Talking Politics | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Talking Politics

rosy23 said:
I don't read your endless quotes sorry Livers. My reading time on here is limited and I prefer to read personal views rather than those of others who have the power to word an article to suit their own agenda.

I'll read the rest later but in response to your first question I don't recall who I voted for in the Vic election you mentioned. I judge things on their merits at the time rather than steadfastly stick to one party or the other. I'm more a National girl actually. I certainly didn't vote in the Beattie election in Queensland. Strange question.

I only raised Beattie as another example of someone who bailed out, without mentioning it before the election....leading the voting public to believe that they were voting HIM in and HIS policies.
Bracks/Thwaites very recent examples of it happening here in Victoria, yet you have a crack at going into the unkown with Howard bailing out....well, least you know he is bailing out, unlike these two ALP state premiers.

As for your lack of memory when it comes to who you voted for in the last state election....well, that is just a gutless answer.
Your memory has not been absent when you are declaring that you are not going to vote for the Government that brought in the GST (July 2000, 7 years ago!), and I have given you FACTS on how the ALP supported the GST until Hawke scuttled it, which you choose to turn a blind eye to.
 
Liverpool said:
As for your lack of memory when it comes to who you voted for in the last state election....well, that is just a gutless answer.

That is rubbish. :mad:

I'm not that interested in politics and vote as I see fit often on the polling day. I've also been known to get my name checked off and thrown my papers in the bin on the way out the door. What I posted is the truth and I'm gobsmacked how you can presume to know me better than I do myself.. ::)
 
rosy23 said:
Liverpool said:
As for your lack of memory when it comes to who you voted for in the last state election....well, that is just a gutless answer.

That is rubbish. :mad:

I'm not that interested in politics and vote as I see fit often on the polling day. I've also been known to get my name checked off and thrown my papers in the bin on the way out the door. What I posted is the truth and I'm gobsmacked how you can presume to know me better than I do myself.. ::)

If that is the case, you may have voted for Howard the last 4 elections and just can't remember that you did? ;D
 
evo said:
Six Pack said:
Crikey, I thought we'd already worked this out. I'll be voting for the local Greens candidate.

I was going to vote for Labor for the first time ever in this election but they proven to have very little substance and continually sought to remain a small target.

For years they've complained vehemently against privatisation,workchoices,GST,our presence in Iraq etc. yet given ample opportunity this year have exhibited no intention to change these things if they win the election.

Can you please explain what you mean by "little substance" - I am hearing this on the radio talk backs and am at loss as to what the person means.

In the debate last night IMO Kevin Rudd was the only one with substance - he has outlined his future plan for Australia - Educaton Revolution dove tailing into the Taxation Reforms dovetailing into an Australian wide Broadband. Further he is removing the ground troops from Iraq - he is banishing AWAs - he has defined the ALPs policy to combat climate change - he has put a stake in the sand concerning hospitals and health - he is outling his major policies to guide Australia into the future -whilst maintaining a surplus in the budget.

Whereas the current Government is having knee jerk reactions to the various policies in a hope to stem the flow of disbelief from their non-actions over the past decade on these major issues.

If anything the Government lacks substance as it has not provided a future policy for Australia on these major issues........

Or Evo maybe I am missing something - like yours and others definition of "substance" or the emotional wafflings of John Howard is really substance and the facts of Kevin Rudd's new policies are not.

What is substance in your opinion?
 
RemoteTiger said:
Can you please explain what you mean by "little substance" - I am hearing this on the radio talk backs and am at loss as to what the person means.

In the debate last night IMO Kevin Rudd was the only one with substance - he has outlined his future plan for Australia - Educaton Revolution dove tailing into the Taxation Reforms dovetailing into an Australian wide Broadband. Further he is removing the ground troops from Iraq - he is banishing AWAs - he has defined the ALPs policy to combat climate change - he has put a stake in the sand concerning hospitals and health - he is outling his major policies to guide Australia into the future -whilst maintaining a surplus in the budget.

Whereas the current Government is having knee jerk reactions to the various policies in a hope to stem the flow of disbelief from their non-actions over the past decade on these major issues.

If anything the Government lacks substance as it has not provided a future policy for Australia on these major issues........

Or Evo maybe I am missing something - like yours and others definition of "substance" or the emotional wafflings of John Howard is really substance and the facts of Kevin Rudd's new policies are not.

What is substance in your opinion?

Ah - you see RT, Labor isn't in power, so it's plans have no substance. They're just plans. Whereas the Liberals have been in power, so whatever they do has had substance. Therefore you must vote Liberals. Simple really.
 
