2010 Federal Election

[IFocus]

Eh?

Your Orwellian controllers have trained you too well.

Surely you mean my Commissars

 

[Calliope]

What is Labor's new strategy?:dunno: Laurie Oakes doesn't know either. But Rudd is right in one aspect. If Abbott does get up it will be by default

So now we have the real Kevin and real Julia campaigning together and Labor morale, for the moment, has been lifted. But it is, when you think about it, a quite ridiculous situation.

Gillard knifes Rudd because she says the Government lost its way. She and other ministers then use the ousted PM as a scapegoat for every mistake, eschewing all responsibility themselves.

There is much joyful dancing on Rudd's political grave. But the ghost of the assassinated leader haunts the election campaign and voters in his home state resent the way he was done in. Gillard's campaign falters.

So she swallows her pride and sends out an SOS asking the bloke whose job she took to come to her rescue. It is political pulp fiction.

Gillard had little hope of saving the election without Rudd, but managing the situation from now on is clearly fraught with peril.

If Rudd overshadows Gillard and the election continues to be about him, Labor will be no better off.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/el...gillards-saviour/story-fn5zmod2-1225902259065

 

[SmellyTerror]

You make it easy, when your political views are based on hate. I guess you hate 60% of those who voted in the above poll.

Ok ok, sorry, not really back in the thread, but I can't let this go.

I had said: I'm going to assume you're NOT an idiot.

You said something dopey.

I said: well I was assuming you're not an idiot, but you're having a good go at proving I'm wrong (ie - proving that you ARE an idiot).

Your answer: "You make it easy". Apparently, I make it easy to prove you're an idiot.

Sir, YOU NEED TO READ WHAT OTHER PEOPLE ARE SAYING.

You are arguing with an imaginary person. Almost nothing about what you think I'm saying is true. Given your clear inability to actually comprehend the posts you read, I can see how you missed the stunningly subtle idea that my line about "hating the same things" was a joke.

Why do you bother to come here? What do you expect to achieve? You can't learn anything if you don't bother to understand what people are saying, and you won't convince anyone when you make no attempt to address anything they've actually said.

...


And since I'm here: Wayne, I'm pretty disappointed with this post.

It only means that the socialists have embraced pragmatism, the end game is still the same. Of course in the meantime it exposes a cognitive dissonance as is obvious in the Wikipedia article on SD, evidenced by these two concurrent statements:

...you give the second quote as this:

"Social democracy supports gradualism; the belief that gradual democratic reforms to capitalist economies will eventually succeed in creating a socialist economy,"

...conveniently skipping the rest of the sentence, that clearly shows it was past-tense. As explained elsewhere in the article, and in the post you were answering, the ideology has changed. The whole point of my post was that you appeared to be thinking of the long-discarded version of the ideology, when in modern usage it's changed.

So, yeah, if you show the older version and the newer version together with no context, then no crap you get "cognitive dissonance".

Here's the full sentence you chopped (my bolds and bigs):

"Social democracy, as practiced in Europe in 1951, was a socialist movement supporting gradualism; the belief that gradual democratic reforms to capitalist economies will eventually succeed in creating a socialist economy,[4] rejecting forcible imposition of socialism through revolutionary means."

I can't see how your mangling half that quote to make a point directly refuted by the full quote is anything but dishonest. So: see also the comic.

You guys just want an echo-chamber, don't you?

 

[wayneL]

Smelly,

The article purports that a socialist economy is no longer the goal. I don't believe that.

Do you honestly believe that with a free rein, that SDs wouldn't create a socialist economy poste haste?

Neither does Wikipedia apparently:

 

[Calliope]

Your answer: "You make it easy". Apparently, I make it easy to prove you're an idiot.

No, quite the reverse. It has been suggested to me that you are on substance abuse. Your posts seem to indicate that. And you do have long periods when you are out of this world.

Try and chill out.

 

[So_Cynical]

Save your breath Smelly...apparently only right wing conservative capitalists have objectivity and the required intelligence to make good political decisions.

The ASF gang of 4 have said so...so it must be true.

 

[drsmith]

Why is it that with both major parties, the only red in the background in their media statements is in the Australian flag ?

 

[drsmith]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/photos/2010/08/07/2976441.htm

The happy couple.

 

[drsmith]

A third Julia or Kevin ?

 

[Calliope]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/photos/2010/08/07/2976441.htm

The happy couple.

The Women's Weekly air brushed out the decolletage. Will Kevin fall for the wiles of the temptress? Do not miss the next thrilling episode of this exciting story of true love being rediscovered. Which of the faceless men will play match maker? How will they restore Kevin's image and still keep Julia's image intact? All will be revealed in the next episode.

 

[noco]

Just can't wait for Mark Latham's show on 60 minutes coming to your TV screen Aug 15. I heard a whisper, it could be explosive.

 

[Calliope]

It's not surprising that Rudd and Gillard detest each other. They are an obnoxious pair, and neither of them can trust the treacherous Swan. It is also not surprising that the only decent one in the gang of four decided he'd had enough of this nasty trio.

