The NEXT coming Oz election thread!

Australia has lost its moral compass under Howard's rule
Paul Keating
November 22, 2007/the AGE



Without this, the nation has no standard to rely upon, no claim that can be believed, not even when the grave step of going to war is being considered. When truth is up for grabs, everything is up for grabs.

Cynicism and deceitfulness have been the defining characteristics of John Howard and his Government.John Howard took us into the disastrous Gulf war on the back of two lies. One, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, capable of threatening the Middle East and Western Europe; the other, that Howard was judiciously weighing whether to commit Australian forces against an evolving situation. We now know he had committed our forces to the Americans all along.

If the Prime Minister cannot be believed, who in the system is to be believed?

When opposition leader in 1995, Howard told us he would restore trust in government, when at that time trust in government was not in question. He also told us he would make us more "relaxed and comfortable". Well, some relaxation and some comfort. These days, there are many parts of the world where Australians dare not go, something new for all of us.

But bad as all this is, how much worse was it for John Howard to begin the fracturing of his own community?

Think about his tacit endorsement of Hanson's racism during his first government, his WASP-divined jihad against refugees"non-core promises". Even on Medicare, contrary to his commitment, he forced each of us into private health or carry the consequences.

During the 1996 election campaign, a number of people I regard well said to me, "Oh, I think Howard will be all right"; meaning, while not progressive, he would not be reactionary or socially divisive, or opportunistically amoral. Well, Howard wasn't "all right". He has turned out to be the most divisive prime minister in Australia's history.To compound Howard's transgressions, he has run dead on the continuing obligation of structural economic changeNations get a chance to change course every now and then. When things become errant, a wise country adjusts its direction. It understands that it is being granted an appointment with history. On this coming Saturday, this country should take that opportunity by driving a stake through the dark heart of Howard's reactionary Government.

Paul Keating was prime minister of Australia from 1991 to 1996.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/australia-has-lost-its-moral-compass-under-howards-rule/2007/11/21/1195321862029.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

Voting is compulsory

http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2955163#2955163

You think that a change of govt will restore our moral basis?

It is my opinion that govt's encourage people to sue each other for vast sums of money....this breeds fear of helping others, for fear of being sued. It breeds fear of anyone not your friend in any hazardous situation...it makes people suspicious...suspicious people are easier to lie to, and are easier to control. It breaks down peoples sense of community, and individuals are easier to sway and control than is a community.

They appear to encourage civil liberties (which should properly be known as individual rights) at the expense of community rights, further breaking down societies sense of community.

It is my opinion that when govt's teach children their 'rights' in school, they give children enough information to know that there are boundaries to be challenged but not enough information to keep them out of trouble when challenging those boundaries. The teaching of rights give them a great sense of individuality, without the necessary complimentary sense of community and responsibility to the community.

...anyway, you get the idea...

...it is my opinion that important parts of the moral compass remain purposefully broken by govt.

I think that much that we valued in this country, such as a tolerance, compassion & "a fair go" has been severely undermined during the past 11 years.

No, I don't believe that decency can necessarily be "restored" simply by the installation of another government. But I want to see the last of the government that was responsible for systematically undermining integrity & fairness in this country. That's a start.

Too close to call: latest poll
November 23, 2007 - 4:24PM/SMH

The Coalition believes it is coming home with a wet sail after a second poll has shown it could win tomorrow's election.

The Newspoll, released today, finds Labor's lead has been hacked back in the final week and it is now leading by 52 per cent to 48 per cent.

Labor scored 47 of the two-party vote at the last election and needs a swing of almost 5 per cent to net the 16 seats it needs to form government.
This would require a minimum result of 52 per cent.

Consequently, if the Newspoll is correct, tomorrow's result is too close to call.

John Howard, campaigning through Queensland today, said he sensed victory..........


The Labor leader Kevin Rudd said again today that whoever won the election would do so only by a nose.

A Galaxy Poll published in today's News Ltd tabloids showed the same result as Newspoll.

The Herald/Nielsen poll published today found that, as of Wednesday night, Labor led the Coalition in the primary vote by 48 per cent to 40 per cent.

Depending on how preferences were allocated, this gave Labor a two-party-preferred figure of between 55 per cent and 57 per cent, enough for an emphatic win if replicated tomorrow.

The four Herald polls conducted during the campaign have canvassed 6138 voters and show on average Labor leading by 55 per cent to 45 percent, a swing of almost 8 percentage points since the 2004 election.

With AAP

http://www.smh.com.au/news/federal-election-2007-news/too-close-to-call-latest-poll/2007/11/23/1195753279860.html

...Erm, MsOlga

24 hours? (nothing to do with Tulsa). Or is that just pertaining to advertising.

Sorry, please explain, dadpad.

It's late & I'm kinda confused. :wink:

I thought there was a moratorium on electioneering 24 hours prior to elections. Ijust thought your informative cutting and pasting may be contravening the rules

It may be applicable only to advertising though.

Are you kidding, dadpad?

I mean the papers responsible for the articles are still posting them ....

... & there are still political ads. Like this ALP one on the front page of the Australian:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/

Ah! advertising not allowed
From a 2006 article

Victorian politicians find election advertising loophole
PM - Thursday, 23 November , 2006 21:13:22
Reporter: Samantha Donovan
MARK COLVIN: With the Victorian election less than two days away, the black-out on campaign advertising started in that state last night.

But Victorian political parties have found a way around the federal legislation that bans TV and radio advertising from the Wednesday night before an election.

They're taking to the web and running their ads on the video website YouTube.

It may be one loophole legislators can't close.

I notice that the AGE & the SMH don't appear to have any ads on their sites anymore. Thank god! The barrage of crude Lib scare ads on the SMH site was mind boggling!

However there were Ads in todays morning paper. I better shut up until I find the proper rules.

.... & the Hun is still at it!:

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/

OK. Bed time. (1:35 am)

Night night!

And don't forget to vote, willya!

Fair enough :wink:

Overture
light the lights.
This is it,
the night of nights.

I have actually been following this, but without comment. Rudd, I think, will win. But that is just my guess.

Stinking Howard has had a late surge, hasn't he?


I can't stand it.

That makes two of us.