Happy, because Gillard is in deep sh*t.

The fact that this unstabilises the country is something Rudd is not concerned with --

He is not a statesman, only interested in his own pursuits

and says loudly "Anybody want money? Line up, line up. . . I've pockets full of money from silly PAYE Australians who think that the leftist are on their side".

Line up, line up!

olde.sault wrote on Feb 5^th, 2012 at 12:02pm:

Happy, because Gillard is in deep sh*t. The fact that this unstabilises the country is something Rudd is not concerned with -- He is not a statesman, only interested in his own pursuits and says loudly "Anybody want money? Line up, line up. . . I've pockets full of money from silly PAYE Australians who think that the leftist are on their side". Line up, line up!

Interesting how you're concerned with the country being destabilised, and yet you're very happy to see Abbott maintain uncertainty by claiming he'll rescind mining and carbon taxes.  ;D

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 5^th, 2012 at 12:29pm:

olde.sault wrote on Feb 5th, 2012 at 12:02pm: Happy, because Gillard is in deep sh*t. The fact that this unstabilises the country is something Rudd is not concerned with -- He is not a statesman, only interested in his own pursuits and says loudly "Anybody want money? Line up, line up. . . I've pockets full of money from silly PAYE Australians who think that the leftist are on their side". Line up, line up! Interesting how you're concerned with the country being destabilised, and yet you're very happy to see Abbott maintain uncertainty by claiming he'll rescind mining and carbon taxes.  ;D

How is Abbotts' statements that he will rescind the carbon and mining taxes anything but absolute certainty? He's said he'll do it if elected, so what's to stop him?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 5^th, 2012 at 2:11pm:

He's said he'll do it if elected, so what's to stop him?

The Senate.

Gist wrote on Feb 5^th, 2012 at 2:43pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 5th, 2012 at 2:11pm: He's said he'll do it if elected, so what's to stop him? The Senate.

exactly!!! and a hostile opposition that I am almost sure will say NO to everything..LOL

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 5^th, 2012 at 2:11pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 5th, 2012 at 12:29pm: olde.sault wrote on Feb 5th, 2012 at 12:02pm: Happy, because Gillard is in deep sh*t. The fact that this unstabilises the country is something Rudd is not concerned with -- He is not a statesman, only interested in his own pursuits and says loudly "Anybody want money? Line up, line up. . . I've pockets full of money from silly PAYE Australians who think that the leftist are on their side". Line up, line up! Interesting how you're concerned with the country being destabilised, and yet you're very happy to see Abbott maintain uncertainty by claiming he'll rescind mining and carbon taxes.  ;D How is Abbotts' statements that he will rescind the carbon and mining taxes anything but absolute certainty? He's said he'll do it if elected, so what's to stop him?

This just goes to show how little you know about politics.

Do you REALLY want a majority for one party in both houses? We saw how good that was last time it happened... ;D ;D

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 5^th, 2012 at 12:29pm:

olde.sault wrote on Feb 5th, 2012 at 12:02pm: Happy, because Gillard is in deep sh*t. The fact that this unstabilises the country is something Rudd is not concerned with -- He is not a statesman, only interested in his own pursuits and says loudly "Anybody want money? Line up, line up. . . I've pockets full of money from silly PAYE Australians who think that the leftist are on their side". Line up, line up! Interesting how you're concerned with the country being destabilised, and yet you're very happy to see Abbott maintain uncertainty by claiming he'll rescind mining and carbon taxes.  ;D

---

Abbott causing"Uncertainty"?

It's certainty that mining and carbon tax was thought up in order to ruin this country's economy.

If you don't see that then your brain-revolutions are slower than of those who know what they are doing if not realising the end result.

Countries are turning away from this idiotic concept that our emissions affect climates.

It affects congested cities and these are congested because imbeciles keep po*ping out kids - many of these to slowly starve to death.

The way to save the environment is to limit the birthrate and that, unfortunately, seems to be beyond the IQ of the larger part of the world's population

olde.sault wrote on Feb 5^th, 2012 at 7:25pm:

The way to save the environment is to limit the birthrate and that, unfortunately, seems to be beyond the IQ of the larger part of the world's population

Yes, reducing the population is one way of achieving this. Are you volunteering to make the sacrifice??

Gist wrote on Feb 5^th, 2012 at 7:52pm:

olde.sault wrote on Feb 5th, 2012 at 7:25pm: The way to save the environment is to limit the birthrate and that, unfortunately, seems to be beyond the IQ of the larger part of the world's population Yes, reducing the population is one way of achieving this. Are you volunteering to make the sacrifice??

------

That's the problem with you leftards, always have to choose the extreme.

I wasn't promoting genocide but the planning of future families - within one's means and a country's space.

Is that too hard to compute?

If one comes into being it has to entail food and comfort. Eating only sometimes and suffering a disease because of malnutrition is something beyond the forethoughts of the "Right to life" mob.

Human infants are not like newly-hatched turtles who have to make their own way through hazards on beach and the sea.

Gist wrote on Feb 5^th, 2012 at 2:43pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 5th, 2012 at 2:11pm: He's said he'll do it if elected, so what's to stop him? The Senate.

If that is the case, he could call a DD election and that is something he would almost certainly win.