cent on her in a last hurrah. There is no escaping now.
It will take much more than a manufactured sweet smile, new gear, a cute dog and a spot of liposuction to make this PM aesthetically acceptable.

 I think Miss Gillard's roosters are coming home to nest. It would appear there is a case building up against her.


----------



## sptrawler (22 January 2013)

I think she will go down as the most divisive, disruptive and non productive person in Australian politics.
Her legacy will be, to have introduced taxes, that brought her country "back to the pack".
When the opportunity was there to build a country that could support twice as many people.


----------



## noco (23 January 2013)

sptrawler said:


> I think she will go down as the most divisive, disruptive and non productive person in Australian politics.
> Her legacy will be, to have introduced taxes, that brought her country "back to the pack".
> When the opportunity was there to build a country that could support twice as many people.




We would certainly have been a lot further advance without her at the helm.

We have gone backwards and it will take years to unravel it all.


----------



## noco (23 January 2013)

Janet Albrechtsen sums up this deceitful Prime Minister of ours in a nut shell. 



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...nism-is-man-made/story-e6frg7bo-1226559589863


----------



## Logique (23 January 2013)

If you have an account at the Aus Noco, but confected outrage for political gain is about right. How must Warren Mundine be feeling, passed over twice, in favour of someone who isn't even an ALP member.


----------



## Julia (23 January 2013)

Logique said:


> If you have an account at the Aus Noco, but confected outrage for political gain is about right. How must Warren Mundine be feeling, passed over twice, in favour of someone who isn't even an ALP member.



Warren Mundine could be ruled out by Gillard on two counts.
He is a very decent bloke.
He was a Rudd supporter.


----------



## Calliope (23 January 2013)

Logique said:


> If you have an account at the Aus Noco, but confected outrage for political gain is about right. How must Warren Mundine be feeling, passed over twice, in favour of someone who isn't even an ALP member.




Actually he congratulated Gillard on her choice of Kneebone.


----------



## Julia (23 January 2013)

She has apparently been married two more times since Mr Kneebone.


----------



## noco (24 January 2013)

I would say the police are getting closer to the truth. 

How Miss Gillard will get out of this one I do not know but of course she has been cunning enough to cover her tracks in the past.



http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...p_up_investigation_into_gillards_awu_scandal/


----------



## sptrawler (25 January 2013)

If this Galaxy poll is anything to go by, it shows Jullia is on the nose, with the public.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/na...t-prime-minister/story-fncynkc6-1226561231526


----------



## MrBurns (25 January 2013)

sptrawler said:


> If this Galaxy poll is anything to go by, it shows Jullia is on the nose, with the public.
> 
> http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/na...t-prime-minister/story-fncynkc6-1226561231526




Yep she's a gonner and her latest trick with Peris just makes it worse for her.


----------



## Logique (25 January 2013)

sptrawler said:


> If this Galaxy poll is anything to go by, it shows Jullia is on the nose, with the public.
> 
> http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/na...t-prime-minister/story-fncynkc6-1226561231526



Has anyone informed Newspoll about this.


----------



## drsmith (25 January 2013)

A picture paints a thousand words.


----------



## Logique (26 January 2013)

It would be high-fives all round in the Rudd camp, respondents ranked him above Hawke


----------



## noco (4 February 2013)

Following today's caucas meeting, it looks like Gillard is not inspiring confidence amongst her crew. They are leaking like a sieve to the media and about to implode.

Will she last out the week?


http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...-to-destroy-govt/story-fncyva0b-1226570172009


----------



## sptrawler (4 February 2013)

I wonder how long it will be, before she blames Abbott for the Labor melt down.

I suppose he can expect another spray in parliament soon.


----------



## drsmith (4 February 2013)

noco said:


> Following today's caucas meeting, it looks like Gillard is not inspiring confidence amongst her crew. They are leaking like a sieve to the media and about to implode.
> 
> Will she last out the week?
> 
> ...




From the linked article above,



> ...the PM said she was aware that MPs had been leaking to journalists with the intention of backgrounding against the Government. Backgrounding is where politicians provide sensitive information to journalists under the assumption they will not be named.




from,



> A source inside the caucus...




Classic.


----------



## sptrawler (4 February 2013)

All the left leaning voters take note, even her own, find her on the nose.
It is not just us apparently rusted on Libs, that find her unpalatable.

I wouldn't be in Timmy's shoes for quids.


----------



## noco (4 February 2013)

noco said:


> Following today's caucas meeting, it looks like Gillard is not inspiring confidence amongst her crew. They are leaking like a sieve to the media and about to implode.
> 
> Will she last out the week?
> 
> ...




I watched Paul Murray Live tonight with Mark Latham on the panel.

He called Rudd a saboteur, a bastard and a leaker of cabinet to the media.

Rudd wasn't even at the caucas meeting as he was not well. Maybe he is has been over eating.


----------



## sptrawler (4 February 2013)

noco said:


> I watched Paul Murray Live tonight with Mark Latham on the panel.
> 
> He called Rudd a saboteur, a bastard and a leaker of cabinet to the media.
> 
> Rudd wasn't even at the caucas meeting as he was not well. Maybe he is has been over eating.




Yes poor old Mark, was the biggest choker in modern politics.IMO
Don't think it will happen with madame lash, more likely there will be more resignations and breakdowns in the ranks.
I bet Oakeshott, Wilkie and Windsor are huddled in a corner at the moment, trying to find an escape route.lol


----------



## drsmith (6 February 2013)

Who's the poor tormented child ?

https://twitter.com/JuliaGillard


----------



## Macquack (6 February 2013)

sptrawler said:


> I bet Oakeshott, Wilkie and Windsor are huddled in a corner at the moment, trying to *find an escape route*.lol




Oakeshott, Wilkie and Windsor will never be in a more powerful position than they are in now. So what are they escaping from or escaping to? In other words "What are you going on about?"


----------



## sptrawler (6 February 2013)

Macquack said:


> Oakeshott, Wilkie and Windsor will never be in a more powerful position than they are in now. So what are they escaping from or escaping to? In other words "What are you going on about?"




Well from memory, I think a member has to serve three terms to qualify for full entitlements(pension etc).
Oakeshott was elected 2008, Willkie 2010, Windsor would be sitting in a corner with them, because no one else would want to listen to his babble.
So Macquack, do a bit of arithmetic, re read my post and try to see what I'm going on about.
If you still can't work it out, I'm not going to spell it out.


----------



## Macquack (7 February 2013)

sptrawler, you are saying all these independents are putting their own interests before the interests of their constituency. This could be right, and this could be wrong. Also, the same could be said of any politician - Labor, Liberal, Green.

*On Wilkie, he would have to be the most decent politician in Canberra*. Standing up for the welfare of problem gamblers is a selfless campaign will no ulterior motive. The flack Wilkie has received from the Clubs Australia lobby has been unacceptable.


----------



## MrBurns (7 February 2013)

Macquack said:


> *On Wilkie, he would have to be the most decent politician in Canberra*. Standing up for the welfare of problem gamblers is a selfless campaign will no ulterior motive. The flack Wilkie has received from the Clubs Australia lobby has been unacceptable.




They rolled him lied to him and he took it like a wimp


----------



## Macquack (7 February 2013)

MrBurns said:


> They rolled him lied to him and he took it like a wimp




He is not a wimp, Burns.

He did not get what he wanted, that is politics.

He is still plugging away, what was the alternative?


----------



## MrBurns (7 February 2013)

Macquack said:


> He is not a wimp, Burns.
> 
> He did not get what he wanted, that is politics.
> 
> He is still plugging away, what was the alternative?




He should have switched allegiance to the Libs or resigned, he has no self respect.


----------



## Macquack (7 February 2013)

MrBurns said:


> He should have switched allegiance to the Libs or resigned, he has no self respect.



Their is no allegiance to the Liberals, they completely dismissed his plans. 

Why would he resign, are you crazy?


----------



## MrBurns (7 February 2013)

Macquack said:


> Their is no allegiance to the Liberals, they completely dismissed his plans. Why would he resign, are you crazy?




Gillard promised him certain things then spat in his face, I would have done a deal with the Libs, a matter of honour.


----------



## Macquack (7 February 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Gillard promised him certain things then spat in his face, I would have done a deal with the Libs, a matter of honour.




There was no deal to be had with the Liberals.


----------



## MrBurns (7 February 2013)

Macquack said:


> There was no deal to be had with the Liberals.




I'm sure the Libs would have done a deal to get his support, I actually felt sorry for the poor bastard when Gillard just brushed him aside.


----------



## Macquack (7 February 2013)

MrBurns said:


> I'm sure the Libs would have done a deal to get his support, I actually felt sorry for the poor bastard when Gillard just brushed him aside.




What deal with the Libs?

You got one thing right feeling sorry for Wilkie, because he did nothing wrong and got dished.

He is still in the best position to help the plight of problem gamblers, so cut the "honour" bull**** Burns.


----------



## MrBurns (7 February 2013)

Macquack said:


> What deal with the Libs?
> 
> You got one thing right feeling sorry for Wilkie, because he did nothing wrong and got dished.
> 
> He is still in the best position to help the plight of problem gamblers, so cut the "honour" bull**** Burns.




Look.......he did a deal with Gillard to get her into the Lodge, she then spat in his face and he did nothing, how pathetic is that.
There are various ways to curb gambling he could have done a deal with the Libs but he didnt even have the guts to do that he is weak and useless.


----------



## sptrawler (7 February 2013)

MrBurns said:


> I'm sure the Libs would have done a deal to get his support, I actually felt sorry for the poor bastard when Gillard just brushed him aside.




Well he has jumped into bed with the most despised government in my memory. 
So how he can support it and expect to be treated differently, is rubish.
As for feeling sorry for the bastard, he didn't feel too sorry when he behaved like a bastard at Duntroon.
Give me a break, live by the sword die by the sword. The rewards are high and they know the scrutiny they will come under.


----------



## MrBurns (7 February 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Well he has jumped into bed with the most despised government in my memory.
> So how he can support it and expect to be treated differently, is rubish.
> As for feeling sorry for the bastard, he didn't feel too sorry when he behaved like a bastard at Duntroon.
> Give me a break, live by the sword die by the sword. The rewards are high and they know the scrutiny they will come under.




Duntroon ? dont know the story there, but he will have to dodge public bars in future as he wil be despised by many.


----------



## sptrawler (7 February 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Duntroon ? dont know the story there, but he will have to dodge public bars in future as he wil be despised by many.




ANDREW Wilkie has a knot in his stomach. It comes, mostly, from not knowing which chapter of his ''spirited youth'' he will be forced to confront next.

The Tasmanian independent believes he is at the centre of a smear campaign orchestrated by the pokies industry. There have been threats about ''compromising'' photographs and allegations about his bastardry at Duntroon, some incidences of which he could not recall, many of which he had already confessed to.



Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/national/n...reform-push-20110423-1ds8u.html#ixzz2KDKZcOwD

I'm not saying he isn't sorry for his behaviour, but I do take exception to him being made out to be some sort of angel.


----------



## MrBurns (7 February 2013)

sptrawler said:


> ANDREW Wilkie has a knot in his stomach. It comes, mostly, from not knowing which chapter of his ''spirited youth'' he will be forced to confront next.
> 
> The Tasmanian independent believes he is at the centre of a smear campaign orchestrated by the pokies industry. There have been threats about ''compromising'' photographs and allegations about his bastardry at Duntroon, some incidences of which he could not recall, many of which he had already confessed to.
> 
> ...




Well that explains his gutless reaction to being treated like dirt by Gillard.


----------



## MrBurns (8 February 2013)

Guess she's packing up at the Lodge as well.



> Julia Gillard sells Canberra investment property
> 
> February 8, 2013, 10:48 amYahoo!7
> 
> The two-bedroom Wentworth Avenue apartment is located in the “boutique” Aspect complex, very close to Parliament House.




http://au.pfinance.yahoo.com/money-...092059/julia-gillard-sells-canberra-apartment


----------



## Aussiejeff (8 February 2013)

Confidence?

More like CONfidence.

JuLiar & Propoganda Minister Herr Schwann promised all Australians mega riches from the MRRT - initially to the tune of $AUS 4 Billion, later revised down in a series of humiliating backdowns to $AUS 2 Billion. 