 

[So_Cynical]

Australian Workers Union "The Abbott Family" video

They're tricky and there sneaky, dishonest and cheeky, they're altogether freaky...the Abbott Family.

LOL
~

 

[moXJO]

Australian Workers Union "The Abbott Family" video

They're tricky and there sneaky, dishonest and cheeky, they're altogether freaky...the Abbott Family.

LOL
~

LOL trust the unions to come up with that

 

[noco]

LOL trust the unions to come up with that

Yes and the unions may be trouble for infringing copy rights. I understand there could be court challenge over that add!!

 

[drsmith]

Kevin Will Survive

http://media.smh.com.au/opinion/national-times/kevin-rudd-will-survive-1753521.html

 

[trainspotter]

Ok ok, sorry, not really back in the thread, but I can't let this go.

I had said: I'm going to assume you're NOT an idiot.

You said something dopey.

I said: well I was assuming you're not an idiot, but you're having a good go at proving I'm wrong (ie - proving that you ARE an idiot).

Your answer: "You make it easy". Apparently, I make it easy to prove you're an idiot.

Sir, YOU NEED TO READ WHAT OTHER PEOPLE ARE SAYING.

You are arguing with an imaginary person. Almost nothing about what you think I'm saying is true. Given your clear inability to actually comprehend the posts you read, I can see how you missed the stunningly subtle idea that my line about "hating the same things" was a joke.

Why do you bother to come here? What do you expect to achieve? You can't learn anything if you don't bother to understand what people are saying, and you won't convince anyone when you make no attempt to address anything they've actually said.

And since I'm here: Wayne, I'm pretty disappointed with this post.

...you give the second quote as this:

"Social democracy supports gradualism; the belief that gradual democratic reforms to capitalist economies will eventually succeed in creating a socialist economy,"

...conveniently skipping the rest of the sentence, that clearly shows it was past-tense. As explained elsewhere in the article, and in the post you were answering, the ideology has changed. The whole point of my post was that you appeared to be thinking of the long-discarded version of the ideology, when in modern usage it's changed.

So, yeah, if you show the older version and the newer version together with no context, then no crap you get "cognitive dissonance".

Here's the full sentence you chopped (my bolds and bigs):

"Social democracy, as practiced in Europe in 1951, was a socialist movement supporting gradualism; the belief that gradual democratic reforms to capitalist economies will eventually succeed in creating a socialist economy,[4] rejecting forcible imposition of socialism through revolutionary means."

I can't see how your mangling half that quote to make a point directly refuted by the full quote is anything but dishonest. So: see also the comic.

You guys just want an echo-chamber, don't you?

Can I have the same medication that Smelly Terror is on Nurse Ratched? He reminds me of rederob. Obviously your superior intellect and grasp of the spoken word as well as the grammatical prose you display is of a very well educated person who requires a massive amount of stimulus. You do not seem to be getting it from here so WHY do you bother ?

The rest of us just drink the Kool - Aid.

Nurse Ratched: Aren't you ashamed?
Billy: No, I'm not.
Nurse Ratched: You know Billy, what worries me is how your mother is going to take this.
Billy: Um, um, well, y-y-y-you d-d-d-don't have to t-t-t-tell her, Miss Ratched.
Nurse Ratched: I don't have to tell her? Your mother and I are old friends. You know that.
Billy: P-p-p-please d-d-don't tell my m-m-m-mother.

 

[trainspotter]

Save your breath Smelly...apparently only right wing conservative capitalists have objectivity and the required intelligence to make good political decisions.

The ASF gang of 4 have said so...so it must be true.

Save your fingers from wearing out the keyboard So_Cynical ... apparently the only people intelligent enough to understand Smelly & your posts are Left Wing, Card Carrying, Trade Unionists who still believe that Stalinism is a totalitarian government of the people, by the people, for the people.

 

[Calliope]

Save your breath Smelly...apparently only right wing conservative capitalists have objectivity and the required intelligence to make good political decisions.

So-Smelly and So-Gullible have a lot in common, and it's certainly not objectivity or intelligence.

 

[trainspotter]

Taken from the Greens website:

2: equity of access to the essentials of life and promoting equality are central goals for a civilised society. (read Communism)

6: the fulfilment of human potential and the enrichment of lives is best achieved when people work together for common goals. : Hahahahahhaaa

9: long term government borrowing is the preferred mechanism for funding long term infrastructure investments. More debt !

13: progressive taxes such as income taxes are preferable to regressive forms of taxation such as the GST. HEY !! What happened to rule #2 where we are all equal? HUH ??

29: return the company tax rate to 33% and broaden the company tax base by reducing tax concessions. Yeah right ..... they got my vote ! Pffffffttttttt

I could not read anymore as I was beginning to feel stupefied and my brain had turned to mush. I also felt an irresistible urge to go hug a tree and crap in the woods and wipe my @rse with a rabbit. Dunno why?

http://greens.org.au/policies/sustainable-economy/economics for those who need to be dumbed down to a Bob Brown level.