This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Pauline Hanson for PM?

Jump to new
Logique said:
Now don't be like that IF, the Right have done their duty with Ms Hanson, what have you lot done about (Prime Minister) Brown and (Deputy) Milne? .
Click to expand...
Reasonable question.

IFocus said:
Lots of talk about the greens running Labor did Howard get run by the Democrats when he did deals to get his agenda over the line?
Click to expand...
Another reasonable question. But in that case I think it was more that the Democrats modified their own policy (which was anti the GST) and effectively caved in to the Libs with the adjustment that food should be exempt. So both sides gave in order to get the legislation through.
The Democrats were widely criticised for this and never recovered.

In the current situation, it's Labor which is succumbing to the pressure of the Greens and allowing the Greens to set the agenda. Without the need to appease the Greens to keep her in power, there's no way Julia Gillard would have laid herself open to the justifiable charge that she lied. That she has done so is a measure of her desperation.


medicowallet said:
PAULINE, for PM?

The last thing we need is that useless ranga sheila running this country.

Oh, and I don't think Pauline would do much better of a job either.
Click to expand...
I hope Ms Hanson is soundly defeated. She has become a serial user of the system, without genuine conviction or moral purpose.
 
Julia said:
I hope Ms Hanson is soundly defeated. She has become a serial user of the system, without genuine conviction or moral purpose.
Click to expand...

Absolutely.

It just seems that the other red headed politician doesn't seem to have any genuine conviction either (although imo is the lesser of two evils)
 

Actually Labor doesn't need the greens to retain power but will need their cooperation in the senate after July to pass any bills.
 
IFocus said:
Actually Labor doesn't need the greens to retain power but will need their cooperation in the senate after July to pass any bills.
Click to expand...

I think labor really do need the greens. If Bandt renegged on supply to labor and supported the coalition, we would be back to a hung parliament which would force another election - which clearly would be the best thing to have one side or the other governing in their own right.

We know Bandt not going to do that while greens are enjoying holding our country to ransom with their new found balance of power, but on the same basis, try and stick to the facts that labor actually do need the green in the lower house.

Goodness knows how much pork barrelling continues to go on at taxpayer expense to keep the green and the two independents from switching sides.
 
Just went to double check the federal 2010 election results and interesting that the coalition actually got 73 seats in their own right compared to labor's 72.

http://www.abc.net.au/elections/federal/2010/liveblog/

Gillard cannot afford for any one of the indies or green to swap sides. I wonder how much she has to pay them in pork barrelling to keep them on side and yet she couldn't find the money for $1.8 billion choosing instead to inflict further taxes on to the people...grrr
 
Well, Pauline missed out on her gravey train in NSW... so, I guess it's back to selling real estate eh?
 
Whiskers said:
Well, Pauline missed out on her gravey train in NSW... so, I guess it's back to selling real estate eh?
Click to expand...

I'm sure the payout she will receive from the electoral commission for the votes she received will help asuage her dissapointment in missing out on a seat.
She made an interesting point, that if her nomination had been above the line it might have been a different story.
 
nulla nulla said:
She made an interesting point, that if her nomination had been above the line it might have been a different story.
Click to expand...

It's funny how the losers always complain about the system when they don't get in. If she did get in you wouldn't hear a murmur about the voting system. Like a darn school kid complaining everything's too hard, what a waste of space.
 
I haven't been following this in the last few days. So does her missing out mean there is an additional Senate Greens member?
If so, I'd even rather have had Ms Hanson.
 
Julia said:
I haven't been following this in the last few days. So does her missing out mean there is an additional Senate Greens member?
If so, I'd even rather have had Ms Hanson.
Click to expand...

That statement speaks volumes....i used to spend 20 minutes filling out the senate forms just to put her and one nation last, hell i was putting crazy Christians and gun nuts in front of her.
 
So_Cynical said:
putting crazy Christians and gun nuts in front of her.
Click to expand...

It was good old Fred Nile that gave us that extra public holiday a few years ago when the Libs (I think) were trying to do away with it, now that's something worth voting for. You're a good voter So_Cynical , your time spent on the ballot paper didn't go to waste.
 
Julia said:
I haven't been following this in the last few days. So does her missing out mean there is an additional Senate Greens member?
If so, I'd even rather have had Ms Hanson.
Click to expand...

Hear hear. If she can come this close after returning from England and only recently moving to NSW, next time arround she should be a shoe in. I'd rather her any day in preference to the greens. At least you know what you are getting. Nothing hidden there.
 

I agree with you, having the odd headbanger in there tends to keep the issues and debates robust. Rather than the recycled party crap with the right amount of political correctness to make it boring enough that no one with a brain would listen to it. Then have a vote on it at 2 in the morning.
Talk about appathy, the guvnment rely on it and being full of ex union guys are playing it to the max. The only thing is they know that when you have lost the audience it is really hard to get back on song. hehehe I love it
 
So_Cynical said:
That statement speaks volumes....i used to spend 20 minutes filling out the senate forms just to put her and one nation last, hell i was putting crazy Christians and gun nuts in front of her.
Click to expand...