So what did we really end up with?



> THE mining tax, which the Federal Government needs to fund projects worth billions of dollars, *raised just $126 million in its first six months.*
> 
> The failure of the tax had been the Government's most embarrassing fiscal secret.
> 
> ...



http://www.news.com.au/business/mining-tax-raises-126m-so-far/story-e6frfm1i-1226573638482 

EPIC FAIL!

I vote - NO CONFIDENCE whatsoever.


----------



## noco (10 February 2013)

Julia Gillard was asked before Xmas 2012 about the budget coming into surplus.

Her answer,"we will not fail. Failure is not an option". See her on the link.

How can anyone believe or have any confidence in this communistic tainted Prime Minister. She must go before she has a chance to do more damage to this great country of ours. 


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...ts/people_still_take_the_treasurer_seriously/


----------



## Logique (10 February 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Guess she's packing up at the Lodge as well.  http://au.pfinance.yahoo.com/money-...092059/julia-gillard-sells-canberra-apartment



Amazing, unbelievable timing.  She must have known it would look like she was running up the white flag.


----------



## Logique (10 February 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Well he has jumped into bed with the most despised government in my memory.
> So how he can support it and expect to be treated differently, is rubish.
> As for feeling sorry for the bastard, he didn't feel too sorry when he behaved like a bastard at Duntroon.
> Give me a break, live by the sword die by the sword. The rewards are high and they know the scrutiny they will come under.



Yes, and in the period following the last election, I'm sure the Liberal Party would have an opinion on how 'decent' Andrew Wilkie's negotiations with them were. There's a saying used in US politics, something about pigs and lipstick.


----------



## bellenuit (11 February 2013)

Getting closer.......... New development in the AWU scandal.

http://www.2gb.com/audioplayer/7272


----------



## bellenuit (11 February 2013)

bellenuit said:


> Getting closer.......... New development in the AWU scandal.
> 
> http://www.2gb.com/audioplayer/7272





*Witness says he was approached by a builder over payment for reno*

http://www.news.com.au/national/wit...payment-for-reno/story-fncynjr2-1226574905765


----------



## sptrawler (11 February 2013)

bellenuit said:


> *Witness says he was approached by a builder over payment for reno*
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/national/wit...payment-for-reno/story-fncynjr2-1226574905765




It seems like smart ar$ed McTernan, has invoked the old saying live by the sword die by the sword, with the misogyny speach. 
It was a bit 'out there' and seemed like it could have been levelled at any bloke. Actually change a few words and it could have been levelled at any woman.
All in all a pretty un Australian cheap shott that is backfiring.
How she can claim Abbott is nasty to her and then behave as she does, undermines it.
She comes over as a contradiction, "you will now see the real Julia", yep and it isn't nice.lol


----------



## drsmith (12 February 2013)

bellenuit said:


> *Witness says he was approached by a builder over payment for reno*
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/national/wit...payment-for-reno/story-fncynjr2-1226574905765



Slowly but surely, Julia Gillard's universe is collapsing.



> A JUDICIAL figure who exposed alleged union corruption involving Julia Gillard's then boyfriend is taking a rare step of calling on witnesses to offer evidence to a new police investigation.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...-tells-witnesses/story-fng5kxvh-1226575771357

Kevin Rudd or otherwise, Labor will have no choice but to replace her as party leader before the ugly stuff really hits the fan. That's if her scheduled election doesn't come first and the electorate are left to do what the Labor Party itself should have done long ago.


----------



## sptrawler (12 February 2013)

I wonder if the weight of evidence will give the ipetus, to pursue the untouchable.


----------



## Logique (12 February 2013)

drsmith said:


> Slowly but surely, Julia Gillard's universe is collapsing.
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...-tells-witnesses/story-fng5kxvh-1226575771357
> Kevin Rudd or otherwise, Labor will have no choice but to replace her as party leader before the ugly stuff really hits the fan. That's if her scheduled election doesn't come first and the electorate are left to do what the Labor Party itself should have done long ago.



The pressure will build all year. ALP backbenchers, as with Mungo McCallum, will awake as if from a dream.  

From a dispassionate standpoint, cheering for Julia Gillard to prop her up as PM, would be the best way to ensure a change of government in Sept.  

Can't see them going early, unless Rudd or S.Smith take over, which has to be at least a 50:50 chance now.  Electorally, Crean, Shorten or Combet would be seen as just more of the same, if not worse looking at Combet.


----------



## dutchie (12 February 2013)

drsmith said:


> Slowly but surely, Julia Gillard's universe is collapsing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Does not matter whether it is Rudd or Gillard. They are both inept and completely unsuitable to be PM.

One is psycho (see other Labor Party members comments) and the other one is a lying crook (see multitude of scandals and backflips).

Great choice!!


----------



## drsmith (12 February 2013)

If Julia Gillard's looking for the dagger, I think I know where it is.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opi...ics-live-february-12-2013-20130212-2e9kd.html


----------



## bellenuit (12 February 2013)

drsmith said:


> Slowly but surely, Julia Gillard's universe is collapsing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




You should be able to get the full story from the Australian without needing a subscription through this link via Michael Smiths's Blog

*Ian Cambridge on the Victoria Police investigation into The AWU Scandal*

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...-investigation-into-the-awu-scandal.html#more


----------



## drsmith (12 February 2013)

bellenuit said:


> You should be able to get the full story from the Australian without needing a subscription through this link via Michael Smiths's Blog
> 
> *Ian Cambridge on the Victoria Police investigation into The AWU Scandal*
> 
> http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...-investigation-into-the-awu-scandal.html#more



This has also appeared on Smithy's blog.



> Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has imposed a travel ban on Coalition MPs heading overseas, saying they need to be prepared for an election at any time.




If the image on the post is from today, something is indeed brewing.

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2013/02/something-brewing-in-canberra-.html#more


----------



## sails (17 February 2013)

Found on Michael Smith's website - says it all really...




http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2013/02/make-up-your-mind.html


----------



## drsmith (17 February 2013)

Michael Smith has a score to settle and it may well settle in his favour.


----------



## sptrawler (17 February 2013)

I think the misogyny speach has been a turning point in Gillards career and not for the better.

It was a massive tactical stuff up, now only one in four women want to vote for her.

This is the problem with bringing in an overseas spin doctor, what works in U.K doesn't necassarily work here, there are subtle differences.


----------



## Miss Hale (17 February 2013)

sptrawler said:


> I think the misogyny speach has been a turning point in Gillards career and not for the better.
> 
> It was a massive tactical stuff up, now only one in four women want to vote for her.
> 
> This is the problem with bringing in an overseas spin doctor, what works in U.K doesn't necassarily work here, there are subtle differences.




It didn't work in the UK either.


----------



## sails (17 February 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> It didn't work in the UK either.





That's what is bizarre.  Why would Gillard bring in someone who had failed?


----------



## Purple XS2 (18 February 2013)

Being open minded and all, I thought I'd chip in to the anti-Gillard thread for a change:

From today's _Crikey_ :"In launching the policy, the Prime Minister gave a speech that was almost cringingly awful at times."[/I]

With one exception, (a speech made in China, no doubt drafted by Foreign Affairs wonks instead of her usual Wally) every 'speech' from our current PM I've heard, is cringingly bad.

Which, ignoring all the weird anti-Gillard stuff one sees about the traps, (present thread excepted _of course_, is 1 of 2 reasons why the current PM is a failure at her job, because there are just 2 fundamental tasks for a  Prime Minister:

1: to articulate the government's polices and principles (whatever they are - that's a separate issue), and
2: to be responsible for ministerial appointments. Any PM that tolerates a boob like Joe Ludwig in their cabinet is clearly oblivious to this requirement.

Anyway, don't let me interrupt your spiking of your voodoo doll,

regards,

P


----------



## drsmith (18 February 2013)

Purple XS2 said:


> Anyway, don't let me interrupt your spiking of your voodoo doll,



You've filled the last two places to put pins.


----------



## sptrawler (18 February 2013)

Well this is a not so rosy picture, from what the reporter is saying, there were no treasury accountants present when the MRRT was thrashed out.
No wonder they were thrashed, pure arrogance, anything to keep office.IMO

Amazing, it was posted on an ABC website, maybe they are realigning for a change of master.

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/4524780.html


----------



## noco (27 March 2013)

The new debt level is now $267,000,000,000 that is $267 billion (THAT IS $14,000 FOR EACH MAN WOMAN AND CHILD) and rising at the rate of $100,000,000 each day.

Gillard is leaving with a "SCORCHED EARTH POLICY" for the Coalition to battle with for the next 10+years and when it is all paid back the stupid naive will say it is time for a change of government and the merry go round will start all over again.

How can anyone have confidence in this Prime Minister let alone this inept Labor Party? Well, I guess the rusted on Labor supporters wiil but then again they are starting dwindle.


http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...-this-term-alone/story-fncyva0b-1226607170108


----------



## YMI (27 March 2013)

noco said:


> The new debt level is now $267,000,000,000 that is $267 billion (THAT IS $14,000 FOR EACH MAN WOMAN AND CHILD) and rising at the rate of $100,000,000 each day.
> 
> Gillard is leaving with a "SCORCHED EARTH POLICY" for the Coalition to battle with for the next 10+years and when it is all paid back the stupid naive will say it is time for a change of government and the merry go round will start all over again.
> 
> ...



Yes it’s awful how they waste the money that isn’t theirs but look at the debt level of other countries, for example:
USA: ~48000 A$ per person,
EU: ~26000 A$ per person,
China: ~1125 A$ per person.
Does that mean the Chinese have the best government?

And it would be more meaningful to put the debt in relation to the GDP.
USA: ~100%
EU: ~89%
Australia: ~27%
China: ~19%
Now it doesn’t look quite so bad anymore, does it?


----------



## noco (27 March 2013)

YMI said:


> Yes it’s awful how they waste the money that isn’t theirs but look at the debt level of other countries, for example:
> USA: ~48000 A$ per person,
> EU: ~26000 A$ per person,
> China: ~1125 A$ per person.
> ...




Personally I don't give a bugger about what is going on in other countries. 

I am concerned about what is going on here with this inept Green/Socialst Left wing Labor Party.

They have no concerns about the people's living standards in Australia. All they are concerned about is there own survival.


----------



## drsmith (27 March 2013)

YMI said:


> And it would be more meaningful to put the debt in relation to the GDP.
> USA: ~100%
> EU: ~89%
> Australia: ~27%
> ...



It's the fiscal path our government is taking that's the problem.

It's unsustainable.


----------



## sails (27 March 2013)

YMI said:


> Yes it’s awful how they waste the money that isn’t theirs but look at the debt level of other countries, for example:
> USA: ~48000 A$ per person,
> EU: ~26000 A$ per person,
> China: ~1125 A$ per person.
> ...




 No matter how you put it, $260+ billion gross debt is far greater than any debt ever run up by a labor government.  

And you want us to follow in the footsteps of the countries you admire?







www.menzieshouse.com.au/steve-hunter/


----------



## YMI (27 March 2013)

sails said:


> No matter how you put it, $260+ billion gross debt is far *greater than any debt ever run up by a labor government*.



What a great picture and true in some way. The point is, this happens no matter what level of debt. If the world economy suffers, our economy suffers. Don’t get me wrong, I hate that too, how they deal with the taxpayer’s money and that they know just one direction and that is more debt. However, the current level doesn’t concern me so much, it’s more the direction. And whether Labor or Liberal is better at making debt I don’t know. And whether our grandchildren will say one day, that was sustainable what you guys did 50 years ago – I don’t know. 


> And you want us to follow in the footsteps of the countries you admire?



A good question, one that I admire – maybe yes but not one of the listed ones. And I would need more time to figure out whether there is one which I admire more


----------



## DB008 (27 March 2013)

YMI said:


> What a great picture and true in some way. The point is, this happens no matter what level of debt. If the world economy suffers, our economy suffers. Don’t get me wrong, I hate that too, how they deal with the taxpayer’s money and that they know just one direction and that is more debt. However, the current level doesn’t concern me so much, it’s more the direction. And whether Labor or Liberal is better at making debt I don’t know. And whether our grandchildren will say one day, that was sustainable what you guys did 50 years ago – I don’t know.
> 
> A good question, one that I admire – maybe yes but not one of the listed ones. And I would need more time to figure out whether there is one which I admire more




Should we have a very, very, very, deep hole to dig ourselves out of, or just a smash ditch?


