The NEXT coming Oz election thread!

hingehead wrote:

msolga wrote:
Streuth! Labor is surely not even considering doing preferential deals with Family First after the stuff up last time? What are they thinking? That's it! I'm voting Greens in the Senate. And I hope they hold the balance of power! Now that would make things very interesting!

Me too. Mrs Hinge won't though - she doesn't want any possibility that the libs could still control the senate.

And it would be nice to have another Tasmanian feather duster holding the reigns of senate, although being Tasmanian is about the only thing Bob Brown and Brian Harridine have in common.

A few pro-Greens, pro-left causes, Tasmanian (& other) feather dusters would be even better, hinge! Very Happy

Keeping the bastards honest, along the lines of what the Democrats used to try try to do, before Meg & her (GST) deal with the Libs! I mean it's healthy to have alternative voices in parliament to the two (conservative) mainstream parties!

0 Replies

They're at it again! When will the US learn to keep it's nose out of Oz politics? (Remember the last election & the US ambassador to Oz criticizing Mark Latham's intention to with draw Australian troops from Iraq "by Christmas"?) Now we have Bush sticking his nose in! And one wonders what pearls he'll bestow on us while in Sydney for the APEC conference. From this morning's AGE editorial.:

....Despite Mr Bush's comment yesterday that he was not "going to get involved in your election down there", he has done so. It would be naive of the President to think that any comment he makes would not be the subject of inference. Almost in the same breath that he declares no interest in getting involved, Mr Bush offers the observation that "John Howard has been behind in the polls before and he's won, so certainly I'm not going to prejudge the decision of the Australian people".

Conversely, neither is the President going to offer an opinion on the Opposition Leader, Kevin Rudd, saying "he doesn't know me and I don't him". This is true, up to a point. When pressed on if he could work with a Labor government that has said it will withdraw Australian forces from Iraq, Mr Bush replied: "I refuse to accept your hypothesis. You're asking me a hypothetical." It is actually not clear to which hypothesis Mr Bush was referring: Mr Rudd winning or an Australian troop withdrawal. ....

But will Bushes warm endorsement of his "man of steel" sway any Australians to change their vote to JH & the Libs? It's hard to know. But this might give the US president & his Oz crony some indications of how the "alliance" between the leaders of the two countries is viewed these days.:

....While Mr Bush undoubtedly will receive a warm welcome from Mr Howard, the view of Australians to his visit will be less sanguine. The annual poll by the independent think tank, the Lowy Institute for International Policy, released this week, showed that more than two-thirds of respondents had an unfavourable view of the US because of Mr Bush. This low opinion was caused for the vast majority because of American foreign policy.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/editorial/rudd-bushwhacked-by-man-of-steel-remark/2007/08/31/1188067362691.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

0 Replies

To his credit, Kevin Rudd has responded with a bit of integrity on this one. He'd be cutting his own throat by responding an any other way, surely?:

Rudd rebuffs Bush on Iraq
Michelle Grattan, Adam Morton and Brendan Nicholson
September 1, 2007/the AGEBush on Iraq

OPPOSITION Leader Kevin Rudd has rebuffed US President George Bush's intervention in domestic politics by refusing to bend on the ALP's commitment to pull troops out of Iraq.

In pointed remarks before his Australian visit, President Bush told reporters he would tell Mr Rudd that an early withdrawal of Australian troops would be disastrous. He said the decision should be made on the basis of conditions on the ground, claiming there were strong signs the US was making headway.

"I'm going to remind him that, one, the stakes in Iraq are very high for peace; that the liberation of a country (and) Iraqi-style democracy in the heart of the Middle East is part of winning this ideological struggle," he said in an interview with journalists from the region.

"And I'll remind him that, as far as I'm concerned, leaving Iraq before the job is done will cause an enemy that attacked us before to become emboldened." ...<cont>

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/bush-tests-rudds-mettle/2007/08/31/1188067367967.html

0 Replies

Another Howard intervention. Just as Turnbull is showing doubts & Peter Garrett has finally (sort of!) found his voice on the issue. The leader story from today's Australian.:

Mill will be built: Howard
Matthew Denholm
September 01, 2007/the AUSTRALIAN

JOHN Howard has dramatically intervened in the Tasmanian pulp mill debate to reassure the timber industry that the $2 billion project "can and will be built".

