2010 Federal Election

[basilio]

And thanks for the kind comments on my observations on what has been going on this thread.

 

[Calliope]

basilio, anything sensible you may have said is negated by this stupidity;

The only party that actually puts up some clear policies along the above lines is The Greens (Boo, hiss, Bxxxxx communist/fascist ratbags... Let's get the abuse over with quickly shall we.. )

If you wish to set out your reasons for your support of the Greens I have started a thread for that purpose. I await you response with interest. Green's supporters among ASF members are naturally thin on the ground.

 

[basilio]

basilio, anything sensible you may have said is negated by this stupidity;

The only party that actually puts up some clear policies along the above lines is The Greens (Boo, hiss, Bxxxxx communist/fascist ratbags... Let's get the abuse over with quickly shall we.. )

If you wish to set out your reasons for your support of the Greens I have started a thread for that purpose. I await you response with interest. Green's supporters among ASF members are naturally thin on the ground.

Hmm The main point I was trying to get across in my original comment was that Labour and Liberal were campaigning on basically bribes, smear and negativity. I referenced The Greens because they at least were presenting a set of policies about where they thought Australia should be going , why we should be going there and how this might be achieved.

You might not agree with it but at least it could be discussed semi rationally.

As to your offer to actually discuss The Greens policies... I noticed that the thread heading was The Greens - the New Radical Socialists. I just assumed from the title it was another opportunity to smear anything left of Genghis Khan.

 

[Calliope]

I just assumed from the title it was another opportunity to smear anything left of Genghis Khan.

You assumed wrong, it's a forum for you to defend your socialist ideologies. Go for it.

 

[Julia]

I completely enjoyed Laurie Oakes this Morning:

Laurie " So six weeks ago you could not wait to get rid of Kevin Rudd as he was seen as a liabilty to the Labor Party?"

Patsy " Yes that is rigHt Laurie"

Laurie "So what has changed that you now need him back to bolster your campaign to be re-elected?"

Patsy : DEAFENING SILENCE !

Who is Patsy?
Laurie Oakes' observation, of course, is what is making the Labor Party look so foolish.

 

[trainspotter]

Not quite sure what you are saying trainspotter. Would you like to recheck your comment and perhaps clarify ?

Sorry basilio ...... very bad Cybil moment there. What I was trying to get across (inadequately) was that people have differences of opinions in a topical conversation all the time. Just because you do not get the answers you want or are heckled with obtuse and vitriolic comments does not mean you should give up. Hope this clarifies what I was not trying to say.

 

[trainspotter]

Who is Patsy?
Laurie Oakes' observation, of course, is what is making the Labor Party look so foolish.

Patsy = Julia Gillard / Definition:- Slang a person easily imposed upon or victimised.

 

[basilio]

Sorry basilio ...... very bad Cybil moment there. What I was trying to get across (inadequately) was that people have differences of opinions in a topical conversation all the time. Just because you do not get the answers you want or are heckled with obtuse and vitriolic comments does not mean you should give up. Hope this clarifies what I was not trying to say.

Thanks for the clarification. I don't mind discussing ideas and I hopeI can see other arguments.

I'm not that impressed however with reflex abuse and I wish there was less of it in some parts of this forum. At some stage I also try and see if other people are willing or have the capacity to recognize some fundamental facts that should be the starting points for a particular discussion. If I don't think that is there I guess there is not going to be a fruitful conversation.

For example. There have been some long and very heated threads on climate change in this forum. On almost all the credible scientific evidence to date our civilizations production of greenhouse gases is creating a monstrous problem. And even if the evidence wasn't 100% certain prudent thinking would say "Let's take appropriate action because the downside of being wrong and not doing so will be horrendous".

But in this forum and around the world the relentless personal abuse and a refusal to accept well understood scientific knowledge and then physical data (temperature readings, climate observations ) has crippled this debate.

I wish I had an answer for this.

 

[Calliope]

Laurie Oakes says Mark Latham is full of bile. Perhaps he should get his gall bladder removed. This simple operation will turn the nastiest critic into a well behaved puppy dog.