----------



## noco (30 March 2013)

Did Gillard do anything wrong with the Wilson and the AWU scandal?

According Michael Smith News Ltd Gillard has done plenty wrong.

Do listen to his 20 minute audio attached to this link and form your own opinion.

What I would like to know is why haven't the police taken this into consideration? 


http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...putation-on-the-proposition-that-you-did.html


----------



## banco (30 March 2013)

noco said:


> Did Gillard do anything wrong with the Wilson and the AWU scandal?
> 
> According Michael Smith News Ltd Gillard has done plenty wrong.
> 
> ...




Probably because it's bull**** and only convincing to people who don't actually know anything about how the law works. 

To take but one example he defines "probable" as "could well happen" at around 6:30.


----------



## MrBurns (30 March 2013)

banco said:


> To take but one example he defines "probable" as "could well happen" at around 6:30.





> prob·a·ble
> Adjective
> 
> 
> Likely to be the case or to happen.



.....


----------



## drsmith (30 March 2013)

banco said:


> Probably because it's bull**** and only convincing to people who don't actually know anything about how the law works.



QandA from November 26 2012 is well worth a listen,



> JANET ALBRECHTSEN: Now, as a lawyer, I’m very familiar with ABC rules. I know that you can't set up an association using the letters ABC without authorisation. It was not authorised. What do I do next? I decide not to open a file. I'm a lawyer. I've got fiduciary duties to my partners at a law firm. I choose not to tell those partners about this matter. I’m a lawyer. I’ve got fiduciary duties to the firms major client, the ABC, but I choose not to tell other members of the ABC that I’m doing work on the side for my boyfriend to set up a fund using the letters ABC for the purposes that have nothing to do with workplace reform. Now, I'm sorry, Penny, you know, the Prime Minister today talked about being very ultra cautious and ultra careful. She was not ultra cautious or ultra careful in the work that she conducted and that's why this issue keeps coming up again and again. And let me just finish. By coming out today and denying everything, not even conceding there were perhaps judgments that she could have made a little better in hindsight, by coming out and denying, she’s upped the ante, not for the Opposition but for people like Nick Styant Browne, the former partner at Slater & Gordon. I think we will hear from people like that.




http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s3635992.htm


----------



## drsmith (4 April 2013)

Discount dinner with Julia Gillard,



> In a sign that business is deserting the ALP, organisers of a fundraising dinner featuring by Julia Gillard and her Cabinet have dramatically cut ticket prices.
> 
> The dinner at Melbourne's Sofitel Hotel on April 16 is being advertised as an opportunity to hear the Prime Minister deliver a "keynote'' address outlining her "key policy priorities''.
> 
> Business lobbyists were staggered to receive an email yesterday offering a "special individual ticket'' rate of just $495 - after earlier being advised that the "non member'' price was $1500.




Next might be buy one, get one free.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...after-cash-boost/story-fncvk70o-1226612016068


----------



## basilio (4 April 2013)

This is really special...
THIS IS TRULY AMAZING - AND WORTH THE EFFORT….

MATH QUIZ: Reveals your favourite movie!!

I did it in my head, then on paper, and finally on a calculator just to confirm my numerical capabilities.
Each time I got the same answer, and sure enough it IS my very favourite movie EVER!

DO NOT cheat and scroll down to the movies. Do YOUR maths, THEN compare the results to the list of movies at the bottom.

You will be AMAZED how and accurate this test is.

1. Pick a number from 1 to 9;
2. Multiply that number by 3;
3. Add 3;
4. Multiply that number by 3 again; then
5. Your total will be a two digit number. Add the first and second digits together to find your favourite movie (of all time) in the list of 17 movies below:





Movie List:

1. Gone With the Wind
2. E.T.
3. Top Gun
4. Star Wars
5. Forrest Gump
6. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
7. Jaws
8. Hang 'em High
9. The Tony Abbott resignation speech of 2013
10. The Manchurian Candidate
11. The Pretender
12. Shrek
13. The War Wagon
14. Titanic
15. Raiders of the Lost Ark
16. Home Alone
17. The Sands Of Iwo Jima


----------



## sails (4 April 2013)

Ah Basilio - I think you have changed it to suit your propaganda (once again...lol)

Below is the movie list that has been going around:

Movie List:

1. Gone With the Wind
2. E.T.
3. Top Gun
4. Star Wars
5. Forrest Gump
6. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
7. Jaws
8. Hang 'em High
9. *The Julia Gillard resignation speech of 2013*
10. The Manchurian Candidate
11. The Pretender
12. Shrek
13. The War Wagon
14. Titanic
15. Raiders of the Lost Ark
16. Home Alone
17. The Sands Of Iwo Jima​


----------



## Whiskers (4 April 2013)

basilio said:


> This is really special...
> THIS IS TRULY AMAZING - AND WORTH THE EFFORT….
> 
> MATH QUIZ: Reveals your favourite movie!!
> ...




Funny that!!!

It always comes to 9! 

Given the thread title, it should come to 11, I say. :


----------



## basilio (4 April 2013)

Well Sails caught out once again !!

I had considered leaving it with the normal rabid right wing punch line but thought "what the heck" lets live dangerously..

It is a tricky joke though.


----------



## sails (4 April 2013)

basilio said:


> Well Sails caught out once again !!
> 
> I had considered leaving it with the normal rabid right wing punch line but thought "what the heck" lets live dangerously..
> 
> It is a tricky joke though.




Fair enough, Bas - at least you fessed up...


----------



## sptrawler (4 April 2013)

Well she is starting to sound delusional.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...of-asia-strategy/story-fnho52jo-1226612190778

Talk about writing your own history.


----------



## dutchie (4 April 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Well she is starting to sound delusional.
> 
> http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...of-asia-strategy/story-fnho52jo-1226612190778
> 
> Talk about writing your own history.




Every thing bad that has happened during the last 5 years (and there's a lot of it) is Abbott's/Howard's fault.

My reign has been perfect and don't you forget it! (feisty part).


----------



## MrBurns (4 April 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Well she is starting to sound delusional.
> http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...of-asia-strategy/story-fnho52jo-1226612190778
> Talk about writing your own history.




She's been delusional for a while, full on insanity is just around the corner.


----------



## drsmith (4 April 2013)

It's not only John Howards's fault, there's misogynists everywhere.



> Prime Minister Julia Gillard says Australians are still getting used to the idea that she is "not a man in a suit".




She must be having nightmares now about misogynists.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-04-04/australians-still-not-used-to-a-female-pm-gillard-says/4609954

This too was a doozie,



> JULIA Gillard says Australia will continue to run "a sizeable immigration program" as she steers the nation towards a population of more than 40 million by 2050.
> 
> The former "big Australia" opponent said she did not anticipate a change in the overall rate of immigration and would not impose population targets, while defending her government's treatment of asylum-seekers.




A sizeable immigration program is a natural consequence of inadequate border control. Somehow, there must be a justification for the hypocrisy in there somewhere. 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...wth-says-gillard/story-fn9hm1gu-1226612567741

That's three in one day. She must be having even worse nightmares about superannuation.


----------



## sails (4 April 2013)

Male PMs in suits have been voted out when the electorate no longer agreed with them - is she looking for special treatment because she isn't a man in a suit?

Does she want the electorate to accept a lower performance standard because she is a woman?  Isn't that just an excuse?

That's surely an insult to capable females...


----------



## Julia (11 April 2013)

This is a good comparison between Margaret Thatcher's attitude and Julia Gillard's.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...n-gillards-haven/story-fnahw9xv-1226617688471


----------



## drsmith (12 April 2013)

Today is another day where Julia Gillard's slush-fund came back to bite,


----------



## sptrawler (12 April 2013)

To be honest doc, I think it has gone way past this, the cancelling of the onshore processing near Broome is a huge if not nation changing event.IMO

At the moment Chinese companies are putting fifo camps on massive iron ore mines. Then they are using barges to off load onto ships.
Therefore when they leave there is nothing but a hole in the ground, great for the greens and labor, but how does it help my grandkids?


----------



## drsmith (23 April 2013)

More stories to break soon on the Gillard AWU slush fund according to Michael Smith,

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2013/04/a-progress-report-and-a-couple-of-developments.html#comments

He can on occasion get a little ahead of himself, so we'll just have to wait and see.


----------



## MrBurns (23 April 2013)

drsmith said:


> More stories to break soon on the Gillard AWU slush fund according to Michael Smith,
> 
> http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2013/04/a-progress-report-and-a-couple-of-developments.html#comments
> 
> He can on occasion get a little ahead of himself, so we'll just have to wait and see.




Well I was told she'll be charged before the election


----------



## drsmith (23 April 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Well I was told she'll be charged before the election



I wonder if there will be an overall sigh of relief within Labor if she is.

They can then dump her as leader and begin to heal the party.


----------



## Calliope (23 April 2013)

drsmith said:


> I wonder if there will be an overall sigh of relief within Labor if she is.
> 
> They can then dump her as leader and begin to heal the party.




She inspires confidence in Barry O'Farrell. She has sold him the Gonski.


----------



## drsmith (23 April 2013)

Calliope said:


> She inspires confidence in Barry O'Farrell. She has sold him the Gonski.



The impression I had is that she didn't want an agreement at COAG last week.

By setting a June 30 deadline and drawing them out one by one, she draws out the publicity. Her hope is either to draw out all the states by the may sitting of Parliament and legislate or get enough of the states to agree to be able to present it as an election policy.

I suspect that with the June 30 deadline, it's the latter.


----------



## drsmith (23 April 2013)

2GB radio host Ben Fordham has claimed on air that Julia Gillard is being investigated by police.

http://www.2gb.com/audioplayer/8620
http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...ia-police-in-the-aw/comments/page/2/#comments

Calling it a bombshell though might be a little hasty. Lets see first of all if the broader media takes up the story.


----------



## Calliope (23 April 2013)

drsmith said:


> 2GB radio host Ben Fordham has claimed on air that Julia Gillard is being investigated by police.
> 
> http://www.2gb.com/audioplayer/8620
> http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...ia-police-in-the-aw/comments/page/2/#comments
> ...




I would be a bit worried if it was Barrie O'Farrell's police who were investigating her. She would probably come out smelling like roses.


----------



## drsmith (23 April 2013)

Calliope said:


> I would be a bit worried if it was Barrie O'Farrell's police who were investigating her. She would probably come out smelling like roses.



She'll get most if not all of the states on board by June 30. 

It's just a case of each state deciding then they feel they've haggled a big enough bag of money.


----------



## DB008 (23 April 2013)

Looks like Melbourne is pushing for a 2nd international airport, and will get it.

Barrie O'Farrell is against a 2nd Sydney airport. 

Why?

Politics? 

Will his views change after the Sep election?


----------



## bellenuit (23 April 2013)

drsmith said:


> 2GB radio host Ben Fordham has claimed on air that Julia Gillard is being investigated by police.
> 
> http://www.2gb.com/audioplayer/8620
> http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...ia-police-in-the-aw/comments/page/2/#comments
> ...




Well, from this comment by Michael Smith, we should expect something tomorrow....

_If she's unhappy tonight, she will be unhappier yet tomorrow.   Sleep well as the presses roll._

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com


----------



## sptrawler (23 April 2013)

drsmith said:


> She'll get most if not all of the states on board by June 30.
> 
> It's just a case of each state deciding then they feel they've haggled a big enough bag of money.






Hasn't everyone worked out, there isn't a bag of money. Jeez I want to scream.


----------



## bellenuit (24 April 2013)

If this is a correct rendition of what Gillard's spokesman said, then she is just digging a deeper hole.

_A spokesman for the Prime Minister said last night there was "no change" in her position. "The Prime Minister has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing and there has been *no request for an interview with police*," he said._

That is not what Fordham alleged today. From the same story....

