- Joined
- 2 July 2008
- Posts
- 7,102
- Reactions
- 6
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".
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 ?
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...
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.
Now that the Greens and Labor are in coalition, when will the Treasury release the costings of the Green's policies.
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.''
Best call of this whole election campaign!!
Even better, cost to the nation of the independents lunacy?
Pot. Kettle. Black.
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 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.
I think this quote from the article best sums up Wilkie;
''at the very best, unreliable; at worst he is flaky and irrational''.
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''.
Easy to say, hard to prove.
NB Your tacit admission of my observation noted.
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.
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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?