The statement appeared to pre-empt the decision of Environment Minister Malcolm Turnbull and came as sources told The Weekend Australian the Prime Minister was among senior Liberals pushing Mr Turnbull to approve the mill quickly.

Instead, Mr Turnbull -- under pressure from an anti-mill campaign in his marginal Sydney seat of Wentworth -- has expressed "grave concerns" about the massive Gunns project, and has extended his assessment by six weeks to seek the opinion of Chief Scientist Jim Peacock.

Mr Turnbull has even said he is "not unsympathetic" to calls to relocate the mill from the Tamar Valley wine and tourism region, in the marginal seat of Bass, to a less sensitive site.

There appear to be growing tensions within the Coalition on the issue, as federal Labor for the first time yesterday promised to impose new restrictions on the mill, including greater use of plantation timber.

But as federal Labor environment spokesman Peter Garrett was toughening Labor's stance, Mr Howard made it clear he wanted the mill built. .... <cont>

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22343218-601,00.html

0 Replies

Commentary from the cartoonists on this Saturday morning:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,5635358,00.jpg

Sad, hey?

0 Replies

It'd be funny if it wasn't so downright scary. OK, hands up which politician wants a nuclear plant in their electorate?:

http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2007/08/31/0109_op_alanmoir_gallery__470x331,0.jpg

0 Replies

Tandberg on the nature of the relationship between the man of steel & his very best mate.:

http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2007/08/31/svCARTOON_gallery__470x379.jpg

0 Replies

Yesterday's Leunig.:

http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2007/08/31/svCARTOON_gallery__470x332.jpg

0 Replies

Who'd want to be in Sydney's CBD during the APEC conference (& Bush's visit to OZ)?:

Police, protesters on collision course
Sian Powell and Sarah Elks
September 01, 2007/the aUSTRALIAN

SYDNEY is braced for an unprecedented security clampdown as it prepares for APEC but a clash between protesters and police now appears inevitable.

The Stop Bush Coalition has refused to back away from a protest march route through a "declared zone" north of King Street in Sydney's CBD -- an area where special security powers will be in place -- while police have been equally firm in their intention to block the marchers.

Police have also contacted key players in the protest movement to tell them to stay away from thezone.

But coalition spokesman Alex Bainbridge yesterday said he would not rule out "civil disobedience" if the marchers were stopped at the border of the declared zone.

Some protest groups -- including Arterial Bloc -- have used violence at past protests, including the G20 summit in Melbourne last year.

Police insist they will continue to negotiate with the coalition on the march route, but the protesters believe they are being strung along. They insist their route through the CBD is reasonable because it stays clears of venues hosting APEC meetings.

"It's very serious, banning a march in a public place," Mr Bainbridge said. "We are aiming to embarrass the Government. We are aiming to put political pressure on the Government to change its policies." ...<cont>

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22343488-16953,00.html

0 Replies

msolga wrote:

... Keeping the bastards honest, along the lines of what the Democrats used to try try to do, before Meg & her (GST) deal with the Libs! I mean it's healthy to have alternative voices in parliament to the two (conservative) mainstream parties!

'Keeping the bastards honest'. You forgot to mention the sterling efforts undertaken by the Democrats' leader, Cheryl Kernot -

(from Wikipedia)
....(Labor frontbencher and Opposition Treasurer, Gareth) Evans conducted a long-running extra-marital affair with then-fellow politician Cheryl Kernot. At first Kernot was leader of the Democrats but spectacularly defected to join Evan's Australian Labor Party in 1997. While this affair was reportedly well known within Canberra political circles, it was kept an insider-secret from the public until reported in 2002 by Laurie Oakes in his Bulletin magazine column.

That's keeping them honest! Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

Well, I'm certain she won't be the first or last politician to besmirch their political standing through lurve, lezzles. :wink: Say nothing of those who've indulged the odd affair or 3, or many more ... :wink: Strange & unfair, I think, that many of the men who've indulged in similar amorous activities escaped such a throrough roasting by the media, though. But I agree, she did neither herself nor her party any favours by actually defecting to the party of her love interest! However, I see this a little differently to cold bloodidly forging an alliance with Howard & the Liberals over the incredibly unpopular GST (within the Democrats' ranks & the general population) though.