_The request came as the Prime Minister denied allegations made by radio broadcaster 2GB's Ben Fordham that she was under *direct investigation*._

If you listen to Fordham's broadcast, he is at all times talking about Gillard's claim in her earlier interview with him that she was not under investigation. The issue was never whether she has been interviewed by police or whether such a request has been made. Denying an accusation that has not been made against you is just a diversion from the real accusation.

*Gillard denies new AWU request*

_A FORMER union employee who has told of depositing $5000 into Julia Gillard's bank account at the direction of her allegedly corrupt union boss boyfriend has been asked by Victoria Police to make a formal statement as part of an ongoing fraud investigation.

The request came as the Prime Minister denied allegations made by radio broadcaster 2GB's Ben Fordham that she was under direct investigation.

Ms Gillard has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing in relation to the money.

Fordham said Victoria Police had verified to him that she was being investigated and asked him to make a statement about responses Ms Gillard gave in a March 7 radio interview about her conduct in an alleged fraud involving several hundred thousand dollars in the early 1990s.

The Australian is aware that detectives have questioned more than 12 witnesses since late last year who had direct knowledge of the Australian Workers Union slush fund scandal, the role of Ms Gillard at law firm Slater & Gordon and admissions by former AWU official Ralph Blewitt that he helped perpetrate a major fraud at the union.

Ms Gillard says she provided legal advice to help set up the AWU Workplace Reform Association, which her then boyfriend Bruce Wilson later used to carry out the alleged fraud. She later described the association as a "slush fund" for the re-election of union officials, but said she had no knowledge of its operations.

Wayne Hem, a former AWU employee, said yesterday that Fraud Squad detectives wanted him to say as little as possible to the media about his upcoming statement: "I've been asked not to say what my role is going to be."

Victoria Police contacted Mr Hem because he swore a statutory declaration last November and told The Australian that Mr Wilson handed him about $5000 and told him to deposit the money in Ms Gillard's bank account.

Mr Wilson and Ms Gillard, who said she could not recall such a payment, have strenuously denied any wrongdoing.

Fordham alleged yesterday that Ms Gillard had told him during last month's interview something "I now know not to be true".

"We were talking about the police investigation, the ongoing and very real police investigation, into the AWU slush fund scandal. When I mentioned this police investigation, the Prime Minister sought to clarify something."

Ms Gillard had warned Fordham in the interview to "just be careful" and not to cast slurs on her as the police investigation had "nothing to do with me".

He said yesterday: "Julia Gillard wanted to make it clear to (Australians) that she was not being investigated. Well I am correcting that record this afternoon because I know for a fact the Prime Minister is being investigated by police over the slush fund scandal. She was being investigated at the time of the interview.

"The investigation is comprehensive and by no means complete but police are still in the process of taking statements on this issue . . . and I know this because I have actually been asked by police to make a formal statement."

A spokesman for the Prime Minister said last night there was "no change" in her position. "The Prime Minister has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing and there has been no request for an interview with police," he said._

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-new-awu-request/story-fn59noo3-1226627403311


----------



## noco (24 April 2013)

I can only hiope the police nail this corrupt Prime Minister to the wall before the 14 th September.

She has got away with it for too long.


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...ts/awu_scandal_police_investigation_broadens/


----------



## drsmith (24 April 2013)

If Julia Gillard is eventually charged, I suspect it will be a while yet before she is. Bruce Wilson will most likely cop it first as Michael Williamson did before Craig Thomson over HSU matters.

If/When Bruce Wilson is charged, that will most likely trigger a leadership change in Labor in my view.

On the tax front, another fire has ignited under Labor's pants this time in relation to increasing the medicare levy to fund NDIS. Like Super, there's no immediate rush by Labor to put it out.



> PRIME Minister Julia Gillard is refusing to engage in budget speculation including suggestions an increase in the Medicare levy could be used to fund the national disability insurance scheme.
> 
> "I'm simply not playing the game," she told ABC radio on Wednesday.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...-disability-levy/story-fn3dxiwe-1226628391237

Also like with Super, Labor will find it difficult to sit on the fence on this for very long while suffering torture by speculation.


----------



## drsmith (24 April 2013)

Ben Fordham today.

http://www.2gb.com/audioplayer/8646

According to the above, Ralph Blewitt, Bruce Wilson and Julia Gillard are all being investigated.


----------



## Macquack (24 April 2013)

DrSmith, you keep harping on about this, when you should know that this is the least of Julia Gillard's problems.

Even if this story was true, Julia Gillard will be long gone as PM.

Ben Fordham is just a grubby little former "Today Tonight" spruiker who is self promoting himself. It took him over six minutes just to say that Julia Gillard is under investigation according to his contacts at Vic Police.


----------



## drsmith (25 April 2013)

Macquack said:


> DrSmith, you keep harping on about this, when you should know that this is the least of Julia Gillard's problems.
> 
> Even if this story was true, Julia Gillard will be long gone as PM.



If enough evidence can by collected, Bruce Wilson will be charged. He's as guilty as sin in my view. That (as I have said in a post above) I feel will trigger a leadership change in Labor should it happen before the election.

What you regard as the least of her problems may well become the greatest of her problems after her prime-ministership is over. It all depends on the evidence that's able to be collected.


----------



## bellenuit (27 April 2013)

*Who knows PM Julia Gillard is under investigation?*

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...er-investigation/story-e6frg6z6-1226630319702

_IN the days after a heated 2GB radio interview in March, during which Julia Gillard was questioned closely about the AWU slush fund scandal, a detective in Victoria's Fraud Squad, Ross Mitchell, made a strategic decision.

One answer the Prime Minister gave during a dogged tussle in her interview with Ben Fordham stood out. Mitchell knew it when he heard it. The other detectives knew it too.

Although seemingly innocuous to those not involved in the probe, Gillard's answer was new and pivotal. It meant police in Melbourne would need a sworn statement from Fordham in Sydney, even though as a journalist he would be expected to subsequently disclose some key facts.

The actions that Mitchell and other police took in seeking further information from Fordham led to him stating in unequivocal terms on his radio show this week something that had been previously cryptically and very carefully inferred - the Prime Minister is under formal Victoria Police investigation as a result of the 18-year-old Australian Workers Union fraud. Fordham has kept a pledge to police to not publicly reveal more than this.

He told his audience: "So, let me make this perfectly clear. The Prime Minister of Australia, Julia Gillard, is under investigation by police. This is fact. I hadn't planned to add to what I said yesterday out of respect for the detectives on the case. But if the Prime Minister's office wants to deny she's being investigated, as has been reported last night and today, then I will once again correct that record. Now it needs to be pointed out that the Prime Minister and her office mightn't know she's being investigated. But I know it. And others do too. The detectives are investigating three individuals and one of them is Julia Gillard. Prime Minister, you may not know this, but you are currently being investigated by the Fraud and Extortion Squad of the Victoria Police Force."

Neither the Police Commissioner of Victoria, Ken Lay, nor the Prime Minister's office has sought to dispute any of Fordham's assertions. Nor is the PM's office now suggesting, as it did in March, that the Victoria Police investigation has nothing to do with Gillard. The reality is that Gillard's office cannot know the details of the probe.

Lay, who has had the opportunity to correct the record if he decided that Fordham had jumped to a wrong conclusion in naming Gillard, let it stand. Lay added: "The AWU matter is under investigation. That's still current."

The Prime Minister has always repeatedly, strenuously and sometimes angrily denied any wrongdoing, accusing The Australian and others of engaging in a smear campaign.

For an alleged fraud being taken seriously since late last year by seasoned detectives, Australians should ask hard questions about why large sections of their media, and particularly the public broadcaster, still baulk at reporting the AWU scandal; downplay the story or, worse, self-censor; ask few or no questions; and even mock journalists who have lost their jobs for pursuing it - Michael Smith and Glenn Milne.

Australia's best-resourced media outlet, the ABC, has scarcely, if at all, reported the ongoing police investigation this year. Only after Media Watch questioned the ABC's obvious reticence to look at the AWU story in any meaningful way last year, the 7.30 program belatedly weighed in. The flagship investigative program, Four Corners, has since abandoned a proposed in-depth story.

Indeed, almost everything that Fordham told his listeners on 2GB this week would surprise Australians who receive their news only from the ABC. Fordham tells Inquirer that nobody from the public broadcaster has contacted him since his revelations.

"I would have thought that the most powerful person in the country being the subject of an ongoing police investigation is a very significant story," Fordham says. "If others choose not to see it that way, I'm more than happy to keep covering it.

"I've had reactions from some people saying: 'How do you know that it's true?' and 'Are you just making it up?' All I can keep saying is that it is 100 per cent fact. I would not say something so serious about the Prime Minister unless I could be 100 per cent sure. If I were wrong on this, there would be a good argument for my dismissal and possibly worse (a defamation action for damages). It would be career suicide and totally unfair to Julia Gillard. But I'm as certain of the facts as I am of my own name.

"I'm not beating my drum and saying 'Look at me'. But if a story about the PM being under investigation is not very interesting and vitally important, I should be in another profession. The listeners are intrigued by it because they are not hearing about it elsewhere. They are not reading about it in every publication and seeing it on the TV news."

With questioning so far of witnesses in Queensland, Victoria, NSW and Western Australia, up to a dozen detectives are particularly interested in the creation and operation of a union election slush fund, misleadingly called the AWU Workplace Reform Association.

The entity was set up and formally registered in Perth with the help of Gillard's legal advice (as a solicitor at Slater & Gordon) to her then boyfriend and client, AWU official Bruce Wilson, and his union sidekick, Ralph Blewitt. The two men allegedly used it as a slush fund to siphon hundreds of thousands of dollars from Thiess during the construction company's development of a major project that required both labour and industrial peace from AWU members.

Some of the money, which was kept secret from everyone else in the union, would go into a $230,000 terrace house at 85 Kerr Street, Fitzroy, bought by Wilson (in Blewitt's name) at an auction he attended with Gillard, whose firm would manage the conveyancing. The terrace house was Wilson's home in Melbourne during his relationship with Gillard and his time as secretary of the Victorian branch of the AWU. The money from the property's sale a few years later went directly to Blewitt and Wilson, not the union, whose national leadership discovered too late that the union had been used in a scam.

In his only recent public statements Wilson has backed Gillard, saying she knew nothing about any wrongdoing. They have each attacked and ridiculed Blewitt, who has said he decided to blow the whistle because two journalists lost their jobs for trying to report the issues.

For Mitchell's taskforce, one of the most interesting features of Blewitt's story is that he has told it in the knowledge that he faces going to prison. Having admitted to police an incriminating role in what he calls a fraud, Blewitt can be prosecuted and convicted. There has been no deal.

One of the planks of Blewitt's story, which 2GB's Fordham latched on to in his interview with the Prime Minister in March, concerns a "power of attorney" document bearing Gillard's signature as the official witness. According to Blewitt, it was a false document.

Blewitt has repeatedly said the "power of attorney" was not worth the paper on which it was written. The document permitted Wilson to buy the Fitzroy terrace house (in Blewitt's name) at auction. Blewitt, who was living in Perth at the time, claims it is bogus - that Gillard could not have "witnessed" it as they were thousands of kilometres apart at the time.

In previous rejections of Blewitt's claims about this document, the Prime Minister insisted she always witnessed such documents properly as a solicitor. But Fordham tells Inquirer that all of Gillard's previous answers seemed to avoid declaring outright that she and Blewitt were in the same room when the power of attorney was witnessed.

"I wanted a straight answer from the PM on that simple question when I interviewed her in March and I wasn't going to let it go," he said.

Gillard finally confirmed to Fordham that she and Blewitt were in the room when the document was signed. It is an assertion that could only be wrong if Victoria Police have evidence placing them on opposite sides of Australia._


----------



## drsmith (27 April 2013)

From the article above,



> Gillard finally confirmed to Fordham that she and Blewitt were in the room when the document was signed. It is an assertion that could only be wrong if Victoria Police have evidence placing them on opposite sides of Australia.




Listening to the interview again, I'm not sure that it was an absolute conformation of that specific document, and judging be the questions and responses that followed, neither was Ben Fordham.

http://www.2gb.com/audioplayer/7690

Listen from 24:45. It depends on the specific context in which she was using the word "absolutely" at 25:16.


