Just asking

Guildford wrote on Apr 14^th, 2012 at 6:44pm:

Just asking

I would say he negotiated with his partner, what was the best option for the two of them.

His partner comes across as just as nice a guy as Bob.

Ah yes but, did he jump or was he pushed?

Im assuming by your response you think he jumped.

Guildford wrote on Apr 14^th, 2012 at 6:51pm:

Ah yes but, did he jump or was he pushed? Im assuming by your response you think he jumped.

I asume by your reply, you have an agenda.

To manufacture.

Tasmanian Greens are selecting Senator Candidates for the next election ... same as other parts of Australia.

Bob has already stated, he was upfront and so didn't put his name forward.

Now Bob has decided to move on.

If you are out to attack Christine Milne, have the guts to do it to her face.

We expect nothing less due to the misogynistic tendency of hard right Regressives.

Look how you guys hate Julie Bishop.

As usual, you will not answer a simple question.

Do you think he jumped or was he pushed.

No agenda, just a simple question, you are the one who wants and does make something more out of it, along with calling me a hard right regressive.

Not pushed...jumped. For sure.

It was his decision. There has been no suggestion of a leadership ruction.

He is just being a coward before his carbon tax that should have been $40 a tonne at the least, comes into affect.

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 14^th, 2012 at 7:11pm:

He is just being a coward before his carbon tax that should have been $40 a tonne at the least, comes into affect.

+1

Guildford wrote on Apr 14^th, 2012 at 7:05pm:

As usual, you will not answer a simple question. Do you think he jumped or was he pushed. No agenda, just a simple question, you are the one who wants and does make something more out of it, along with calling me a hard right regressive.

Just ignore him. He calls everyone here on the right "Hard right", as do the other lefties.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 14^th, 2012 at 7:18pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 7:11pm: He is just being a coward before his carbon tax that should have been $40 a tonne at the least, comes into affect. +1

Option 1: I agree with you both.

Option 2: He knows that the FWA report will name Thomson, and therefore is resigning before the humiliating annihilation that will occur at the next election, which could therefore be sooner than anticipated, ie, some time this year.

Only time will tell.

To be honest, I really don't care why he's gone. I'm just very happy that he has finally gone. That's one less lunatic running the asylum prior to the next election. Lets see how many more decide to jump ship before the massacre!   :)

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 14^th, 2012 at 7:11pm:

He is just being a coward before his carbon tax that should have been $40 a tonne at the least, comes into affect.

How many braincells did you blow coming up with that one.

MOTR wrote on Apr 14^th, 2012 at 8:22pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 7:11pm: He is just being a coward before his carbon tax that should have been $40 a tonne at the least, comes into affect. How many braincells did you blow coming up with that one.

I got good word that the carbon tax was coming in, in July and Booby the coward leaving politics in June. What a disgrace.

He knows the Greens are going to poll low on the next election, lest he can claim it was over his supports because he is no longer there for the resone for the low polling...

matty wrote on Apr 14^th, 2012 at 7:27pm:

Guildford wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 7:05pm: As usual, you will not answer a simple question. Do you think he jumped or was he pushed. No agenda, just a simple question, you are the one who wants and does make something more out of it, along with calling me a hard right regressive. Just ignore him. He calls everyone here on the right "Hard right", as do the other lefties.

I don't.

I would think in terms of far right for the more extreme only.

To me the term hard has masculine connotations which most on the far right do not exude. More like the soft right but that does not get the same point across and feels more like a reference to the mid or mild right which would be about where Labor stand.

Jumped.

Nobody wanted to push him and many would be dissapointed.

Dnarever wrote on Apr 14^th, 2012 at 11:16pm:

matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 7:27pm: Guildford wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 7:05pm: As usual, you will not answer a simple question. Do you think he jumped or was he pushed. No agenda, just a simple question, you are the one who wants and does make something more out of it, along with calling me a hard right regressive. Just ignore him. He calls everyone here on the right "Hard right", as do the other lefties. I don't. I would think in terms of far right for the more extreme only. To me the term hard has masculine connotations which most on the far right do not exude. More like the soft right but that does not get the same point across and feels more like a reference to the mid or mild right which would be about where Labor stand.