RemoteTiger said:
In the debate last night IMO Kevin Rudd was the only one with substance - he has outlined his future plan for Australia - Educaton Revolution dove tailing into the Taxation Reforms dovetailing into an Australian wide Broadband. Further he is removing the ground troops from Iraq - he is banishing AWAs - he has defined the ALPs policy to combat climate change - he has put a stake in the sand concerning hospitals and health - he is outling his major policies to guide Australia into the future -whilst maintaining a surplus in the budget.

* Education Revolution?
Let me guess.....give the kid a laptop with an ALP homepage, teach him to read on "www.liberal.org.au", on how to run a good national economy and you have your 'educational revolution'. ;D
Rudd today announced the slogan for his 'educational revolution'...he called it his "toolbox for the 21st century" and this is right up there with "no child will live in poverty by 1990" and Mark Latham's "climbing the ladder of opportunity'.... :rofl
Gimme a break!

* Tax Reforms?
That wouldn't be the tax reform that was 91.5% copied from the Libs one, would it? ::)
As Costello said...if we were in school, the ALP would have failed their test due to plagiarism.

* Iraq?
He is sitting on the fence on this one.
If he was fair dinkum about getting the troops out of there, he would bring them ALL home...but no...he is leaving all the support teams and aircraft/ships over there to continue their duties, and only bringing the combat troops home.
Gutless....he wants to appease the 'anti war' lobby, but hasn't got the balls to go the whole way.
And this is also contradictory to his gaffe:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/its-off-to-war-we-go--oops-no-we-dont/2007/06/07/1181089238478.html

* Banishing AWAs?
We'll see...but hey, with 70% union officials on board, there'll be too many strikes to worry about who is on what agreement anyway. ;)

* Climate change?
If we had signed Kyoto as Rudd is declaring he will do, then we would be punishing our own businesses and economy, because the USA and China have NOT signed it. Rudd saying that these two superpowers didn't sign it because we haven't signed it also, is a load of crap.
Howard is doing EXACTLY the right thing by waiting until we have an international agreement where ALL countries are involved....not just signing this soft Kyoto one, where the only things that will suffer are the still high gas emissions because the largest causes for this have NOt signed the agreement, and the Australian economy.
Also, Rudd is rushing around promising targets for 2050...yet has not looked at the goals we need to reach between now and 2050, and more importantly, the economic impact this will have on OUR economy, due to the more expensive 'cleaner' technology we would have to use to reach these goals.
The Government are looking at the economic impact and doing it properly, not just half-arsed targets and pie int he sky figures that Rudd is carrying on with.
Also, the Government have said that will aid people who may struggle due to the rise in costs because we will be using cleaner technologies...what has the ALP got for these low income families?
Nothing!
And people go on about the ALP looking after the working class families and the Libs losing touch.....open the other eye mate, you might see the whole picture next time.
 
Six Pack said:
You didn't get to play with the worm then Livers?

The worm was even more garbage considering the worm went up before Rudd even opened his mouth. :help
That's why I watched the Sky version for the night, so I didn't have to put up with Red-Rag Ray hosting the Channel-9 version with his stacked audience of ALP voters all pushing their red button as soon as their messiah came onto the TV screen.
 
Liverpool said:
Six Pack said:
You didn't get to play with the worm then Livers?

The worm was even more garbage considering the worm went up before Rudd even opened his mouth. :help
That's why I watched the Sky version for the night, so I didn't have to put up with Red-Rag Ray hosting the Channel-9 version with his stacked audience of ALP voters all pushing their red button as soon as their messiah came onto the TV screen.

Gee, little ol' Ray has always been one of howard's favorites. What's changed?
 
Six Pack said:
Gee, little ol' Ray has always been one of howard's favorites. What's changed?

Stop talking crap SixPack....Ray as well as Laurie Oakes are ALP all the way.
 
Liverpool said:
Six Pack said:
Gee, little ol' Ray has always been one of howard's favorites. What's changed?

Stop talking crap SixPack....Ray as well as Laurie Oakes are ALP all the way.

Settle down big fella, it's no secret that Howard thinks the world of Ray Martin.
 
Liverpool said:
Six Pack said:
You didn't get to play with the worm then Livers?

The worm was even more garbage considering the worm went up before Rudd even opened his mouth. :help
That's why I watched the Sky version for the night, so I didn't have to put up with Red-Rag Ray hosting the Channel-9 version with his stacked audience of ALP voters all pushing their red button as soon as their messiah came onto the TV screen.