----------



## bellenuit (27 April 2013)

drsmith said:


> Listening to the interview again, I'm not sure that it was an absolute conformation of that specific document, and judging be the questions and responses that followed, neither was Ben Fordham.
> 
> http://www.2gb.com/audioplayer/7690
> 
> Listen from 24:45. It depends on the specific context in which she was using the word "absolutely" at 25:16.




I think this is where she is in big trouble. Although she didn't say it explicitly as you indicated, she must have been together with Blewitt for her to have properly witnessed his signature, otherwise the POA is a fraudulently made document and she is complicit in its making. But being together with Blewitt for the witnessing, either she must have been in Perth or he in Melbourne. One of them had to fly to the other city, so this is something that police investigators should easily be able to trace, as there must be outstanding records either at S & G (her absence recorded, who booked the tickets, who paid for it etc.) or with one of the airlines.It is a pity that she was never directly asked where the POA was signed.


----------



## drsmith (28 April 2013)

bellenuit said:


> I think this is where she is in big trouble.



One interesting aspect of the article above is that 4-Corners has dropped the story it was going to do.

It would be interesting to know to what extent (if any) that's due to the current police investigation and what that's revealing.


----------



## Logique (29 April 2013)

The Aus has a piece today on expected 15% swings against Labor in seats in SE Melbourne, but it's behind a paywall.  

Up here, Werriwa, in SW Sydney - Gough Whitlam's old seat (and Mark Latham's), looks set to go Liberal for the first time ever.


----------



## drsmith (29 April 2013)

Logique said:


> The Aus has a piece today on expected 15% swings against Labor in seats in SE Melbourne, but it's behind a paywall.



Google news search the article headline and you'll be able to read the article in full. (Note though that you can only do this a limited number of times you are online/during a given day).

According to the article, the 15 per cent swing was in the state by-election for the seat of Lyndhurst where the Libs didn't run a candidate, so that may not be representative. 

Also in the article,



> The Australian understands that Labor has surrendered its seats below 6 per cent on a two-party-preferred basis, which means that four seats will fall in Victoria.
> 
> -------
> 
> "The punters have made up their minds," a Labor figure said. "The seats on 5 or 6 per cent have gone. It's a question of which of the rest we try to save. They aren't . . . listening to the government. It's over."




This suggests they've given up winning the federal election altogether even if their leader hasn't.


----------



## bellenuit (29 April 2013)

Has Michael Smith actually called Gillard a crook on this short audio blog? Seems so to me. Is he baiting Gillard to take action against him? Even the heading suggests that he is confident that something is about to happen.

*I'm back and ready to watch The Suspect call in The Removalists*

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...atch-the-suspect-call-in-the-removalists.html


----------



## drsmith (30 May 2013)

I don't agree with throwing sandwiches at our dear PM, unless they're toasted.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/na...igh-school-visit/story-fni0xqrb-1226653659401


----------



## MrBurns (30 May 2013)

drsmith said:


> I don't agree with throwing sandwiches at our dear PM, unless they're toasted.
> 
> http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/na...igh-school-visit/story-fni0xqrb-1226653659401




I think the students aim is atrocious, they should be taught how to throw a sandwich at an imposter with far more accuracy.


----------



## Julia (30 May 2013)

I don't think there's anything OK about throwing anything at a Prime Minister.  Children shouldn't imo be encouraged to engage in such childish and pointless behaviour.


----------



## Miss Hale (30 May 2013)

Julia said:


> I don't think there's anything OK about throwing anything at a Prime Minister.  Children shouldn't imo be encouraged to engage in such childish and pointless behaviour.




Me neither.  What is going on in our schools where kids think this is acceptable behaviour?  The may not respect Julia Gillard but they should at least respect the office of Prime Minister.  If they don't like her and the way she governs what a shame it is that they resort to this instead of asking here some hard questions.  It seems there is a trend towards lobbing things at pollies, remember the shoe that was thrown at John Howard.  Not a trend I am at all comfortable with


----------



## MrBurns (30 May 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> Me neither.  What is going on in our schools where kids think this is acceptable behaviour?  The may not respect Julia Gillard but they should at least respect the office of Prime Minister.  If they don't like her and the way she governs what a shame it is that they resort to this instead of asking here some hard questions.  It seems there is a trend towards lobbing things at pollies, remember the shoe that was thrown at John Howard.  Not a trend I am at all comfortable with




When it happened the first time it was widely reported in the media, so of course it will be copied and it will happen again. If they had respect for Gillard it wouldn't happen at all.


----------



## Bintang (30 May 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> Me neither.  What is going on in our schools where kids think this is acceptable behaviour?  The may not respect Julia Gillard but they should at least respect the office of Prime Minister.  If they don't like her and the way she governs what a shame it is that they resort to this instead of asking here some hard questions.  It seems there is a trend towards lobbing things at pollies, remember the shoe that was thrown at John Howard.  Not a trend I am at all comfortable with




Well I believe in adults setting an example for children. Do you think Gillard's character and parliamentary behaviour have been setting a good example for the children of Australia. I think not! Gillard herself has disgraced the Office of PrimeMinister by her incompetence and treachery. I am therefore not surprised that some children think she is a fair target  for the toss of a sandwich.


----------



## Bintang (30 May 2013)

Julia said:


> I don't think there's anything OK about throwing anything at a Prime Minister.  Children shouldn't imo be encouraged to engage in such childish and pointless behaviour.




But who is encouraging them? The media? Their parents? You? Me? Perhaps it's Gillard herself by her own behaviour that encourages them.


----------



## Bintang (30 May 2013)

drsmith said:


> I don't agree with throwing sandwiches at our dear PM, unless they're toasted.
> 
> http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/na...igh-school-visit/story-fni0xqrb-1226653659401




Since the Labor party is toast that would be deliciously symbolic.


----------



## qldfrog (30 May 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> Me neither.  What is going on in our schools where kids think this is acceptable behaviour?  The may not respect Julia Gillard but they should at least respect the office of Prime Minister.  If they don't like her and the way she governs what a shame it is that they resort to this instead of asking here some hard questions.  It seems there is a trend towards lobbing things at pollies, remember the shoe that was thrown at John Howard.  Not a trend I am at all comfortable with



Just to say that I do not recognise JG as the current prime minister of Australia, she is only there due to corruption of MPs who have been elected by voters who in no way were reporting their vote for her.

The current government has as much right to be representative as Mugabe or Khadafi was.
And does she deserves as an individual that treatment?Probably too kind considering the damages she inflicts to this country.


----------



## Miss Hale (30 May 2013)

Bintang said:


> Well I believe in adults setting an example for children. Do you think Gillard's character and parliamentary behaviour have been setting a good example for the children of Australia. I think not! Gillard herself has disgraced the Office of PrimeMinister by her incompetence and treachery. I am therefore not surprised that some children think she is a fair target  for the toss of a sandwich.




No, I think she has set a bad example, worst PM ever IMO.  But why stoop to her level?  Better to take the high moral ground IMO and behave with dignity.


----------



## Bintang (30 May 2013)

MrBurns said:


> I think the students aim is atrocious, they should be taught how to throw a sandwich at an imposter with far more accuracy.




I don't think the aerodynamics of a sandwich in flight are conducive for high accuracy. Tomatoes should be more effective.


----------



## Bintang (30 May 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> No, I think she has set a bad example, worst PM ever IMO.  But why stoop to her level?  Better to take the high moral ground IMO and behave with dignity.




You make a fair point - at least for us adults - but children tend to be childish because - well - they are children!


----------



## ROE (30 May 2013)

I think labor is at a stage where what ever they say, what ever they do people just don't care and
don't want to know...all they want to do is throw eggs and sandwiches at them....even if they come up with good policy now, no one cares they stopped listening....


----------



## Calliope (31 May 2013)

Bintang said:


> I don't think the aerodynamics of a sandwich in flight are conducive for high accuracy. Tomatoes should be more effective.




Sorry to digress, but eggs are better.



> An event officially known as the Warwick Incident[ occurred on 29 November 1917, which would lead to the formation of the Australian Commonwealth Police with the first commissioner for Commonwealth Police appointed eight days later. As Prime Minister William Morris Hughes was addressing a crowd at the Warwick railway station, a man in the crowd threw an egg dislodging the Prime Minister's hat. Hughes ordered his arrest but the Queensland State Police allegedly refused to carry out the order



 Wikipedia


----------



## MrBurns (31 May 2013)

Anyone see Gillard roll her eyes after Tony Abbotts tribute to Martin Fergusson ?

One cold calculating reptile she is.

The sooner she gets the sandwich that's headed her way on election day the better.


----------



## Miss Hale (31 May 2013)

Bintang said:


> You make a fair point - at least for us adults - but children tend to be childish because - well - they are children!




True, but they take their cues from adults, and there was once a time when no one, child or adult, would dream of throwing things at our PM. Would like to see that respect restored.


----------



## Bintang (31 May 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> True, but they take their cues from adults, and there was once a time when no one, child or adult, would dream of throwing things at our PM. Would like to see that respect restored.




That was probably also the time when children respected their parents and their teachers. Anyway perhaps your wish will be granted when we have someone occupying the Office of Prime Minister who is worthy of respect.


----------



## noco (31 May 2013)

One of Labors stalwarts Graham Richardson spells out the death of the Labor Party which started a long time ago.

It has all been self inflicted.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...-stages-of-grief/story-fnfenwor-1226654077984


----------



## Aussiejeff (1 June 2013)

Bintang said:


> You make a fair point - at least for us adults - but children tend to be childish because - well - they are children!




_On the other hand..._

Many adults tend to act like children - because many "adults" are just - children trapped in adult bodies...

OT - If Gillard inspired confidence, the adults and children would be throwing bouquets of flowers at her at every event. At least they haven't resorted to brickbats yet. Though given time.....


----------



## Calliope (1 June 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> True, but they take their cues from adults, and there was once a time when no one, child or adult, would dream of throwing things at our PM. Would like to see that respect restored.




Children at government schools are well indoctrinated with Green and Labor "values" by their left wing teachers. The sandwich throwers obviously weren't paying attention!


----------



## Macquack (1 June 2013)

Calliope said:


> Children at government schools are well indoctrinated with Green and Labor "values" by their left wing teachers. The sandwich throwers obviously weren't paying attention!




What is that supposed to mean? That you have to have 'Green and Labor "values"' to show some respect for the Prime Minister and not engage in juvenile school yard pranks.

I hope the smart **** little wanker who threw the sandwich was grilled and embarrassed by police. The girl who called Adam Goodes a "ape" was interrogated by police for over two hours.


----------



## Bintang (1 June 2013)

Macquack said:


> I hope the smart **** little wanker who threw the sandwich was grilled and embarrassed by police. The girl who called Adam Goodes a "ape" was interrogated by police for over two hours.




I hope so too. Good to know the police are using their time so wisely and productively. We wouldn't want them to spend too much time chasing down criminals now - would we?


----------



## Calliope (1 June 2013)

Macquack said:


> What is that supposed to mean? That you have to have 'Green and Labor "values"' to show some respect for the Prime Minister and not engage in juvenile school yard pranks.




Not at all. I was just pointing out that these kids weren't paying attention when their class was being indoctrinated to love Gillard and Milne. "Green and Labor values" is of course, an oxymoron.


----------



## Bintang (1 June 2013)

Macquack said:


> What is that supposed to mean? That you have to have 'Green and Labor "values"' to show some respect for the Prime Minister and not engage in juvenile school yard pranks.




Not at all. You just have to be [oxy]moronic.


----------



## Bintang (1 June 2013)

Puns and jokes aside you really need to have your head read if you think our current Prime Minister deserves respect. Respect is something you need to earn. Better still if you want to receive respect try giving it first. 
Did Gillard show respect to the Australian people when she lied about the carbon tax.?
Did Gillard show respect to Kevin Rudd when she knifed him in the back?
Did Gillard show respect to Tony Abbott when she blasted him with her misogyny tirade in Parliament?
Please feel free to add to this list.


----------



## Macquack (1 June 2013)

Bintang, feel free to show your disrespect at the polling booth.

If you think childish sandwich throwing is acceptable then you are just condoning a race to the bottom of anti-social behaviour.


----------



## Bintang (1 June 2013)

Macquack said:


> Bintang, feel free to show your disrespect at the polling booth.
> If you think childish sandwich throwing is acceptable then you are just condoning a race to the bottom of anti-social behaviour.