Gun nuts? The biggest gun nut we have had in this country was John Howard. Did you put him last. He was such a gun nut that he disarmed the honest people and left gun ownership to illegal gun ownership of the crims. Now that was a nutty thing to do.
 
nioka said:
Gun nuts? The biggest gun nut we have had in this country was John Howard. Did you put him last. He was such a gun nut that he disarmed the honest people and left gun ownership to illegal gun ownership of the crims. Now that was a nutty thing to do.
Click to expand...

On 28 April 1996 Martin Bryant murdered 35 people at Port Arthur in Tasmania: he injured 18 more. The Howard Coalition government acted swiftly, other political parties cooperated and the National Firearms Agreement (NFA) came about. Soon improved gun laws existed throughout Australia. The inventory of semi-automatic rifles and shotguns was greatly reduced, gun registration was made universal, an improved licensing system was introduced and gun storage demands improved. It took several years for the benefits to be seen. Australians are safer from gun misuse since those new laws took effect.

http://guncontrol.org.au/2011/04/fifteen-years-since-port-arthur-gun-massacre-2/

Disarmed the honest people? You are not serious are you? Australian citizens do not (and never did) have a constitutional right to own firearms - even before the 1997 buyback program handgun ownership was restricted to certain groups, such as those needing weapons for occupational reasons, members of approved sporting clubs, game hunters and gun collectors. The 1997 buyback program DID NOT TAKE AWAY ALL of the guns owned by these groups nor the people of Australia. Primarily semi automatic and pump action weapons were the targets (no pun intended) If you have a LEGITIMATE need to own a weapon (restricted type admittedly but who needs an AK47 or a Streesweeper under the bed?)there is nothing stopping you in Australia from owning a gun/rifle/shotgun.

Firearms in Australia are grouped into Categories with different levels of control. The categories are:

Category A: Rimfire rifles (not semi-automatic), shotguns (not pump-action or semi-automatic), air rifles, and paintball markers. A "Genuine Reason" must be provided for a Category A firearm.
Category B: Centrefire rifles (not semi-automatic), muzzleloading firearms made after 1 January 1901. A "Genuine Need" must be demonstrated, including why a Category A firearm would not be suitable.
Category C: Semi-automatic rimfire rifles holding 10 or fewer rounds and pump-action or semi-automatic shotguns holding 5 or fewer rounds. Category C firearms are strongly restricted: only primary producers, occupational shooters, collectors and some clay target shooters can own functional Category C firearms.
Category D: Semi-automatic centrefire rifles, pump-action or semi-automatic shotguns holding more than 5 rounds. Functional Category D firearms are restricted to government agencies and a few occupational shooters. Collectors may own deactivated Category D firearms.
Category H: Handguns including air pistols and deactivated handguns. this class is available to target shooters and farmers. To be eligible for a Category H firearm a target shooter must serve a probationary period of six months using club handguns, and a minimum number of matches yearly to retain each category of handgun.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Australia
 
nioka said:
He was such a gun nut that he disarmed the honest people and left gun ownership to illegal gun ownership of the crims.
Click to expand...
That's just not true, and you know it. Emotive nonsense. Trainspotter has corrected your statement appropriately.
 
nioka said:
Gun nuts? The biggest gun nut we have had in this country was John Howard. Did you put him last. He was such a gun nut that he disarmed the honest people and left gun ownership to illegal gun ownership of the crims. Now that was a nutty thing to do.
Click to expand...
That was the best thing he ever did. Why oh why would anyone need to own a AK47 or similar for gods sake? Ridiculous, we don't need to go down the same route as the USA or even worse South Africa. I remember a redneck from Gympie on TV doing the Nazi Goose step March callin John Howard Jack Boot Johny. Is that the kind of moron you think should have arms?
 
So_Cynical said:
That statement speaks volumes....i used to spend 20 minutes filling out the senate forms just to put her and one nation last, hell i was putting crazy Christians and gun nuts in front of her.
Click to expand...

yeah and your statement speaks volumes too #$%$%%$wit, the shooters & fishers party represents responsible law abiding people who choose to participate in recreational shooting (be it target, long arm, clays or hunting) or fishing... both are legal activities and as such are quite entitled to representation, your pathetic attempt to smear these people with your self righteous & derogatory 'gun nuts' statement shows your true character perfectly!
 
Julia said:
That's just not true, and you know it. Emotive nonsense. Trainspotter has corrected your statement appropriately.
Click to expand...

im sorry to correct you but that statement was true, law abiding people handed in firearms that had been perfectly legal til john howard led govt decided to make them illegal HOWEVER criminals do not hand in, nor register their weapons

(i can image the bank robber going to register his saw off shotgun... cop:"what genuine reason do you need this firearm for?" crim:"need it to do over the ANZ this arvo")

anyhow check the beaurea of statistics... gun crime is up.. why? crims have guns, always have always will...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
The Australian Human Rights Commission: A national disgrace
3 4 5
Replies
85
Views
15K
Tisme
Kevin Rudd for PM
27 28 29
Replies
576
Views
62K
drsmith
N
Turnbull for PM
8 9 10
Replies
181
Views
25K
sptrawler
R
The American use of War Pretext Incidents
Replies
6
Views
9K
sptrawler
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...