0 Replies

msolga wrote:

bungie wrote:
kevin needs to be careful he doesn't do a hewson ... lose an un-loseable election. Me thinks he is on the right path.
In trying to be seen to be balanced, he is tilting too far the other way

.... or lose previously un-losable Labor supporters. Where else has the left to go but green?

That pretty much sums it up msolga. I lot of people I work with have taken the same view now. We were hoping for a bit of justice for the wage earner, but all we will get is more of the same no matter who wins the election. Bob Brown seems to care more for the worker than k & j. What ever happens, bonzai has to go and k & j need to get back to their grass roots base.

0 Replies

msolga wrote:

Who'd want to be in Sydney's CBD during the APEC conference (& Bush's visit to OZ)?:

It does beggar belief - why wouldn't they hold it Canberra where a lock down is super simple and bothers no-one (except the odd kangaroo). Bizarre.

0 Replies

bungie wrote:

msolga wrote:
bungie wrote:
kevin needs to be careful he doesn't do a hewson ... lose an un-loseable election. Me thinks he is on the right path.
In trying to be seen to be balanced, he is tilting too far the other way

.... or lose previously un-losable Labor supporters. Where else has the left to go but green?

That pretty much sums it up msolga. I lot of people I work with have taken the same view now. We were hoping for a bit of justice for the wage earner, but all we will get is more of the same no matter who wins the election. Bob Brown seems to care more for the worker than k & jo. What ever happens, bonzai has to go and k & j need to get back to their grass roots base.

Hi bungie

Actually, I'm not so confident that Kevin07 ever had a "grassroots base", or an understanding of what that means - & that's a big part of the current problem, as I see it. He's much more the beaurocrat/international affairs specialist. Perhaps a crash course in Labor history (including "the light on the hill" & what it means to the grassroots) would not go astray. :wink:
I think Julia knows what's what, but is kept well in check by the party minders & heavies. (the same ones who are now considering possible preference deals with the likes of Family first). She must feel rather like a ventriloquist's doll at the moment. Rolling Eyes

To a long term Labor supporter/fellow traveller like me (I've never been a member. My primary loyalty was always to trade unionism. But I'm losing faith in many of the union leaders, too. Another story.) it is quite incredible that business interests hold more sway with the current Labor "leaders" than the interests of the party's traditional support base. No, I'm not suggesting "class warfare" as a way to go. Rolling Eyes

, I mean Labor knowing which side it's on & supporting it in a positive way. Kevin07 seems to find workers & their representatives rather unpalatable ... or something? Confused

0 Replies

Apparently Beazles let the obligatory 'drovers dog' statement out recently... 'I coodabeen a contender!'

0 Replies

hingehead wrote:

Apparently Beazles let the obligatory 'drovers dog' statement out recently... 'I coodabeen a contender!'

Really?
You know, if he waffled less & did a lot more slog work within the party (policy, I mean) he coulda been a contender!

0 Replies

How many elections did Howard lose? Beazley as lazarus with a triple bypass?

0 Replies

That was the problem with Beazles. He was rather slack & got by by saying all the right things. But policy? Not big on that. And this was at a time that Labor didn't/still doesn't mean just workers' rights. All sorts of critical issues, like the environment, education, health, protection of the disadvantaged, etc, etc, etc ... No policy/no viable position. He blew it. Gas-bagging all the way to the end! Now we have a hard worker with absolutely no affinity with those concerns & what they mean for ordinary Australians. Because he does not identitfy with those concerns. Look at how his wife made his family wealth, for starters. Off the back of Howard screwing & privatising Centrelink.

0 Replies

hingehead wrote:

How many elections did Howard lose? Beazley as lazarus with a triple bypass?

Gosh, I'm not certain. Quite a few. But he was always less "salubrious" an option to the establishment, born to rule, Libs. A bit of a Thatcher, if you like. Actually she was his hero & role model. Explains a lot, yes? Rolling Eyes

Beazles again? No. Absolutely not. He hasn't the stamina or the stomach for the current Labor deal. It's too ruthless & ugly.

0 Replies

msolga wrote:

Look at how his wife made his family wealth, for starters. Off the back of Howard screwing & privatising Centrelink.

Whoops! I actually meant the privatisation of a chunk of the services of the CES (the Commonwealth Employment Service) leading to the creation of Centrelink & all those useless "providers" (like Kevin's wife's company)

0 Replies

The NEXT coming Oz election thread!

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know