The Australian Greens party

[sails]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

]

Having had a bit to do with Local Government in a previous life it is more often the higher up the scale wealthy (right wingers) who want their nice trees to stay put.

But it's easier if you do not know to just green bash.

Can you substantiate those statements?

 

[sails]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

Can you substantiate those statements?

Here are the links from the paragraph I posted fro Miranda Devine - I guess you didn't read them, Explod?

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/07/1052280321826.html

http://www.smh.com.au/news/miranda-...tical-kickstart/2006/11/05/1162340090516.html

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/green-ideas-must-take-blame-for-deaths-20090211-84mk.html

http://www.smh.com.au/news/miranda-...1169788740783.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/05/08/1019441520631.html

http://www.watoday.com.au/opinion/you-cant-see-the-danger-for-the-trees-20090516-b6jn.html

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/felled-by-an-invidious-green-plot-20100818-12f2r.html

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion...iend-of-the-bush/story-e6frfhqf-1226326602622

 

[explod]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

Here are the links from the paragraph I posted fro Miranda Devine - I guess you didn't read them, Explod?

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/07/1052280321826.html

http://www.smh.com.au/news/miranda-...tical-kickstart/2006/11/05/1162340090516.html

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/green-ideas-must-take-blame-for-deaths-20090211-84mk.html

http://www.smh.com.au/news/miranda-...1169788740783.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/05/08/1019441520631.html

http://www.watoday.com.au/opinion/you-cant-see-the-danger-for-the-trees-20090516-b6jn.html

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/felled-by-an-invidious-green-plot-20100818-12f2r.html

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion...iend-of-the-bush/story-e6frfhqf-1226326602622

I scanned my way all through those links and not one substantiates the activities of the Greens. Plenty of off the cuff statements and mostly from CFA members which I will get back to in a sec.

First, in no instance are the Greens in any sort of Government power. As said, easy to just off hand bash the Greens but there is no substance to it.

CFA members from my interactions from childhood till the present are more often than not blue and white collar Liberal voters. A bit like the indoctrinated Jackaroo s on the big Stations in Queensland on very few dollars to the hour working in bad conditions for wealthy graziers and on polling days demanding to only have a Country Party how to vote card. Totally programmed and no idea of seeking better conditions. Crooked ole Joe got away with it all under that paradigm.

CFA, as a plod used to meet some overenthusiastic odds and sods in that crowd. As well as the firebugs mentioned here the other day.

But how the Greens can be blamed for so much and not be in power is beyond me.

 

[drsmith]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

First, in no instance are the Greens in any sort of Government power.

The carbon tax we wern't going to have under a government Julia Gillard leads and the flow of asylum boats both suggest otherwise.

 

[explod]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

The carbon tax we wern't going to have under a government Julia Gillard leads and the flow of asylum boats both suggest otherwise.

Surely you are not suggesting that these two things are significant.

The carbon tax goes no where near far enough but at least with it though we have people thinking and debating the issue which will in turn will gradually lead to improvements and perhaps better ways to have society change in these directions.

On the boat people, little has really changed here at all. We need to let them all in and under strict supervision and put to work(as I have discussed on these threads in the past) to protect our northern borders.

 

[dutchie]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

Surely you are not suggesting that these two things are significant.

The carbon tax goes no where near far enough but at least with it though we have people thinking and debating the issue which will in turn will gradually lead to improvements and perhaps better ways to have society change in these directions.

On the boat people, little has really changed here at all. We need to let them all in and under strict supervision and put to work(as I have discussed on these threads in the past) to protect our northern borders.

explod

I see that you think that "We need to let them all in under strict supervision...."

There are are about 15 million refugees at the moment (UNHCR figures). How many of those should we let in?
All of them?
How many a year should we let in (say, x)? If more than x arrive in boats in the first month of the year, then what should we do with the ones that arrive in the following 11 months?

There are a lot of people with good intentions that offer this type of solution, but have no practical sense of what happens in the real world. I am not accusing you of being one but I would be interested in your practical implementation of "letting them all in".

 

[Happy]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

In theory especially sitting on high horse, everybody should have what they want.

In practice it is difficult (read: impossible), as proverbial blanket is too short.

 

[Smurf1976]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

But how the Greens can be blamed for so much and not be in power is beyond me.

Last time I checked, which was today, there is a Labor-Green government in Tasmania right at this moment.

This is the third time we've had the Greens sharing power. Twice with Labor and once with Liberal. This time, the Greens hold ministerial positions - they are part of the government just as Labor is part of the government.