You yourself have said that I am far-right, before.

matty wrote on Apr 14^th, 2012 at 11:25pm:

Dnarever wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 11:16pm: matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 7:27pm: Guildford wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 7:05pm: As usual, you will not answer a simple question. Do you think he jumped or was he pushed. No agenda, just a simple question, you are the one who wants and does make something more out of it, along with calling me a hard right regressive. Just ignore him. He calls everyone here on the right "Hard right", as do the other lefties. I don't. I would think in terms of far right for the more extreme only. To me the term hard has masculine connotations which most on the far right do not exude. More like the soft right but that does not get the same point across and feels more like a reference to the mid or mild right which would be about where Labor stand. You yourself have said that I am far-right, before.

You are - I think from memory you have also said that. You are significantly more conservative than the average conservative which is indicated to be further to the right and when you consider that the average conservative is already a fair distance right of centre the term far is a reasonable indication of where you place yourself.

What I said was that I have never called you or anyone else hard right, its different.

Its not meant as an insult by the way - just a statment of fact.

Matty, I think this thread is about Bob Brown - is he far-right?

Paki gob on a stick wrote on Apr 14^th, 2012 at 11:37pm:

Matty, I think this thread is about Bob Brown - is he far-right?

I would think that Bob is a tad left of centre.

Dnarever wrote on Apr 14^th, 2012 at 11:36pm:

matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 11:25pm: Dnarever wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 11:16pm: matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 7:27pm: Guildford wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 7:05pm: As usual, you will not answer a simple question. Do you think he jumped or was he pushed. No agenda, just a simple question, you are the one who wants and does make something more out of it, along with calling me a hard right regressive. Just ignore him. He calls everyone here on the right "Hard right", as do the other lefties. I don't. I would think in terms of far right for the more extreme only. To me the term hard has masculine connotations which most on the far right do not exude. More like the soft right but that does not get the same point across and feels more like a reference to the mid or mild right which would be about where Labor stand. You yourself have said that I am far-right, before. You are - I think from memory you have also said that. You are significantly more conservative than the average conservative which is indicated to be further to the right and when you consider that the average conservative is already a fair distance right of centre the term far is a reasonable indication of where you place yourself. What I said was that I have never called you or anyone else hard right, its different.

I have said that I have SOME far-right opinions, not that I AM far-right. The term has been used on many here, not just myself. No one has ever actually supported the claims that we are. Care to explain how I, or any others are?

What is the difference between hard and far right? Are they not synonymous?

Paki gob on a stick wrote on Apr 14^th, 2012 at 11:37pm:

Matty, I think this thread is about Bob Brown - is he far-right?

No, he is a far-left loony extremist.

Bob Brown is about as hated and toxic in Australia as you can get and none of the rest of the reprobates in the Greens are impressing the hell out of us either.  They have come out now, they are fair game. 8-)

matty wrote on Apr 14^th, 2012 at 11:41pm:

Dnarever wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 11:36pm: matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 11:25pm: Dnarever wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 11:16pm: matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 7:27pm: Guildford wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 7:05pm: As usual, you will not answer a simple question. Do you think he jumped or was he pushed. No agenda, just a simple question, you are the one who wants and does make something more out of it, along with calling me a hard right regressive. Just ignore him. He calls everyone here on the right "Hard right", as do the other lefties. I don't. I would think in terms of far right for the more extreme only. To me the term hard has masculine connotations which most on the far right do not exude. More like the soft right but that does not get the same point across and feels more like a reference to the mid or mild right which would be about where Labor stand. You yourself have said that I am far-right, before. You are - I think from memory you have also said that. You are significantly more conservative than the average conservative which is indicated to be further to the right and when you consider that the average conservative is already a fair distance right of centre the term far is a reasonable indication of where you place yourself. What I said was that I have never called you or anyone else hard right, its different. I have said that I have SOME far-right opinions, not that I AM far-right. The term has been used on many here, not just myself. No one has ever actually supported the claims that we are. Care to explain how I, or any others are? What is the difference between hard and far right? Are they not synonymous?

One is a term I very occasionally use and one isn't.