Rest assured I most certainly will along with the majority of voters. But for someone who doesn't have the luxury of being able to vote (such as the sandwich thrower) its understandable that they might choose to vent their frustration in a different way.

No it was not acceptable. The sandwich was a very poor choice. It should have been a tomato or an egg.


----------



## Miss Hale (1 June 2013)

Bintang said:


> Puns and jokes aside you really need to have your head read if you think our current Prime Minister deserves respect. Respect is something you need to earn. Better still if you want to receive respect try giving it first.
> Did Gillard show respect to the Australian people when she lied about the carbon tax.?
> Did Gillard show respect to Kevin Rudd when she knifed him in the back?
> Did Gillard show respect to Tony Abbott when she blasted him with her misogyny tirade in Parliament?
> Please feel free to add to this list.




I don't have respect for the current PM, but I do _respect the office_.  I would like to think that our children are taught to respect the office of PM as well.



Bintang said:


> Rest assured I most certainly will along with the majority of voters. But for someone who doesn't have the luxury of being able to vote (such as the sandwich thrower) its understandable that they might choose to vent their frustration in a different way.
> 
> No it was not acceptable. The sandwich was a very poor choice. It should have been a tomato or an egg.




Pitching anything is a dumb way to go about it.  Asking a few hard hitting questions or writing an article in the school paper expressing you disappointment in the current government are two more reasonable ways to vent your frustration.  Let's face it, these kids throwing the sandwiches are most likely not even that interested in politics, they are just doing it for a dare or notoriety or something like that.  They all know Gillard is on the nose so they think it's funny to throw something at her. It's not, it's disrespectful.


----------



## Bintang (1 June 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> I don't have respect for the current PM, but I do _respect the office_.  I would like to think that our children are taught to respect the office of PM as well.




Well said Miss Hale.  I totally agree with you. They are two completely different things. But the student threw the sandwich at the PrimeMinister not at the Office of the Prime Minister so I don't think it is fair for you to assume that the student has no respect for the Prime Minister's Office.


----------



## Bintang (1 June 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> Pitching anything is a dumb way to go about it.  Asking a few hard hitting questions or writing an article in the school paper expressing you disappointment in the current government are two more reasonable ways to vent your frustration.




Pitching something gets far more media attention.


----------



## noco (1 June 2013)

Bintang said:


> Rest assured I most certainly will along with the majority of voters. But for someone who doesn't have the luxury of being able to vote (such as the sandwich thrower) its understandable that they might choose to vent their frustration in a different way.
> 
> No it was not acceptable. The sandwich was a very poor choice. It should have been a tomato or an egg.




+1 and it should have been a rotten egg at that.


----------



## MrBurns (1 June 2013)

Wait till you see the sandwich thrown at her on Sept 14th


----------



## sptrawler (1 June 2013)

The word is t.v directors are carefull how much airplay the give Julia, because viewers are changing channel.lol

Talk about overstay your welcome, Labor are in more crap than Ned Kelly.


----------



## Miss Hale (1 June 2013)

Bintang said:


> Well said Miss Hale.  I totally agree with you. They are two completely different things. But the student threw the sandwich at the PrimeMinister not at the Office of the Prime Minister so I don't think it is fair for you to assume that the student has no respect for the Prime Minister's Office.




I think we are talking at cross purposes. If you respect the office you don't throw sandwiches at the person occupying the office (I assume you realise I am not talking about a physical office as in a building). 



sptrawler said:


> The word is t.v directors are carefull how much airplay the give Julia, because viewers are changing channel.lol
> 
> Talk about overstay your welcome, Labor are in more crap than Ned Kelly.




I know I certainly have.  Haven't watched a news bulletin or current affairs/political programme of any kind for months now.


----------



## MrBurns (1 June 2013)

She went down to Geelong today to tell the Ford workers how much she cared, no one could throw a sandwich because they need them to eat.
The carbon tax added $400 to the cost of a Ford and Holden.


----------



## Ves (1 June 2013)

MrBurns said:


> The carbon tax added $400 to the cost of a Ford and Holden.



http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mellor.nsf/story2/DA51D6B65F944E97CA257846001880EC

Yet, the GM Holden chairman and Managing Director agreed that his company supported carbon tax in Australia.

You can't have it both ways I am afraid.


----------



## MrBurns (1 June 2013)

Ves said:


> http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mellor.nsf/story2/DA51D6B65F944E97CA257846001880EC
> 
> Yet, the GM Holden chairman and Managing Director agreed that his company supported carbon tax in Australia.
> 
> You can't have it both ways I am afraid.




Diplomatic to the end.


----------



## Bintang (1 June 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> I think we are talking at cross purposes. If you respect the office you don't throw sandwiches at the person occupying the office (I assume you realise I am not talking about a physical office as in a building).




Miss Hale, you take me too seriously. I was taking the mickey. Maybe I need to use emoticons.


----------



## Ves (1 June 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Diplomatic to the end.



You've got to be diplomatic to the end when the government has been propping up your industry in this country.


----------



## Miss Hale (1 June 2013)

Bintang said:


> Miss Hale, you take me too seriously. I was taking the mickey. Maybe I need to use emoticons.




Thank you   I was beginning to wonder


----------



## sptrawler (1 June 2013)

MrBurns said:


> She went down to Geelong today to tell the Ford workers how much she cared, no one could throw a sandwich because they need them to eat.
> The carbon tax added $400 to the cost of a Ford and Holden.




Yes I saw on t.v where she was taking credit for the lighting towers around the footy ground.
Thought the commentators comment of, "at least we will be able to see who is stealing our car" was apt.
Geelong is going to be hit hard.


----------



## McLovin (1 June 2013)

Ves said:


> http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mellor.nsf/story2/DA51D6B65F944E97CA257846001880EC
> 
> Yet, the GM Holden chairman and Managing Director agreed that his company supported carbon tax in Australia.
> 
> You can't have it both ways I am afraid.




They also claimed the cost was between $112 and $150/car. Not $400, which was a PwC estimate.

http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mellor.nsf/story2/96F845CF1AFA70BECA2578CA001E577C

Either way if $400 on a $30k product makes it uneconomic then it wasn't economic to begin with.


----------



## Ves (1 June 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Geelong is going to be hit hard.



Let's get real though.    Manufacturing in Australia peaked at 25% of GDP in the 1960s.   It's almost under 10% these days.   It's got nothing to do with the carbon tax.  If what you say is true and Geelong is going to be hit too hard, then it's their own fault.  They've had years to open up their eyes and do something about it.


----------



## Macquack (1 June 2013)

Bintang said:


> They are two completely different things. But the student threw the sandwich at the *PrimeMinister* not at the *Office of the Prime Minister *so I don't think it is fair for you to assume that the student has no respect for the Prime Minister's Office.




What a complete load of nonsense.


----------



## MrBurns (1 June 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Geelong is going to be hit hard.




I'm told they're  finished.............


----------



## Miss Hale (1 June 2013)

MrBurns said:


> I'm told they're  finished.............




Geelong finished?  Go Hawks!!!!!


----------



## MrBurns (1 June 2013)

Macquack said:


> What a complete load of nonsense.




No it's not, when Nixon was impeached it was him who went not the office of the President, Gillard is respected by no one , it's not the office that's disrespected it's her.


----------



## Ves (1 June 2013)

McLovin said:


> They also claimed the cost was between $112 and $150/car. Not $400, which was a PwC estimate.
> 
> http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mellor.nsf/story2/96F845CF1AFA70BECA2578CA001E577C
> 
> Either way if $400 on a $30k product makes it uneconomic then it wasn't economic to begin with.



Also true - I was actually looking for these figures.   I found the right site, just not the stats by the looks of it.  Thanks  

edit:   400/30000 is 1.3%.


----------



## Miss Hale (1 June 2013)

Macquack said:


> What a complete load of nonsense.




Bintang was taking the mickey Macquack.


----------



## McLovin (1 June 2013)

Ves said:


> Let's get real though.    Manufacturing in Australia peaked at 25% of GDP in the 1960s.   It's almost under 10% these days.   It's got nothing to do with the carbon tax.  If what you say is true and Geelong is going to be hit too hard, then it's their own fault.  They've had years to open up their eyes and do something about it.




If we want manufacturing we need to develop a base similar to Germany or the Scandinavian countries. We can't expect to compete on price and I think we've moved on from the hammer and anvil industries of the 70s. We're on the doorstep of Asia so the old line about being too far away is BS. Surprisingly enough, in many parts of Asia, Australia is seen as a source of quality products and services. It will lift us out of the mining induced productivity doldrum, although it will decade at least a decade, so I guess it will never get done.


----------



## Macquack (1 June 2013)

MrBurns said:


> No it's not, when Nixon was *impeached* it was him who went not the office of the President, Gillard is respected by no one , it's not the office that's disrespected it's her.




You are full of it Burns.

Disrespect is not impeachment. 

Impeachment is the formal process in which an official is accused of *unlawful activity

 before an appropriate tribunal* . 

A tribunal does not include your toilet, Burns.


----------



## Ves (1 June 2013)

McLovin said:


> If we want manufacturing we need to develop a base similar to *Germany or the Scandinavian countries*. We can't expect to compete on price and I think we've moved on from the hammer and anvil industries of the 70s. We're on the doorstep of Asia so the old line about being too far away is BS. Surprisingly enough, in many parts of Asia, Australia is seen as a source of quality products and services. It will lift us out of the mining induced productivity doldrum, although it will decade at least a decade, so I guess it will never get done.



High-tech innovation from the countries you bolded. As you imply, they make quality products in a diverse range of industries.   Companies like Cochlear, ARB, Codan (maybe even CSL) etc are a good start.  But we would need a heap more to be competitive on a world scale.

I think the "high cost" argument is lazy to be honest and indicative of why Australia's manufacturing industries are in the doldrums.


----------



## sptrawler (1 June 2013)

Ves said:


> Let's get real though.    Manufacturing in Australia peaked at 25% of GDP in the 1960s.   It's almost under 10% these days.   It's got nothing to do with the carbon tax.  If what you say is true and Geelong is going to be hit too hard, then it's their own fault.  They've had years to open up their eyes and do something about it.




I don't disagree with that, however what needs to be appreciated is, the country is the sum total of all its inputs.
You start removing sections and it has a ripple effect and with such a small base, it doesn't take much for there to be no base at all.
Then you are effectively competing one to one with similar economies.lol  Where does that take us?


----------



## Bintang (1 June 2013)

Miss Hale said:


> Bintang was taking the mickey Macquack.




Yes, I was but I was also making a serious point which Mr Burns has well understood and paraphrased with:

"...... when Nixon was impeached it was him who went not the office of the President, Gillard is respected by no one , it's not the office that's disrespected it's her."


----------



## Bintang (1 June 2013)

Macquack said:


> You are full of it Burns.
> 
> Disrespect is not impeachment.
> 
> ...




Mr Burns made a perfectly legitimate analogy. He did not equate impeachment with disrespect.


----------



## Macquack (1 June 2013)

Bintang said:


> Mr Burns made a *perfectly legitimate analogy*. He did not *equate impeachment with disrespect*.




Well what was the analogy then???


----------



## IFocus (1 June 2013)

Ves said:


> High-tech innovation from the countries you bolded. As you imply, they make quality products in a diverse range of industries.   Companies like Cochlear, ARB, Codan (maybe even CSL) etc are a good start.  But we would need a heap more to be competitive on a world scale.
> 
> I think the "high cost" argument is lazy to be honest and indicative of why Australia's manufacturing industries are in the doldrums.




After nearly 40 years of working in process control or automated industries the Germans win hands down yet we have the same technical expertise / engineering ability here what we don't have is good management Australian management in my own experience is a clear winner for being absolutely hopeless why I don't know its always being a puzzle.


----------



## IFocus (1 June 2013)

Macquack said:


> Well what was the analogy then???




You really have to be a right wing nut job holding a bushmaster with a 100 round clip to get that Mac......


----------



## McLovin (1 June 2013)

Bintang said:


> Yes, I was but I was also making a serious point which Mr Burns has well understood and paraphrased with:
> 
> "...... when Nixon was impeached it was him who went not the office of the President, Gillard is respected by no one , it's not the office that's disrespected it's her."




