Queenslanders are stupid, they want a conservative government because they "don't like that Labor bitch" then they complain when they cut everything. What did they expect?

I can see it now, Tony Abbot's cycle of blame will be: Labor, unions, immigrants, benefit scroungers, poor people, disabled people, old people, young people... everyone but the big business donors...

Want to know how I know that? Just look at David Cameron and co. Tax cuts for the millionaires, austerity for the poor. "We're all in it together", the Tories and their donors I mean.

I think a lot is made of our "booming" economy, most of it rubbish. Maybe it's just the Gold Coast struggling as a result of the strong Aussie dollar and failing tourist industry, it certainly feels like a two-speed economy here. Either way, I don't see how cutting everything to create a surplus for a few political brownie points is going to help anyone.

Read the article, and found it, while rather up its own arse, to be largely on the money.

People have stopped listening to Labor, and most can't wait to boot them out. Spinning Julia Gillard as a tough nut with balls of steel and garnering a measure of respect for her that way could just about be their only hope.

Queenslanders are stupid, they want a conservative government because they "don't like that Labor bitch" then they complain when they cut everything. What did they expect?

I can see it now, Tony Abbot's cycle of blame will be: Labor, unions, immigrants, benefit scroungers, poor people, disabled people, old people, young people... everyone but the big business donors...

Want to know how I know that? Just look at David Cameron and co. Tax cuts for the millionaires, austerity for the poor. "We're all in it together", the Tories and their donors I mean.

I think a lot is made of our "booming" economy, most of it rubbish. Maybe it's just the Gold Coast struggling as a result of the strong Aussie dollar and failing tourist industry, it certainly feels like a two-speed economy here. Either way, I don't see how cutting everything to create a surplus for a few political brownie points is going to help anyone.

NEWS Corporation chairman Rupert Murdoch has branded Labor's language on foreign workers as "pretty disgraceful and racist".

Speaking in Darwin today, Mr Murdoch expressed strong support for the role migration could take to meet labour requirements in developing Australia's north.

“I think the way they are talking about (457 visas) is pretty disgraceful and racist,” the media mogul told Sky News.

“But I'm a big one for encouraging immigration. Just look at America, it's just fantastic. You know, you have difficulties (with the) first generation of migrants, if there's too many people from one area. But you know, they meld in a couple of generations. It leads to tremendous creativity in the community.”

Labor has been ramping up a pre-election campaign against overseas workers, suggesting the 457 visa system has been widely rorted, allowing foreigners to take Australian jobs.


Mr Murdoch said he was excited by the prospect of developing northern Australia and believed private enterprise should play the lead role in boosting Top End investment.

He said the role of government was to provide infrastructure and incentives to encourage investment and labour to relocate to the Northern Territory.

“Right now there is no unemployment in Darwin, and how do we get people to work and come up here?

“We've got to get skilled people up from the south here, and if we still need more people, then we've got to have some migration; that's good.”

News Corporation is the parent company of News Limited, which publishes The Australian.

Julia Gillard has argued her crackdown on foreign workers is about “putting the opportunities of Australian working people first, front and centre”.

However, industry groups have criticised the campaign, saying there is no systematic rorting of the scheme and pointing to skills shortages in key occupational areas.

Opposition immigration spokesman Scott Morrison said Ms Gillard's 457 rhetoric was a “naked grab for votes and a naked pledge to the union movement which has taken control of immigration policy”.

Assistant Treasurer David Bradbury said there was “nothing racist about standing up for jobs and job opportunities for Australians”.

“What we have seen have been many examples and many instances of abuses and rorts in this area,” Mr Bradbury told reporters in Sydney.

“We think it's absolutely essential that we crack down on those rorts and those loopholes.”

POLITICIANS are prowling for votes in their electorates in the lead-up to the federal election, but good luck finding the word "Labor" in the campaign material of senior Government figures.
Labor party branding is conspicuously absent from double-sided pamphlet distributed by Federal Minister for Schools Peter Garrett this week.
Instead, campaign material describes the former Midnight Oil frontman as a “strong voice for our community” who will fight Liberal plans to slash funding to education and the local hospital.
Mr Garrett denied he was trying to disassociate himself from the Labor brand.
"Clearly no. This is one of a variety of communications I have with my electorate."
"And in fact, I note that the Leader of the Opposition communicates in a variety of ways too."
The minister said he had been a proud Labor MP for Kingsford Smith since the 2004 election, suggesting voters knew he belonged to the Labor party.
"I’ve been the Labor MP for Kingsford Smith since 2004 – and I’ve been a proud member of the federal Labor government since 2007."
"During this time I’ve been a strong voice for the community of Kingsford Smith – the flyer outlines some of my achievements."
Mr Garrett is not the only member of the Government with Labor material that does not specifically endorse the party.
Former minister for Tertiary Education Chris Bowen, who resigned from Cabinet after the failed leadership saga, last week tweeted himself campaigning in his electorate of McMahon with a bright orange sign without Labor branding.