Dnarever wrote on Apr 14^th, 2012 at 11:54pm:

matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 11:41pm: Dnarever wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 11:36pm: matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 11:25pm: Dnarever wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 11:16pm: matty wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 7:27pm: Guildford wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 7:05pm: As usual, you will not answer a simple question. Do you think he jumped or was he pushed. No agenda, just a simple question, you are the one who wants and does make something more out of it, along with calling me a hard right regressive. Just ignore him. He calls everyone here on the right "Hard right", as do the other lefties. I don't. I would think in terms of far right for the more extreme only. To me the term hard has masculine connotations which most on the far right do not exude. More like the soft right but that does not get the same point across and feels more like a reference to the mid or mild right which would be about where Labor stand. You yourself have said that I am far-right, before. You are - I think from memory you have also said that. You are significantly more conservative than the average conservative which is indicated to be further to the right and when you consider that the average conservative is already a fair distance right of centre the term far is a reasonable indication of where you place yourself. What I said was that I have never called you or anyone else hard right, its different. I have said that I have SOME far-right opinions, not that I AM far-right. The term has been used on many here, not just myself. No one has ever actually supported the claims that we are. Care to explain how I, or any others are? What is the difference between hard and far right? Are they not synonymous? One is a term I very occasionally use and one isn't.

Sorry?

Guildford wrote on Apr 14^th, 2012 at 6:44pm:

Just asking

Of course the Greenies are sinking fast yet, Bob's skeleton might have rattled in the cupboard!

Interesting question.

Bobs heading off to the X-Files Convention with his poof mate just as soon as they let him out of the nuthouse... :(

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 14^th, 2012 at 7:11pm:

He is just being a coward before his carbon tax that should have been $40 a tonne at the least, comes into affect.

sooooooooooo right...

and dont forget its lost its magic... and now people are not so happy to be saving the planet.... and they will be even madder when they find this GIANT TAX won't make a skeric of difference to GW....he is a coward..

cods wrote on Apr 15^th, 2012 at 8:47am:

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 7:11pm: He is just being a coward before his carbon tax that should have been $40 a tonne at the least, comes into affect. sooooooooooo right... and dont forget its lost its magic... and now people are not so happy to be saving the planet.... and they will be even madder when they find this GIANT TAX won't make a skeric of difference to GW....he is a coward..

But it will hurt big business and anyone who uses electricity, so that's a good thing if you're Green!

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 15^th, 2012 at 8:49am:

cods wrote on Apr 15th, 2012 at 8:47am: progressiveslol wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 7:11pm: He is just being a coward before his carbon tax that should have been $40 a tonne at the least, comes into affect. sooooooooooo right... and dont forget its lost its magic... and now people are not so happy to be saving the planet.... and they will be even madder when they find this GIANT TAX won't make a skeric of difference to GW....he is a coward.. But it will hurt big business and anyone who uses electricity, so that's a good thing if you're Green!

of course it will it will hurt us all..and brown is getting out before the OUCH hits us..

the next election will tell it how it is... people are sick of pollies getting out when the going gets tough..they wont forget brown its you they have to thank for this CARBON TAX>

cods wrote on Apr 15^th, 2012 at 8:54am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 15th, 2012 at 8:49am: cods wrote on Apr 15th, 2012 at 8:47am: progressiveslol wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 7:11pm: He is just being a coward before his carbon tax that should have been $40 a tonne at the least, comes into affect. sooooooooooo right... and dont forget its lost its magic... and now people are not so happy to be saving the planet.... and they will be even madder when they find this GIANT TAX won't make a skeric of difference to GW....he is a coward.. But it will hurt big business and anyone who uses electricity, so that's a good thing if you're Green! of course it will it will hurt us all..and brown is getting out before the OUCH hits us.. the next election will tell it how it is... people are sick of pollies getting out when the going gets tough..they wont forget brown its you they have to thank for this CARBON TAX>

Bob Brown should've changed his name to Germaine Green, given his hatred of Australian business, Australian coal and Australian mining.

matty wrote on Apr 14^th, 2012 at 11:41pm:

Paki gob on a stick wrote on Apr 14th, 2012 at 11:37pm: Matty, I think this thread is about Bob Brown - is he far-right? No, he is a far-left loony extremist.

Very funny - not real sure that you are joking though - please tell me you were?