In a broader (non-fire related) sense it could be argued that the Greens have effectively been running the place since 1983. It's a familiar story - if you can't win the argument locally then just get the Australian Government (assuming it's Labor at the time) to intervene and stop whatever they want stopped. It works politically since it's an effective means of buying votes in Sydney and Melbourne versus the relative few that could possibly be lost in Tas (given the population difference).

It's a trick that's been used numerous times. A group of concerned citizens, of which I was one, threatened to take the Australian Government to the UN back in 1995 over a denial of *any* local representation regarding a particular issue as per UN guidelines. We got our rep and the Greens lost that little debate.

I could also add that the whole country is under a degree of Green influence at present. Not in power? That's a bit like saying Coles and Woolies don't have a monopoly on supermarkets. Technically correct, but for practical purposes it may as well be.

 

[sails]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

...But how the Greens can be blamed for so much and not be in power is beyond me.

Labor manages to blame Tony Abbott for seemingly everything and yet he is not in power and doesn't even hold the balance of power like the greens...

That's really bizarre...

 

[So_Cynical]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

The carbon tax we wern't going to have under a government Julia Gillard leads and the flow of asylum boats both suggest otherwise.

Your confusing influence and power...quite common for noalition supporters.

 

[wayneL]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

Your confusing influence and power...quite common for noalition supporters.

I think you are confusing power with in power.

I clearly remember the 'government of one', when Senator Harradine virtually had the power of veto over all legislation. I also clearly remember the Australian Dumbocrats changing the face of GST.

To suggest that the Greens do not exert what power they have is naive.

You are also confusing your and you're.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

explod

I see that you think that "We need to let them all in under strict supervision...."

There are are about 15 million refugees at the moment (UNHCR figures). How many of those should we let in?
All of them?
How many a year should we let in (say, x)? If more than x arrive in boats in the first month of the year, then what should we do with the ones that arrive in the following 11 months?

There are a lot of people with good intentions that offer this type of solution, but have no practical sense of what happens in the real world. I am not accusing you of being one but I would be interested in your practical implementation of "letting them all in".

+1

gg

 

[drsmith]

Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists

Your confusing influence and power...quite common for noalition supporters.

You'll soon enough be able to share the political bunker with IF and exchange tales of woe.

 

[drsmith]

The Greens quit on Labor, Andrew Wilkie style

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...effectively-over/story-fn59niix-1226581102969

The Greens have effectively taken a Labor lifeboat and jumped in. The do however remain firmly teathered to the listing ALP vessel with a long line and don't intend to cut it until the good ship ALP finally sinks.

Their hope to be far enough away from the wash as to not be swamped themselves when Labor finally goes under having raided Labor's support base for as many votes as possible.

 

[wayneL]

Re: The Greens quit on Labor, Andrew Wilkie style

Closet communists just like the Dumbocrats. The end result will be similar once good inten tioned folk twig

 

[drsmith]

Re: The Greens quit on Labor, Andrew Wilkie style

Closet communists just like the Dumbocrats. The end result will be similar once good inten tioned folk twig

I gave up on them when they mutilated John Howard's GST. Then of course there was Natasha Stott Degoodsort. She was better suited to the Greens.

 

[sptrawler]

Re: Australian Greens discussion

It seems that Tasmania thinks it's o.k to shut down most of its industry, in the name of conservation.
But they don't like it when people point out they are a welfare state, of their own choice.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/newshome/16194422/wa-crying-poor-over-gst/

If all the states shut down viable industry, to try and make themselves look virtuous, we would end up in a real mess.
Thankfully there are people like Barnett who have the b@lls to call it as he sees it.

 

[sptrawler]

Re: The Greens quit on Labor, Andrew Wilkie style

I gave up on them when they mutilated John Howard's GST. Then of course there was Natasha Stott Degoodsort. She was better suited to the Greens.

Ah yes, the democrats, born out of Don Chipp a man with principles. We will keep the b@stards honest, nice guy, true Australian.
Then along came Cheryl Kernot, what a difference a day makes, she led them from 93 to 97, then as all good losers do, joined the Labor party. They apparently intimated she was a whinger and poor performer so they dumped her.
The highlight of her career from my memories, was the fact she snubbed Don Chipp at a democrat get together.
She didn't invite him, said we have moved on from his era, then she moved on.

Funny how history repeats, it will be happening to a couple of our current political parties soon.IMO

 

[sptrawler]

Re: The Greens quit on Labor, Andrew Wilkie style

I am really interested in seeing the swing, against or for the three independents. I think that will be more of a true reflection of how this government has performed.

 

[dutchie]

Re: The Greens quit on Labor, Andrew Wilkie style

When is a non alliance an alliance, when its a Green's non alliance.

The Greens are more stupid and hypocritical than Labor (if that's possible)!