 

[basilio]

Well there is obviously synchronicity at work in the universe. Just as I finished my last post I received an email which offered another perspective on people and "crackpots" (however they may be defined)

An elderly Chinese woman had two large pots each hung on the ends of a pole which she carried across her neck.
One of the pots had a crack in it while the other pot was perfect and always delivered a full portion of water.
At the end of the long walks from the stream to the house the cracked pot arrived only half full.
For a full two years this went on daily with the woman bringing home only one and a half pots of water.
Of course the perfect pot was proud of its accomplishments.
But the poor cracked pot was ashamed of its own imperfection and miserable that it could only do half of what it had been made to do.

After two years of what it perceived to be bitter failure it spoke to the woman one day by the stream.

"I am ashamed of myself because this crack in my side causes water to leak out all the way back to your house."
The old woman smiled "Did you notice that there are flowers on your side of the path but not on the other pot's side?"
"That's because I have always known about your flaw so I planted flower seeds on your side of the path and every day while we walk back you water them."
"For two years I have been able to pick these beautiful flowers to decorate the table.
Without you being just the way you are there would not be this beauty to grace the house."

Each of us has our own unique flaw. But it's the cracks and flaws we each have that make our lives together so very interesting and rewarding.

You've just got to take each person for what they are and look for the good in them.
SO to all of my crackpot friends have a great day and remember to smell the flowers on your side of the path!

Cheers

 

[trainspotter]

There is no answer basilio to people who do not want to believe in climate change nor do they want to change their opinion no matter what the studies performed by the scientists say.

"A productive, healthy debate is informative and insightful, and collectively moves the debaters and the audience closer to a potential solution or agreement."

Unleash the psychologists http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2952229.htm

As for the knee jerk reactionaries who immediatley play the man and not the ball - I think this picture sums it up nicely.

 

[wayneL]

Thanks for the clarification. I don't mind discussing ideas and I hopeI can see other arguments.

I'm not that impressed however with reflex abuse and I wish there was less of it in some parts of this forum. At some stage I also try and see if other people are willing or have the capacity to recognize some fundamental facts that should be the starting points for a particular discussion. If I don't think that is there I guess there is not going to be a fruitful conversation.

For example. There have been some long and very heated threads on climate change in this forum. On almost all the credible scientific evidence to date our civilizations production of greenhouse gases is creating a monstrous problem. And even if the evidence wasn't 100% certain prudent thinking would say "Let's take appropriate action because the downside of being wrong and not doing so will be horrendous".

But in this forum and around the world the relentless personal abuse and a refusal to accept well understood scientific knowledge and then physical data (temperature readings, climate observations ) has crippled this debate.

I wish I had an answer for this.

How utterly pompous.

Apparently:

1/ "Evidence" for one point of view is more valuable than the opposing point of view.

2/ "Reflex Abuse" is abhorrent from those of one point of view, but not from those of the other point of view.

Unbelievable

 

[trainspotter]

Back to the politics - Wayne Swan vs Joe Hockey at the National Press Club in Canberra today should be a rip snorter !

Joe: We created the surplus for you to spend it so we are better at economics !
Wayne: We created a deficit for you to pay off so we are better at economics !

Abbotts Liberal Launch yesterday was a fizzer IMO with a lot of details white washed BUT policies will be forthcoming prior to election day. Spent a lot of time on the negative Labour bagging. The party faithful were beside themselves. Sheeeeeeeeesh !

Julia Gillard in Perth today out on the hustings - West Australia has a number of marginal seats, including Swan, Canning, Stirling and Hasluck, which Labor will need to win or retain to stay in government.

 

[Logique]

Anybody else finding the unfairfax sites slow atm? Must be a lot of election traffic. Paul Sheehan needs to watch out, he'll end up going the way of Miranda Devine - out, and off to Murdoch press. Corker article today:

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...asion-halftruths-and-spin-20100808-11q54.html
An unhealthy blend of evasion, half-truths and spin
August 9, 2010 by Paul Sheehan

...I chose this exchange, out of dozens of alternatives, because it is indicative of a prime minister who, under pressure, appears incapable of giving a straight answer. Gillard came into Parliament as an ardent left-wing firebrand but has gone so far beyond the pragmatism required of politics she manages to be everywhere yet nowhere. She distorts or evades issues repeatedly, compulsively and without shame.