Since when did not respecting someone = right to assault them?

The comparison to Nixon is bizarre to say the least.


----------



## Bintang (1 June 2013)

IFocus said:


> .......what we don't have is good management Australian management in my own experience is a clear winner for being absolutely hopeless why I don't know its always being a puzzle.



As exemplified by the hopeless management of Australia's economy.
Now if we had managers who could inspire confidence that would be something.


----------



## Bintang (1 June 2013)

McLovin said:


> Since when did not respecting someone = right to assault them?
> 
> Never
> 
> The comparison to Nixon is bizarre to say the least.




The comparison was to Nixon's Office.


----------



## Miss Hale (1 June 2013)

Gah!!!! I am trying to listen to the footy on the radio and Gillard comes on so I change the station, then she's on the other station!!!  It's like a nightmare


----------



## MrBurns (1 June 2013)

Bintang said:


> The comparison was to Nixon's Office.




The comparison was meant to illustrate that no matter how crummy the leader is, and Gillard is as crummy as they come, it does not reflect on the office if people show their displeasure with that leader.

Nixon was the subject of ridicule but it did not damage the office of President.


----------



## Macquack (1 June 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Nixon was the subject of ridicule but it did not damage the office of President.




What's your point Burns?

At the end of the day, some f***ing idiot has to be the President of the good old US of A, they are not going to *leave the position vacant*.


----------



## MrBurns (1 June 2013)

Macquack said:


> What's your point Burns?
> 
> At the end of the day, some f***ing idiot has to be the President of the good old US of A, they are not going to *leave the position vacant*.




Someone with character and integrity will carry on, the same as when Tony Abbott takes over in Sept from the curse that occupies the Lodge now.


----------



## Julia (1 June 2013)

McLovin said:


> They also claimed the cost was between $112 and $150/car. Not $400, which was a PwC estimate.
> 
> http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mellor.nsf/story2/96F845CF1AFA70BECA2578CA001E577C
> 
> Either way if $400 on a $30k product makes it uneconomic then it wasn't economic to begin with.



Ms Gillard today announced an additional $15m to the Ford workers' package.


> The $15m commitment comes on top of an existing $51.9 million jobs assistance package.
> 
> Ms Gillard said $5 million would be set aside immediately to provide career advice services and training. A further $5 million will go towards future skills training if required.
> 
> Geelong will be made a priority employment area, with a $200,000 fund to help the transition of workers into new jobs before or after the plant closes.




I've previously raised the inequitable nature of so much being offered to just one area, despite hundreds of people losing their jobs for similar reasons all over the country.

Nothing special for them, apparently.

She must very specifically be looking for votes in the Geelong area.


----------



## Macquack (1 June 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Someone with character and integrity will carry on, the same as when Tony Abbott takes over in Sept from the curse that occupies the Lodge now.




Looking forward to ripping strips off your "good old boy".


----------



## MrBurns (1 June 2013)

Macquack said:


> Looking forward to ripping strips off your "good old boy".




Feather duster...


----------



## Macquack (1 June 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Feather duster...




Featherweight...


----------



## MrBurns (1 June 2013)

Macquack said:


> Featherweight...




That too


----------



## McLovin (2 June 2013)

Bintang said:


> The comparison was to Nixon's Office.




Which makes it no less uninformed. But par for the course around here.


----------



## Calliope (2 June 2013)

McLovin said:


> Which makes it no less uninformed. But par for the course around here.




It's pleasing to see that we are not all cynics here, and that Ms Gillard does inspire confidence enough in you for you to sit up until 2.46AM to think up that brilliant riposte in support of her..


----------



## DCD (2 June 2013)

Macquack said:


> Bintang, feel free to show your disrespect at the polling booth.
> 
> If you think childish sandwich throwing is acceptable then you are just condoning a race to the bottom of anti-social behaviour.




Yogurt is more acceptable in my view. And I used to  vote Labor.


----------



## Macquack (2 June 2013)

Calliope said:


> It's pleasing to see that we are not all cynics here, and that Ms Gillard does inspire confidence enough in you for you to sit up until 2.46AM to think up that brilliant riposte in support of her..




McLovin is not a geriatric and is quite able to stay up on Saturday night after 8.30pm.

Since when did you dictate the "opening hours" of ASF?


----------



## MrBurns (2 June 2013)

Sandwiches are just the warm up.


----------



## moXJO (2 June 2013)

IFocus said:


> After nearly 40 years of working in process control or automated industries the Germans win hands down yet we have the same technical expertise / engineering ability here what we don't have is good management Australian management in my own experience is a clear winner for being absolutely hopeless why I don't know its always being a puzzle.




Sorry but worker attitudes of 'that will do' play a big part on top of costs. I'd rate Australia as bottom of the list for service across the majority of industry as well. German work ethic and Australian work ethic are poles apart. Even German unions attitudes are 180 degrees from where we are. Funding and support is also an issue


----------



## Calliope (2 June 2013)

Macquack said:


> McLovin is not a geriatric and is quite able to stay up on Saturday night after 8.30pm.
> 
> Since when did you dictate the "opening hours" of ASF?




You misunderstood me MacQuack. I was praising your friend McLovin. I think it admirable that while Julia's supporters are falling by the wayside, a staunch little band of supporters here are standing firm.

As for the late hour...he was probably having a Love-in, and good for him.


----------



## Bintang (2 June 2013)

McLovin said:


> Which makes it no less uninformed. But par for the course around here.




In that case McLovin I'm all ears. Please inform us here on ASF just exactly how Gillard inspires confidence. Perhaps you could inform us about Gillard's many inspirational achievements. If the list becomes too long feel free to start a new thread.


----------



## McLovin (2 June 2013)

Bintang said:


> In that case McLovin I'm all ears. Please inform us here on ASF just exactly how Gillard inspires confidence. Perhaps you could inform us about Gillard's many inspirational achievements. If the list becomes too long feel free to start a new thread.




I'm not saying anything about whether she inspires confidence, but the comparison to what Richard Nixon did is ridiculous.



			
				Calliope said:
			
		

> It's pleasing to see that we are not all cynics here, and that Ms Gillard does inspire confidence enough in you for you to sit up until 2.46AM to think up that brilliant riposte in support of her..




How do you know I'm in Australia?

I'm a Gillard supporter, news to me.


----------



## Calliope (2 June 2013)

McLovin said:


> How do you know I'm in Australia?



Just a guess


> I'm a Gillard supporter, news to me.



If you're not - you give very good imitation; or maybe you are just trolling.


----------



## McLovin (2 June 2013)

Calliope said:


> If you're not - you give very good imitation; or maybe you are just trolling.




Not really. I've never actually said anything positive about her. Saying that you shouldn't be throwing a sandwich at the PM regardless of whether or not you agree with her is hardly the stuff of party hacks.

Put the shoe on the other foot, if someone threw a sandwich at PM Abbott there would be a very different reaction on here.


----------



## Bintang (2 June 2013)

McLovin said:


> Put the shoe on the other foot, if someone threw a sandwich at PM Abbott there would be a very different reaction on here.




Not from me. Give PM Abbott time. If he disgraces the Office of PrimeMinister as badly as Julia Gillard has then he will deserve at least sandwich but I would hope he gets a tomato, an egg, some yogurt and a Mr Burns pie as well.

I will admit to thinking you are a Labor party supporter but likewise you probably think I am not.


----------



## Calliope (2 June 2013)

Bintang said:


> Not from me. Give PM Abbott time. If he disgraces the Office of PrimeMinister as badly as Julia Gillard has then he will deserve at least sandwich but I would hope he gets a tomato, an egg, some yogurt and a Mr Burns pie as well.




And maybe a shoe from some disgruntled asylum seeker.


----------



## noco (14 June 2013)

Psst. Another piece of orchestrated hysteria looking for Prime Ministerial sympathy.

They even made it look good by suspending Howard Sattler but my guess is he will be back on in no time.

Julia Gillard is so desperate for votes, nothing would surprise me.

And yes, another diversion from the real issues like Rudd snapping at her heals.

Poor Juliar, they are always picking on her. Those naughty mysoganist in blue ties!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What will be her next trick today?????



http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/wes...ate-gay-marriage/story-fnhocxo3-1226663453289


----------



## Calliope (14 June 2013)

noco said:


> Psst. Another piece of orchestrated hysteria looking for Prime Ministerial sympathy.
> 
> They even made it look good by suspending Howard Sattler but my guess is he will be back on in no time.
> 
> ...




Julia said that suggestions that Timmy was gay were "vile and offensive things".

There goes the gay vote.:nono:


----------



## Julia (14 June 2013)

noco said:


> Psst. Another piece of orchestrated hysteria looking for Prime Ministerial sympathy.
> 
> They even made it look good by suspending Howard Sattler but my guess is he will be back on in no time.
> 
> ...



So are you saying, noco, that you think it's quite in order to ask someone, anyone at all, not necessarily a Prime Minister, about the sexual nature of their relationship?


----------



## drsmith (14 June 2013)

noco said:


> They even made it look good by suspending Howard Sattler but my guess is he will be back on in no time.



I'm not so sure he'll be back.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/wes...-with-parkinsons/story-e6frg13u-1226604173455


----------



## drsmith (14 June 2013)

In addition to the above,



> Melbourne broadcaster Neil Mitchell said Sattler was a “nice, gentle man” before going on to condemn the interview, which he described as “stupidity on a stick”.
> 
> “Now, we all make mistakes, but this was a beauty,” the 3AW presenter said.
> 
> ...




http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment...m-interview-as-axe-hovers-20130614-2o8hk.html


----------



## sails (14 June 2013)

Julia said:


> So are you saying, noco, that you think it's quite in order to ask someone, anyone at all, not necessarily a Prime Minister, about the sexual nature of their relationship?




I agree - I don't think it's any of our business, in fact we don't need to know, about such private matters. As long as the PM is running the country properly and efficiently, that's all that matters. 

 Although, I wonder if this interview wasn't yet another set-up to distract from the real political issues that so desperately need answers...sigh.  I read somewhere that Sattler had cleared his questions with the PMO - can't find that now so can't vouch for the accuracy.


----------



## drsmith (14 June 2013)

Howard Sattler's been sacked (ABC Radio Perth).

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/ent...ed-over-gillard-interview-20130614-2o8hk.html


----------



## chode84 (14 June 2013)

> They even made it look good by suspending Howard Sattler but my guess is he will be back on in no time.




or maybe not...


----------



## MrBurns (14 June 2013)

drsmith said:


> Howard Sattler's been sacked (ABC Radio Perth).
> 
> http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/ent...ed-over-gillard-interview-20130614-2o8hk.html




I think he might get more sympathy then her, not because he was right but because everyone dislikes her so much.


----------



## noco (14 June 2013)

Julia said:


> So are you saying, noco, that you think it's quite in order to ask someone, anyone at all, not necessarily a Prime Minister, about the sexual nature of their relationship?




Julia, I would not be surprised if she was the one who set up the questions for Sattler to ask.

In her usual manner, she could have deflected the question if she had wanted to but she went all the way with it. Everyone knows how good she is at avoiding questions she does not wnat to answer.

I don't trust that woman and nothing would surpise me as to what she would do for sympathy votes.


----------



## Calliope (14 June 2013)

sails said:


> I agree - I don't think it's any of our business, in fact we don't need to know, about such private matters. As long as the PM is running the country properly and efficiently, that's all that matters.




Yes we have to respect the privacy of those who are not ready to come out of the closet. Julia opposes gay marriage in order to distance her and Tim from these matters. She probably supports it but to put her seal of approval on it would only start idle tongues wagging.


----------



## Julia (14 June 2013)

MrBurns said:


> I think he might get more sympathy then her, not because he was right but because everyone dislikes her so much.



I disagree.   Amongst her supporters, his intrusive questions would bring her considerable sympathy, and even amongst her detractors (such as myself) there will be only condemnation for him.

I'm glad to know he has been sacked, not because I hold any affection for the Prime Minister, but because such an action at least redresses somewhat the exponentially increasing rudeness which is so characterising our current political scene.