"Everyone knows that I’m a Labor member of parliament," Mr Bowen told The Australian newspaper.
The federal Labor party is facing an uphill battle at the federal election, which will be held on September 14.
According to Newspoll, Labor's primary vote slumped five points to a disastrous 30 per cent after the leadership spill that wasn't a fortnight ago.

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/national-news/labor-mps-dumps-the-alp-branding-in-campaign-material/story-fncynjr2-1226611596295#ixzz2PNEUxIuh

I have the choice of Gillard: A useless twat in every sense of the word.

Or, Abbot: A right wing fundamentalist catholic nut job who is on the knees to the priest rather than the people.

Voting for anarchy!

It is a pity the Democrats sold their soul for political irrelevancy....they could've been the big winners in this upcoming election.

Wikileaks will be interesting, keen to see who their nsw senate candidate is...they will romp it in for victoria by the looks
The greens are screwed its fair to say...depending on how many of them are up and how strong the wikileaks candidates are nationally.
Assange is meant to be self identified as libertarian, which will work well to steal a bunch of the greens social libertarian vote. I will assume he'll leave the economic, borderline anarcho capitalist stuff alone...hoping he has been reading a bit of Rothbard at the embassy

He's views will sell out as soon as he is fighting for votes but it's been said before that the two party preferred system is not democracy.

I have the choice of Gillard: A useless twat in every sense of the word.

Or, Abbot: A right wing fundamentalist catholic nut job who is on the knees to the priest rather than the people.









Voting for anarchy!

No one decides that there will be a two party system if it happens, it happens because people vote for it.

Not entirely...the house of reps system is heavily geared toward a two party system...with the exception of strong local indies or the occasional green who can pull ahead on preferences. A five member, larger lower house electorates would mean much lower quotas to get elected and less skew to major parties. Or better yet a proportional assembly vote.

The current system reinforces two party rule as it is not proportional for lower house or even close to it...which the senate at least partly is.

Direct propotional voting is a very bad thing, problem is the nutters get a much larger portion of the seats then they otherwise would, which would have given One Nation 5% of the seats one election I believe, so the centrist parties are forced to always form minoritty government with radicals.

Let's see now...
Right wing - pretty centrist for a Tory
Fundamentalist - hardly, he's never been opposed to another faith
Catholic - yes
Nut job - by what description? Seems pretty level-headed to me, and proven as a good health minister in Howard's cabinet. So hardly missing too many marbles.
On his knees to the priest - presumably at confession, I don't see why not if that's his thing.
Does he need to be on his knees to the people? Howard wasn't and he was our greatest post-war PM. Hawke wasn't and he was one of the better ones. Did lay the tears on a bit thick though.

You're on the money about Gillard though.

Abbot: A right wing fundamentalist catholic nut job who is on the knees to the priest rather than the people.

Let's see now...
Right wing - pretty centrist for a Tory
Fundamentalist - hardly, he's never been opposed to another faith
Catholic - yes
Nut job - by what description? Seems pretty level-headed to me, and proven as a good health minister in Howard's cabinet. So hardly missing too many marbles.
On his knees to the priest - presumably at confession, I don't see why not if that's his thing.
Does he need to be on his knees to the people? Howard wasn't and he was our greatest post-war PM. Hawke wasn't and he was one of the better ones. Did lay the tears on a bit thick though.

You're on the money about Gillard though.

Holy fuck, it's scary that people actually think this is true... because I don't think you are a troll.

Why do racists and bigots think it's ok to attack someone because of their religion ?

At least super is largely untouched and not retrospective.

Why do racists and bigots think it's ok to attack someone because of their religion ?

If you earn over 100k a year in super earnings then for fucks sake you're a rich fuck that will barely miss the tax.

Edited by macktheknife: 5/4/2013 04:27:29 PM

Why do racists and bigots think it's ok to attack someone because of their religion ?

Why do racists and bigots think it's ok to attack someone because of their religion ?

Not entirely...the house of reps system is heavily geared toward a two party system...with the exception of strong local indies or the occasional green who can pull ahead on preferences. A five member, larger lower house electorates would mean much lower quotas to get elected and less skew to major parties. Or better yet a proportional assembly vote.

The current system reinforces two party rule as it is not proportional for lower house or even close to it...which the senate at least partly is.