Clearly our exalted leaders perfidy has reached an extent that his very appearance induces nausea in the audience, to the extent that Rudd's blandness comes as a huge relief. I've observed this reaction to the eyebrowed one myself for a decade or so.
 
RemoteTiger said:
Can you please explain what you mean by "little substance" - I am hearing this on the radio talk backs and am at loss as to what the person means.

In the debate last night IMO Kevin Rudd was the only one with substance - he has outlined his future plan for Australia - Educaton Revolution dove tailing into the Taxation Reforms dovetailing into an Australian wide Broadband. Further he is removing the ground troops from Iraq - he is banishing AWAs - he has defined the ALPs policy to combat climate change - he has put a stake in the sand concerning hospitals and health - he is outling his major policies to guide Australia into the future -whilst maintaining a surplus in the budget.
If you think these are bold plans fair enough.

Personally I see them as plans to do a bit of tinkering around the around the edges of the conservative soon to be ex-government.

It seems to me Rudd couldn't be more firmly planted direct centre of the political spectrum and must be getting some savage splinters in his arse from all the fence sitting.In my view he has sold out the traditional left in this country for fear he might not be popular.

Whereas the current Government is having knee jerk reactions to the various policies in a hope to stem the flow of disbelief from their non-actions over the past decade on these major issues.

If anything the Government lacks substance as it has not provided a future policy for Australia on these major issues........

Or Evo maybe I am missing something - like yours and others definition of "substance" or the emotional wafflings of John Howard is really substance and the facts of Kevin Rudd's new policies are not.

What is substance in your opinion?
You seem to be laboring under the misconception that I'm a Howard supporter.Neither of the parties represent my political world view(unfortunately for me).I'm really just interested in the election from intellectual politcal science standpoint.

The thing is we already understand Howards ideology, broadly speaking.We've had 11 years of knowing where he stands on issues.

I'm interested in what Rudds ideology is.It seems to me he either doesn't have one,or is keeping it well hidden.
 
evo said:
I'm interested in what Rudds ideology is.It seems to me he either doesn't have one,or is keeping it well hidden.

It's pretty easy Evo...just use the term 'working class families' for 1,236 times in 1.5 hours....with a twist of a slogan or two....and you have your new PM.... :hihi
 
Liverpool said:
evo said:
I'm interested in what Rudds ideology is.It seems to me he either doesn't have one,or is keeping it well hidden.

It's pretty easy Evo...just use the term 'working class families' for 1,236 times in 1.5 hours....with a twist of a slogan or two....and you have your new PM.... :hihi

again you underestimate the intelligence of the Australian people, Livers.
 
evo said:
I'm interested in what Rudds ideology is.It seems to me he either doesn't have one,or is keeping it well hidden.

And in so doing is frustrating the hell out of the Coalition because they cannot target him. (Isn't that what Howard did to Keating in '96?)

Plus the splinters in the bum quote is good - like it a lot - why? Because the leader who holds the middle ground in Australian Politics generally wins the election!

Coveat - I still cannot see how Rudd can win 16 seats back from Howard in 1 election - never been done before - it would create history in Australian Politics and whilst the pundits and the bookies all agree they can see 14 seats - its those last 2 - where are they going to come from?
 
Remote, i hope that one of them is Bennelong. That would be fantastic. kiss his sorry ass goodbye!
 
RemoteTiger said:
And in so doing is frustrating the hell out of the Coalition because they cannot target him. (Isn't that what Howard did to Keating in '96?)
Plus the splinters in the bum quote is good - like it a lot - why? Because the leader who holds the middle ground in Australian Politics generally wins the election!
Coveat - I still cannot see how Rudd can win 16 seats back from Howard in 1 election - never been done before - it would create history in Australian Politics and whilst the pundits and the bookies all agree they can see 14 seats - its those last 2 - where are they going to come from?

Remote,
Constant agreeing for making himself a smaller target and sitting on the fence is NOT good.
If Rudd is agreeing with what he thinks is bad policy, it means that he would be stuck with that policy (unless he broke promises here, there and everywhere) and also that he is not confident or strong enough to argue what he thinks is a better line.
Is this who you want as PM?
And stop understating Rudd as some sort of underdog....he isn't, and is clear favourite to win, and will win (unfortunately).
 
RemoteTiger said:
Coveat - I still cannot see how Rudd can win 16 seats back from Howard in 1 election - never been done before - it would create history in Australian Politics and whilst the pundits and the bookies all agree they can see 14 seats - its those last 2 - where are they going to come from?

Yeah, I tend to agree. He's proved to be a slippery customer in the past too.