----------



## noco (15 June 2013)

Julia said:


> I disagree.   Amongst her supporters, his intrusive questions would bring her considerable sympathy, and even amongst her detractors (such as myself) there will be only condemnation for him.
> 
> I'm glad to know he has been sacked, not because I hold any affection for the Prime Minister, but because such an action at least redresses somewhat the exponentially increasing rudeness which is so characterising our current political scene.




Julia, as I have been saying in my last couple of posts, this Prime Minister of ours and her advocate John Tierman, or what ever his name is, you know the bloke here on a 457 visa, have orchestrated all this nonsence on the menu affair, the blue tie crap, the abortion issue, the gay Tim outburst by Howard Sattler and the rasing of misogyny BS again just to get a sympathy vote and she has been successful in a small way according to link herewith.

It is also a well planned diversion from the main issues of the economy, the level of debt and the asylum seekers.They want to have all these more important issues off the agenda.

This is a tactic they have used once too often and I believe many are starting to see through her.

I believe a lot of people will agree with me that I am not too far out in my judgement of Ms Gillard.



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...comfort-its-gone/story-fn53lw5p-1226664126204


----------



## Calliope (15 June 2013)

Julia said:


> I disagree.   Amongst her supporters, his intrusive questions would bring her considerable sympathy, and even amongst her detractors (such as myself) there will be only condemnation for him.
> 
> I'm glad to know he has been sacked, not because I hold any affection for the Prime Minister, but because such an action at least redresses somewhat the exponentially increasing rudeness which is so characterising our current political scene.




I hope that sympathy for her shows up in the polls. It would be the only thing that could save us from Rudd.



> JULIA Gillard's long-time nemesis, the opinion polls, may offer surprise salvation for her this coming fortnight if enough voters feel sorry for her given the increasing attacks she has had to endure.
> 
> It would of course be a false rise rather than a genuine sign of recovery. This Prime Minister's goose is well and truly cooked. But that doesn't alter the political significance even a statistically insignificant rise in the polls might have on the Labor leadership.
> 
> All indications are that a delicate and tentative process by which a Kevin Rudd comeback might be on the cards is gaining momentum and will come to a head over the next two parliamentary sitting weeks. Rudd admitted yesterday he made mistakes as prime minister. It might seem like an obvious statement, but to the powerbrokers who are considering asking him to return to the prime ministership it was a key statement for him to make.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...comfort-its-gone/story-fn53lw5p-1226664126204


----------



## MrBurns (15 June 2013)

Julia said:


> I disagree.   Amongst her supporters, his intrusive questions would bring her considerable sympathy, and even amongst her detractors (such as myself) there will be only condemnation for him.
> 
> I'm glad to know he has been sacked, not because I hold any affection for the Prime Minister, but because such an action at least redresses somewhat the exponentially increasing rudeness which is so characterising our current political scene.




Our current political scene is 100% the work of Gillard in my opinion, she is a nasty piece of work that never opens her mouth without spewing forth bile and smear


----------



## Bintang (15 June 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Our current political scene is 100% the work of Gillard in my opinion, she is a nasty piece of work that never opens her mouth without spewing forth bile and smear




Unlike all of us here at ASF who always communicate with courtesy and respect towards each other.


----------



## MrBurns (15 June 2013)

Bintang said:


> Unlike all of us here at ASF who always communicate with courtesy and respect towards each other.




Those of us who aren't PM are allowed a little slack


----------



## Bintang (15 June 2013)

MrBurns said:


> Those of us who aren't PM are allowed a little slack




Oh great. So that means I can start using some smear and bile in my posts provided it is just a 'little'.


----------



## MrBurns (17 June 2013)

This ones for you Macquack, you can tell this at your weekly prayer meetings for Gillard - 

Little Johnny - won 5 stars for his assignment for making the most money by selling toothbrushes , how did he do it ?



> "I found the busiest corner in town", said Little Johnny, "I set up a Dip & Chip stand and I gave everybody who walked by a free sample." They all said the same thing, "Hey, this tastes like dog ****!" Then I would say, "It is dog ****, you wanna buy a toothbrush?" I used the Julia Gillard method of giving you some crap, dressing it up so it looks good, telling you it's free, and then making you pay to get the bad taste out of your mouth."
> 
> Little Johnny got five stars for his assignment. Bless his heart.


----------



## Macquack (17 June 2013)

You are losing it Burns.

I will be happy when the Liberal Party takes office so we can see the end of your childish nonsense.


----------



## noco (17 June 2013)

Macquack said:


> You are losing it Burns.
> 
> I will be happy when the Liberal Party takes office so we can see the end of your childish nonsense.




I would say the majority of voters would consider Gillard is acting like an over grown school girl in pig tails.

Just look at today's polls Macquack, that should tell you something.


----------



## drsmith (17 July 2013)

While the AWU slush fund issue continues to bubble away in the background, Michael Smith a week or so appeared to be indirectly hinting the Julia Gillard would not be charged.

The latest from Hedley Thomas,

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...nt-on-slush-fund/story-fng5kxvh-1226680409694


----------



## basilio (17 July 2013)

Hasn't this thread lost its relevance with Kevin Rudd now PM  ? Is there any point to further comments ?


----------



## Julia (17 July 2013)

basilio said:


> Hasn't this thread lost its relevance with Kevin Rudd now PM  ? Is there any point to further comments ?



I think a lot of people are still interested in whether the woman who was PM for three years is ultimately shown to have acted improperly or not.


----------



## basilio (17 July 2013)

Julia said:


> I think a lot of people are still interested in whether the woman who was PM for three years is ultimately shown to have acted improperly or not.




So at this stage it is no longer about her role as PM  but focusing on whether or not she did something dodgy 20 years ago ? Bit of a long bow I think.

But I suppose its still worth having another personal line to attack the Labour party in the coming election.


----------



## drsmith (17 July 2013)

*Re: Julia Gillard and the AWU scandal*



basilio said:


> So at this stage it is no longer about her role as PM  but focusing on whether or not she did something dodgy 20 years ago ?



I'm open to compromise.


----------



## Tisme (7 April 2015)

This has to burn the eyes of the Liberalites

http://realnewsone.com/2013/12/23/r...e-best-prime-ministers-in-australian-history/


----------



## wayneL (7 April 2015)

Tisme said:


> This has to burn the eyes of the Liberalites
> 
> http://realnewsone.com/2013/12/23/r...e-best-prime-ministers-in-australian-history/




I'm not a Liberalite, or a liberal lite (what is that anyway?) But I suspect that article would be more of a source of amusement.... a bit like "worlds best treasurer" etc.

Transparent.


----------



## sptrawler (7 April 2015)

Tisme said:


> This has to burn the eyes of the Liberalites
> 
> http://realnewsone.com/2013/12/23/r...e-best-prime-ministers-in-australian-history/




If you substituted Bob Brown for Julia Gillard, I'd agree with it, he pulled off a blinder, excuse the pun.

He played Julia like a fiddle, beautiful to watch, then he rode of into the sunset.


----------



## galumay (7 April 2015)

I guess whatever your views of Gillard's tenure in the role of PM, there would be very few that would argue that Abbott's abysmal performance has made her look much, much better! We didnt realise how awful a PM could be until 'we' elected the rabbit. (although now, no one admits to voting for the LNP.). 

I think we are starting to see history will hold Gillard in high regard, faced with a relentless, viscious and mysoginist attack on her position by both the RWNJ media and Captain Negativity, Abbott - as well as the meglomania of Rudd, she still managed to achieve a lot of constructive government.


----------



## wayneL (7 April 2015)

galumay said:


> I guess whatever your views of Gillard's tenure in the role of PM, there would be very few that would argue that Abbott's abysmal performance has made her look much, much better! We didnt realise how awful a PM could be until 'we' elected the rabbit. (although now, no one admits to voting for the LNP.).
> 
> I think we are starting to see history will hold Gillard in high regard, faced with a relentless, viscious and mysoginist attack on her position by both the RWNJ media and Captain Negativity, Abbott - as well as the meglomania of Rudd, she still managed to achieve a lot of constructive government.




Oops there's the M word again.


----------



## drsmith (7 April 2015)

galumay said:


> I think we are starting to see history will hold Gillard in high regard, faced with a relentless, viscious and mysoginist attack on her position by both the RWNJ media and Captain Negativity, Abbott - as well as the meglomania of Rudd, she still managed to achieve a lot of constructive government.



It was Labor itself and its current leader that kicked her from the prime ministership.

She was so good that not even her own side was game enough to have her lead the party to the 2013 election.


----------



## galumay (7 April 2015)

drsmith said:


> It was Labor itself and its current leader that kicked her from the prime ministership.




I mentioned the Rudd meglomania, but it would be a very naive analysis that ignored the impact of the other impacts I highlighted.



> She was so good that not even her own side was game enough to have her lead the party to the 2013 election.




And what sweet irony that the Mad Monk should find himself in a very similar situation a couple of years later! It would take a miracle for him to still lead the party at the next election - and all the praying for him to stay from the ALP probably wont be enough to keep him in the job!


----------



## Tisme (7 April 2015)

Ah the memories of media grown ups of the not so distant past, replete with comments from their erudite nasal twanged fans:



What was it Paul Keating said ...."`God help us. God help us"'.


----------



## drsmith (7 April 2015)

galumay said:


> I mentioned the Rudd meglomania, but it would be a very naive analysis that ignored the impact of the other impacts I highlighted.
> 
> And what sweet irony that the Mad Monk should find himself in a very similar situation a couple of years later! It would take a miracle for him to still lead the party at the next election - and all the praying for him to stay from the ALP probably wont be enough to keep him in the job!



Her own use of the political political bread knife didn't exactly help the Rudd megalomania and at the end of the day, Kevin Rudd was only one vote in the Labor caucus.

Julia Gillard's prime ministership didn't perish because of Labor's political opponents as "F*** Tony Abbott" and the like won't kill his prime-ministership. They have both suffered as a consequence of their own decisions.


----------



## sptrawler (7 April 2015)

galumay said:


> I mentioned the Rudd meglomania, but it would be a very naive analysis that ignored the impact of the other impacts I highlighted.
> 
> 
> 
> And what sweet irony that the Mad Monk should find himself in a very similar situation a couple of years later! It would take a miracle for him to still lead the party at the next election - and all the praying for him to stay from the ALP probably wont be enough to keep him in the job!





Don't you think the 'mad monk' quote really lowers the value of your opinion.

I've yet to see Abbott act 'mad', or even raise his voice, when goaded by rabid reporters.

I really would like to see yourself and others, stand up for this misplaced criticism, with the same venom you stood up for Gillard's misplaced accusation.

Just have to wait for the press to give you the heads up and o.k it.


----------



## noco (7 April 2015)

galumay said:


> I mentioned the Rudd meglomania, but it would be a very naive analysis that ignored the impact of the other impacts I highlighted.
> 
> 
> 
> And what sweet irony that the Mad Monk should find himself in a very similar situation a couple of years later! It would take a miracle for him to still lead the party at the next election - and all the praying for him to stay from the ALP probably wont be enough to keep him in the job!





The Labor controlled ABC are going out of their way to destroy Abbott.


----------



## wayneL (7 April 2015)

Could those accusing Abbott of misogyny, can you please give examples.


----------



## sptrawler (8 April 2015)

wayneL said:


> Could those accusing Abbott of misogyny, can you please give examples.




In a word "no" they can't, they can't even give an example of him losing his temper or abusing a reporter. He doesn't even snap at reporters who constantly interject or wrongly accuse him of something.

Yet Rudd can ff and blind everyone, Gillard verbally abuses him, Gillard's staff incited a riot against him.
Yet the press overlook that behaviour, just shows how much sway the media has.

As the old saying goes "throw enough mud, some will stick", especially when feeding muppets.


----------



## moXJO (8 April 2015)

Gillard was terrible, with under table policy that benefited unions. She was nothing but bitter and still cries about misogyny as she tried to divide the nation. One of the worst PMs ever.
She was however better than Rudd. But I would in no way swap that last labor govt for the current liberal one. We will get tax reform under libs. Labor was just a train wreck.

Labor left and right factions are having a very bitter battle behind the scenes. It will be a while till they are ready to govern. Bill Shorten will be lucky to hold his position.


----------

