2010 Federal Election

[Calliope]

Oakeshott is probably in the Green/Labor camp already, and under the influence of their spin doctors. He has been asked by the Nationals to back up the slur he made recently about an incident in which it was alleged that a National member told a group, at a party in 1996, that he despaired for the future of the party now "blacks" were joining the ranks.

NSW Independent MP Rob Oakeshott is refusing to be drawn into a public debate with the National Party over an alleged racist comment.

Mr Oakeshott yesterday maintained his silence despite National Party efforts to flush out further details of the incident 14 years ago.

Victorian Nationals MP Darren Chester challenged the former NSW National Party MP turned federal independent to verify an incident at a 1996 party when an older Nationals stalwart is claimed to have made a racist remark, possibly directed at Mr Oakeshott's then girlfriend, now his wife.

Mr Oakeshott's wife, Sara-Jane, is of Aboriginal and Pacific Islander heritage.
Ms Oakeshott said she had not heard the offending remark at the time but "heard it a long time after".

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ott-racism-claim/story-fn59niix-1225913521304

 

[derty]

Well there we go, breaking news - Gillard has got it after a cliffhanger ~
http://parramatta-advertiser.wherei...d-wins-leadership-after-cliffhanger-election/

 

[wayneL]

They will be far better off reverting to form and becoming a head kicking totally obstructionist opposition until they can find or create some way to bring down the government. After all it will only take 1 maybe 2 Labour MHRs to "fall under a bus" to trigger a new election... (Or was there some talk of a kindler, gentler politcs emerging from this election ?

ROTFL!

Socialists never fail to amuse with their raging bias and hypocrisy.

...all fantastic evidence for the "The impossibility of objectivity in social democrats" thesis.

Keep it up, I'll have my PhD sewn up in no time.

 

[sails]

Well there we go, breaking news - Gillard has got it after a cliffhanger ~
http://parramatta-advertiser.wherei...d-wins-leadership-after-cliffhanger-election/

Haha - different Gillard...

 

[derty]

Haha - different Gillard...

and a different Abbot too.

 

[basilio]

basilio
They will be far better off reverting to form and becoming a head kicking totally obstructionist opposition until they can find or create some way to bring down the government. After all it will only take 1 maybe 2 Labour MHRs to "fall under a bus" to trigger a new election... (Or was there some talk of a kindler, gentler politics emerging from this election ?

ROTFL!

Socialists never fail to amuse with their raging bias and hypocrisy.

...all fantastic evidence for the "The impossibility of objectivity in social democrats" thesis.

Keep it up, I'll have my PhD sewn up in no time.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

 

[Calliope]

Now that the Greens and Labor are in coalition, when will the Treasury release the costings of the Green's policies.

 

[Bushman]

Now that the Greens and Labor are in coalition, when will the Treasury release the costings of the Green's policies.

Best call of this whole election campaign!!

Even better, cost to the nation of the independents lunacy?

 

[basilio]

Good story on Andrew Wilkie in The Age. It's worth remembering he was originally a member of the Liberal party and his close friend is John Valder former president of the Liberals.

Basic nuts of the story is that he will be a very prickly "supporter" of Julia Gillard. He is very principled person. Consider his refusal to allow John Howard to go to war with Iraq on spurious grounds.

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/po...-centre-stage-20100902-14ro0.html?autostart=1

Andrew Wilkie surprised his friend John Valder when he signed up yesterday with Julia Gillard. Valder, the former Liberal Party president who bonded with Wilkie over their mutual discomfort with John Howard, thought he would remain more rigorously independent, like the South Australian Nick Xenophon.

Valder predicts Wilkie will be, in practice, a ''prickly'' supporter of Gillard and the ALP. This is, of course, a compliment from a Liberal-turned-rebel. ''Andrew is genuine, he stands up for what he believes in. I would regard him as a fine character,'' he told The Age last night. ''I can see stoushes over all sorts of things.''

 

[Knobby22]

Best call of this whole election campaign!!

Even better, cost to the nation of the independents lunacy?

I thought with your name you would be a friend of the independants.

They seem like good country politicians to me who have a good case to argue and have a lot more honesty, ability and wiilingness to do what is best for the country than the city bred Labor and Liberal hacks we have had to get used to.

 

[wayneL]

Pot. Kettle. Black.

Easy to say, hard to prove.

NB Your tacit admission of my observation noted.

