well i wonder what indonesia would do if the boats were heading in the other direction??

i think the problem needs to be addressed at the source, not on the sea's.....but in any case the way it's being handled now is worse......

I think the way it's currently being handled is completely unecessary and inhumane, I can't say that it's worse than turning unseaworthy boats around though.

in any case hardly a reason to ignore a party when the existing arrangement is far from acceptable

I don't understand what you mean.

Well basically if that's the only or biggest reason why your happy to keep a grossly incompetent government asleep at the wheel, racking up $100 million worth of debt per DAY,

no worries...hope you sleep well at night............

If you have a better solution for processing asylum seekers who arrive by boat without papers than having people go through and check up on them, id like to hear it.

I can see why politicians use simple phrases over and over ad nauseum.

Sometimes the cure really is worse than the disease.

Notor has a point in a sense though. Im not voting LNP is Abbott is in charge. He just doesnt have a clue when it comes to running a country. If LNP change him and depending on who it is, then the whole picture will change drastically.

Can you please explain what evidence you have on Abbott's capabilities as Prime Minister? How exactly do you or anyone know what kind of Prime Minister he would be?
If all you have is predictions, there here's one: Abbott would be a better PM than Gillard.

His boat comments, his comments about how Australia should be run. his policies..........


do you pay attention to him at all??

do you pay attention to how Gillard is running the country into the ground?? the lies?? the waste?? the incompetence??

yes i do, ive already said of my hate for Gillard, but my hate for Abbott is more.

Just look at all the newspolls. LNP is preferred but Gillard is preferred.

Honestly, I'm not a fan of discussing politics because it seems everybody gets so riled up, so I'm just going to put it out there.

I don't care who you vote for, and why, but anyone who is actually against a pro-environment (The Greens) organisation is a fucking moron. The idiocy that must possess someone to actually not give a shit about future generations is remarkable - And honestly, it's actually sad that 99% of you guys are Liberal voters. All for mass capitalism and privatisation. Business before life, it's actually sickening.

That's not to say I vote for the Greens, but there is a difference between abstaining support and purposefully opposing.

Edited by Draupnir: 27/3/2012 11:33:01 AM

it's a falacy that the greens are actually an enviromentally orientated party.....

and liberal aren't for mass capitalism and privatisation......pretty sure if you check labors record you would find that anna bligh and the deposed NSW labor government have done very well at selling state assets......



[youtube]WH_MBwQhGgA[/youtube]


which one are you in the video????

PM adopts Howard 'trust me' line

March 27, 2012

A DEFIANT Julia Gillard says she is happy to face the voters on her Achilles heel issue of ''trust'', asking people who they trust on the economy.

With comparisons being drawn between the Queensland voters' rout of Anna Bligh after a breach of trust and the public's distrust of her, Ms Gillard told a news conference in Seoul: ''I'm happy now, and in the 2013 election, to say, who do you trust to manage the economy in the interests of working people?

''Who do you trust to understand the needs of the future and the building of that future economy? Who do you trust to spread the benefits of the mining boom to make sure they are shared by all Australians? Who do you trust to improve your local schools and local hospitals?''

Comparisons are being drawn over the public's mistrust of the PM and ex-Queensland premier Anna Bligh.

Her ''trust'' line reprises that of John Howard in the 2004 election: He turned back Labor's attack on him over trust by launching his election pitch on who could be ''trusted'' on economic matters.

Ms Gillard, who at the weekend issued only a brief statement on the devastating Labor defeat, said yesterday it was ''a deep, deep disappointment'' to her, admitting its dimension took her by surprise.

She distanced herself from the result - she did no campaigning except attend the launch - saying the election was overwhelmingly on state issues and there was a major ''it's time'' factor.

''The people of Queensland have not only spoken a message to Queensland Labor, indeed they've shouted it, and that message needs to be respected.''

She understood people would discuss the federal implications: since becoming PM she had never underestimated the challenges for federal Labor and ''I don't underestimate it now''. Labor had a lot of hard work to do for the people of Queensland.

While she insisted she had meant it when she said before the election that there would be no carbon tax, she ruled out any modifications to the tax, which comes in on July 1.

Federal Opposition Leader Tony Abbott played down predictions that he was home and hosed after the Queensland result, saying there was ''no such thing as a sure thing in politics''. It might be 18 months to the election and all sorts of things could happen in that time.

He said Ms Gillard should be taking a long hard look at herself, her government and her party, and listen to the Australian people. ''If the Prime Minister's got wax in her ears, well, she'll pay the consequences.''

The result ''certainly is a verdict on governments that don't tell the truth'', Mr Abbott said.

Stressing he would keep his promise to repeal the carbon tax, he said ''the first discussion that I would have with the public service, should I become the prime minister, would be to prepare the carbon tax repeal legislation …

''I have got the message loud and clear … in New South Wales, in Queensland, in Victoria and right around Australia: if you make a commitment you have to keep it.''

Acting PM Wayne Swan backed Ms Gillard on trust, saying there was ''a clear choice on offer when it comes to economic management''.


Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/pm-adopts-howard-trust-me-line-20120326-1vuov.html#ixzz1qHI6Q2Ll

How can you say you dont know what kind of PM he will be. He speaks now as the opposition on his policies and ideas, is that not an indication.

Its like a manager who applies for a job and says, "Ill play defensive and not look to attack" and then everyone says, we cant judge him because he hasnt coached and we dont know if he has good ideas.

Fact is no one can say what kind of PM Abbott will be because he's not been given the chance.

No-one can say whether I'd be a good PM or not. I think I should be given the chance.

No-one can say whether I'd be a good PM or not. I think I should be given the chance.

Firstly, as Opposition Leader, it's his job to be negative about the government. I don't know why that surprises people.
Second, if you are going to go with the football manager analogy, doesn't everyone say about manager 'give them time to develop their own style with the players they want'. Even in football, no one knows how the manager will go til he's in the job. See Durakovic, M.

This is what i hate, its not the opposition leaders job to disagree with everything. Even when Labour agrees with the LNP, Abbott will find something to say in contrast so they can disagree again.

Hahaha, no, I gave you an example of a manager who will mess up and fuck up everything and is saying that they will do it too, and you still say give him a chance. People say give the manager a chance if you can actually see that he is trying something good, not trying to fuck up everything.

If you get more than 50% of the popular vote, I'd agree to you being PM as well.