:lol: It was never even close. People out here who are staunchly Liberal still vote for Bowen. Only time it may have been close, was with like 5% of the votes counted. McMahon was never in any real danger of falling and anyone who thought it would knows absolutely nothing about the area.

As for his 'smear' campaign. Ray King did all the hard work for him with his comments about the Burqa and his blatant lies about refugees. I mean not really smart to talk shit about migrants in a seat with a fuck tonne of migrants in it.


Edited by sydneycroatia58: 10/9/2013 09:24:30 AM

http://theantibogan.wordpress.com/2013/09/10/lnp-dirty-tricks-in-rankin-election-2013/

Agreed re migrant comments though the smear campaign was about King's police past and was shameful.

Anyway, it's all over, time for us all to move on.

Labor party politburo?

Come on mate, who'd get taken in by that? It's just a campaign ad.

Did Rusty write it?

Edited by thupercoach: 10/9/2013 09:35:17 AM

The same people that get taken about all the other asylum seeker scaremongering - a significant portion of the community. How many people forward those little chain emails that claims Asylum Seekers are being paid more in welfare than pensioners, despite it being broadcast loud and clear as false?

Regardless, whether people actually get taken by it or not is really besides the point. It's fucking disgraceful, and I hope the person that did it gets caught and goes to prison for a long time.

Agreed on both counts.

A prison sentence for that?

Umm... Ok...:shock:

Should be more than 6 months really.

Don't know if it's been mentioned but Labor's Chris Hayes actually had a 9.5% swing TO him in Fowler :lol:

Jokes aside, there some very capable Labor MPs out there doing a good job for their electorates so I'm not that surprised.

In the context of the election though it's the equivalent of saying that we lost 5-1 but had more corners in the second half.

How the hell does the carbon tax pertain to building materials any more than any other element of society?

On second thought, don't bother answering that as I have no doubt the response will be puerile.

Sorry if I've missed it, but how has there not been made more of the fact that Abbott wants to make Racial Discrimination completely fine?

The hun makes me :lol: they want an overhaul because the motor enthusiasts party won a senate seat . Abbott wants a senate enquires into said matter so partyies honest views of the people .

How has he done that?

They make a fair point. The guy representing that party is a dud cunt and the fact that he gets paid some $1.2m over his tenure is a joke.

Wants to repeal section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act.



http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2013C00013/Html/Text#_Toc345324323

And it begins:


[youtube]V8oJjIHIpgA[/youtube]

Steve Bracks's sacking from the NY consul general post looks like Coalition vindictiveness

IAN MCPHEDRAN NEWS LIMITED NETWORK SEPTEMBER 10, 2013 10:17AM

THE new Abbott Government has not even been sworn in but its nasty side is already on show with the sacking of New York Consul General in waiting former Victorian Labor Premier Steve Bracks.

Foreign Minister-elect Julie Bishop's first act as Australia's chief diplomat was to order her departmental head Peter Varghese to call Bracks and tell him that his appointment to the plum diplomatic post had been revoked.

Bracks was given the job in May by the former Gillard Government before it entered the caretaker period for the September election.

The coalition expressed anger at the time, particularly over the lack of consultation, but given Labor's record of appointing and keeping former Coalition politicians in diplomatic postings Bracks was entitled to believe his job was secure. He began in the role in August with high-level briefings in Canberra.

The fact that Labor had left ex-Howard Government minister Amanda Vanstone in Rome and had appointed two former senior coalition politicians, Tim Fischer (the Vatican) and Brendan Nelson (Brussels) to prominent diplomatic jobs, clearly counts for nothing.

Attorney General-elect George Brandis explained the Bracks decision away in typical lofty language saying that his credentials for the New York job "were not obvious to us".

It is doubtful that a non-Italian speaking Amanda Vanstone or the Catholic hat wearing former deputy prime minister and farmer Tim Fischer were especially qualified either, but they were still appointed by their political foes.

Both sides of politics are guilty of using plum diplomatic postings, and the vast array of perks that accompany them, to look after old political mates. John Howard elevated it to an art form, but all governments are guilty to some degree.

If the Abbott Government is drawing a line under these jobs for the boys and girls and reserving these important jobs for professional diplomats, then it will be applauded. If, on the other hand, it intends to sack all Labor appointees and put their own lackeys in places such as New York, London and Washington, then it will leave itself wide open to charges of hypocrisy and petty vengeance.

Tony Abbott promised us better and he should remind the likes of Bishop and Brandis that government is a privilege not a right and that taxpayer funds should not be used to reward party hacks.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/steve-bracks8217s-sacking-from-the-ny-consul-general-post-looks-like-coalition-vindictiveness/story-fnh4jt60-1226715923755

Unless Craig Emerson sings it to the tune of Horror Movie then he's not worth listening to.

dolt

the experts say that the carbon tax has put $15,000 onto the cost of an average house.....is that to hard for you to gather?????

Edited by batfink: 10/9/2013 12:53:56 PM

The idea that the carbon tax will add .7% to the cost of living is a complete nonsense which may have significant cost implications for both the business and property services industries. The Housing Industry Association (HIA) estimates that the average cost of the carbon tax for a new home is around $6,026 if the carbon price was $20 per tonne. The compensation measures included in the carbon tax program reduce this cost to just over $5,000 per home (Housing November 2011 edition pp 8-12). Given that the cost of a new home is already about one-third taxes, this is a real impost to new home buyers. If consumer confidence falls, and it is already very low, there could be real problems in the property market.

http://www.cpsisc.com.au/resources/CPSISC/Useful%20Discussion%20Papers/DP%207%204%20Carbon%20Tax.pdf

Edited by Joffa: 10/9/2013 12:41:02 PM

Weren't you one of the people who loudly protested against Julia Gillard implementing that law on this forum?

That's complete bullshit

I don't believe so. I may have had problems with how broad it had the potential to be, but definitely had no problem with the general idea of it.

I live in an average house and my cost of living hasn't gone up $15,000 :lol:

-PB

surprised that the cost is as low as $5000, unless things have changes since 2011, the other thing is the home owner insurance which is around $10,000 to $15,000 a house now or old.....and to protect banks???? what a rort....fuck the banks they have a mortgage over the asset and only lend to %70 so miles of safety net there.......

#-o #-o #-o #-o

whoever's figures are correct is of no consequence, the FACT remains that the carbon tax and all the other parameters i mentioned HAVE added substantial costs to building a house....can't deny that

Aunt Sally the dolt strikes again

Sorry I TL:DR what you were talking about.

-PB

Pauly what does that mean???