 

[Calliope]

Basic nuts of the story is that he will be a very prickly "supporter" of Julia Gillard. He is very principled person. Consider his refusal to allow John Howard to go to war with Iraq on spurious grounds.

I think this quote from the article best sums up Wilkie;

''at the very best, unreliable; at worst he is flaky and irrational''.

 

[Bushman]

I thought with your name you would be a friend of the independants.

They seem like good country politicians to me who have a good case to argue and have a lot more honesty, ability and wiilingness to do what is best for the country than the city bred Labor and Liberal hacks we have had to get used to.

My nickname is due to my South African background. Nothing to do with rural independents.

Lunacy is policies like devalue the Aussie dollar, break-up Coles/Woolies, protect inefficent rural industries etc. Well intentioned but come on.

Nothing against the indepedents as human beings. Seem like a decent and sincere bunch of grass roots politicians.

 

[basilio]

I think this quote from the article best sums up Wilkie;

''at the very best, unreliable; at worst he is flaky and irrational''.

If anyone else actually reads the story they would discover that this comment about Andrew Wilkie was made by Liberal party politicians when they were trying to destroy him because of his stand against John Howards decision to war with Irag becasue of the threat of weapons of mass desctruction.

The full comment and context of the above quote reads as follows.

The mercurial Wilkie was first soldier, then analyst, then whistleblower. In 2003 he publicly stood up to Howard over claims that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. For his pains he faced considerable retribution, shunned by the dominant political class, subjected to a whispering campaign in the capital. His marriage was ending; he was unstable, went the ''background'' to political reporters after he quit his post at the Office of National Assessments - one Liberal senator even made the claim publicly. Wilkie was ''at the very best, unreliable; at worst he is flaky and irrational''.

Of course the actual reality was that Andrew Wilkie was totally accurate in his analysis of Iraqs non existent weapons of mass destruction. It was Howard who was trying to protect a dishonest position by attempting to destroy the whistle blower Andrew Wilkie.

 

[basilio]

Easy to say, hard to prove.

NB Your tacit admission of my observation noted.

No not accepted . Just not worth arguing with you Wayne.

 

[Calliope]

If anyone else actually reads the story they would discover that this comment about Andrew Wilkie was made by Liberal party politicians

It was made by one politician and it was spot on. Nothing he has done since has proved the assessment wrong.

When you get older and less naive you may realise that your leftist progressive idols have feel of clay.

 

[Macquack]

It was made by one politician and it was spot on. Nothing he has done since has proved the assessment wrong.

When you get older and less naive you may realise that your leftist progressive idols have feel of clay.

Basilio was spot on the money.

Calliope, you are just waffling and showing your usual bias.

Basilio 1
Calliope 0

 

[trainspotter]

Anyone considered the outcome of all of this? HUH?

I don't really give a flying fox who wins or loses. What good of it if the country is in a mexican standoff? It doesn't matter. If either party wins the country is deadlocked. Labor wins it is blocked. Liberal wins it is constipated.

None of this on a political scale is palatable. IMO

 

[trainspotter]

Of course the actual reality was that Andrew Wilkie was totally accurate in his analysis of Iraqs non existent weapons of mass destruction. It was Howard who was trying to protect a dishonest position by attempting to destroy the whistle blower Andrew Wilkie.

*YAWN* .... *STRETCH* .... wahhhhhh ??? So it wasn't the Liberal preferences that got him across the line?? He is there on the off chance of pure luck. Not because he stood up for what is right or wrong.

Labor won the primary vote, dear heart, in his electorate. May he well remember that !

 

[IFocus]

It looks to me that on the surface Labor has been far more adept at the negotiations and discussions with the independents.

Labor hasn't conducted any negative discussion in public and over all looks far more able to govern with a minority much in the same way Steve Bracks did successfully in Victoria with the support of rural independents sound familiar.

Bracks won a second term with a land slide victory.

The federal coalition on the other hand currently sound desperate and critical of all concerned along with outlandish pork barreling a sign of their lack of commitment to the core principles required to govern.

Abbotts partisan, aggressive, bust though behavior in opposition has had outstanding results for the coalition but just wont cut it in government.

In Government you actually have to work with everyone Rudd is a great example of what happens when you don't.

After reading up on Katter I wont be surprised if he joins Labor as his forebears were very much Labor people of high moral principles. When Katter talks he talks straight from the heart, I like the
man.