...I can't vouch for his estimate, but it sits plausibly with the pattern of Whitlamesque excesses that have been the hallmark of the Rudd-Gillard government.
The federal government presents the fiction that it is a font of efficient compassion on healthcare. When the federal Minister of Health, Nicola Roxon, released a summary of RuddCare's proposed reforms on July 7, her statement concluded with a preposterous claim: ''These measures build on the50 per cent increase in hospital funding by the government.''

Fifty per cent? How about zero? Lifting the federal government's share of spending on the health system from 40 per cent to 60 per cent simply represented a shift of 20 per cent of health spending from state governments to Canberra. It was a shift in power, not a 50 per cent surge in spending.

Roxon and Gillard have both repeated ad nauseam the accusation the Howard government, and Abbott in particular, ''stripped a billion dollars out of the hospital system''. It cannot withstand scrutiny.
When the Howard government introduced a tax rebate on private health insurance, it took pressure off the public hospitals as people moved to private care. The government was able to move $1 billion, earmarked for public hospitals, to tax relief for health insurance payments. It was a shift of spending, not a reduction.

So great is the growing gap between rhetoric and reality that Gillard not answering simple questions is a symptom of something much deeper: an abdication of public honesty in the pursuit of power.

 

[basilio]

Quote:
Originally Posted by basilio View Post
Thanks for the clarification. I don't mind discussing ideas and I hopeI can see other arguments.

I'm not that impressed however with reflex abuse and I wish there was less of it in some parts of this forum. At some stage I also try and see if other people are willing or have the capacity to recognize some fundamental facts that should be the starting points for a particular discussion. If I don't think that is there I guess there is not going to be a fruitful conversation.

For example. There have been some long and very heated threads on climate change in this forum. On almost all the credible scientific evidence to date our civilizations production of greenhouse gases is creating a monstrous problem. And even if the evidence wasn't 100% certain prudent thinking would say "Let's take appropriate action because the downside of being wrong and not doing so will be horrendous".

But in this forum and around the world the relentless personal abuse and a refusal to accept well understood scientific knowledge and then physical data (temperature readings, climate observations ) has crippled this debate.

I wish I had an answer for this.

How utterly pompous.

Apparently:

1/ "Evidence" for one point of view is more valuable than the opposing point of view.

Wayne, that is because the evidence confirming human induced climate change is overwhelming while evidence against the proposition isn't. Either 99% of the climate scientists, their research and observations are devastatingly mistaken or we are all cooked. I repeat again

And even if the evidence wasn't 100% certain prudent thinking would say "Let's take appropriate action because the downside of being wrong and not doing so will be horrendous".

 

[Julia]

Basilio, don't we already have various threads on climate change?
Do you really have to hijack the election thread to promote your personal climate beliefs?

 

[Calliope]

SO to all of my crackpot friends have a great day and remember to smell the flowers on your side of the path!

Basilio, I think you have been sniffing something else.

 

[derty]

Apologies for the off-topic digression ladies and gents, but this is pure gold.

Calliope you could not have chosen a better user-name for yourself.

A calliope is a musical instrument that produces sound by sending a gas, originally steam or more recently compressed air, through large whistles, originally locomotive whistles.

A calliope is typically very loud. Even some small calliopes are audible for miles around. There is no provision for varying the tone or loudness. The only expression possible is the timing and duration of the notes.

 

[Calliope]

Apologies for the off-topic digression ladies and gents, but this is pure gold.
Calliope you could not have chosen a better user-name for yourself.

Nor You.
Yes, they used to use them on carousels. It is also the small town in Qld where I was born. The town was named after the naval ship Calliope which brought the Governor of NSW to Port Curtis in 1854. It was also one of the Spanish ships in the Armada. Calliope is also one or the muses.

And people who throw mud can end up derty

 

[trainspotter]

JOE Hockey presented a positive agenda for economic policy under an Abbott government and won today's National Press Club debate with Wayne Swan.

The Treasurer's appeal to the electorate was rooted in a defence of the government's management of the global financial crisis.

Swan managed to puncture a number of the coalition's claims. Mr Hockey admitted that the budget would have gone into deficit under a Liberal government and also conceded that interest rates paid by home buyers now are lower than it was at the end of the Howard government.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ebate-on-economy/story-fn59niix-1225903056487

If the Labor Govt had a disastrous week of politics why has the latest polls got them in front again? Has the Libs lost their nerve and is their message just not getting through anymore?