Bob is 67 yrs old and has contributed more to this countries future than Abbott or Gillard ever will and you want to know why he has retired  ;D
Dont worry because Im betting he will have even a greater influence on public policy once hes out of parliament.

3 possible reasonable explanations:-

1. His health is pretty crook and he reckons the hate mail that will come his way once his CO2 tax starts to send Australia down the gurgler might kill him.

2. He knows the Labor election crash is coming next year and he is getting out while he is still on top.

3. His recent looney "alien death by climate ghouls" speech upset even the ultra looneys in the Communist Greens so much that they tapped Uncle Bob on the shoulder.

juliar wrote on Apr 15^th, 2012 at 10:37pm:

3 possible reasonable explanations:- 1. His health is pretty crook and he reckons the hate mail that will come his way once his CO2 tax starts to send Australia down the gurgler might kill him. 2. He knows the Labor election crash is coming next year and he is getting out while he is still on top. 3. His recent looney "alien death by climate ghouls" speech upset even the ultra looneys in the Communist Greens so much that they tapped Uncle Bob on the shoulder.

Or...

4. He's hit 'pension-age' and has simply decided to retire and spend
some time with his 'family' and loved ones.

People DO sometimes do that when they get to his age.


Or...

5.  He wants to leave now to give CM time to settle in before the election.

This is also a reasonable and valid explanation.



See? Two perfectly valid reasons, and in neither did I feel the need to denigrate him.

Either or both are perfectly acceptable and reasonable.

bob did not jump nor was he pushed.

our law requires all senators approaching the end of their six year terms to nominate before june this year if they wish to stand again for re-election.  bob has explained that, at the age of 67, he prefers to step aside for younger people, rather than keep on working as a senator until he is 73.

good decision.  he will continue working to try and save our environment and to promote the greens both here and overseas. 

he is a decent man and a politician of integrity.  i especially admire the way to refuses to offend or insult those who, in their ignorance, abuse him.

Kat wrote on Apr 15^th, 2012 at 10:56pm:

juliar wrote on Apr 15th, 2012 at 10:37pm: 3 possible reasonable explanations:- 1. His health is pretty crook and he reckons the hate mail that will come his way once his CO2 tax starts to send Australia down the gurgler might kill him. 2. He knows the Labor election crash is coming next year and he is getting out while he is still on top. 3. His recent looney "alien death by climate ghouls" speech upset even the ultra looneys in the Communist Greens so much that they tapped Uncle Bob on the shoulder. Or... 4. He's hit 'pension-age' and has simply decided to retire and spend some time with his 'family' and loved ones. People DO sometimes do that when they get to his age. Or... 5.  He wants to leave now to give CM time to settle in before the election. This is also a reasonable and valid explanation. See? Two perfectly valid reasons, and in neither did I feel the need to denigrate him. Either or both are perfectly acceptable and reasonable.

kat - I am with you on #4 there.
he's been in the public eye for long enough, some Bob Brown time is due.

kika wrote on Apr 15^th, 2012 at 11:00pm:

bob did not jump nor was he pushed. our law requires all senators approaching the end of their six year terms to nominate before june this year if they wish to stand again for re-election.  bob has explained that, at the age of 67, he prefers to step aside for younger people, rather than keep on working as a senator until he is 73. good decision.  he will continue working to try and save our environment and to promote the greens both here and overseas.  he is a decent man and a politician of integrity.  i especially admire the way to refuses to offend or insult those who, in their ignorance, abuse him.

My thoughts, EXACTLY

Why is is it ANY politician who retires ( ... ironically, at around retirement age) is either "jumping a sinking ship" or was "stabbed in the back"

Brown IS - and will always BE - to the Australian Greens, what Menzies is to the Liberal Party of Australia

Did Menzies "jump" - or was he "pushed" by Holt ?

Brown has made it VERY clear, the reasons for the timing
He had until July, 2012, to decide whether at his age he could commit to another SIX YEARS ( ... post the 2013 election) representinhg Tasmania as a Greens' senator ...

Or to spend his "golden years" in the company of long-term soul-mate - and very patient - Paul

You'd look a LONG way back to find a smoother, mid-term, "handing over of the baton"

Having dedicated his LIFE ( ... so far) to the environment - it would be poor excuse for a human being that would wish him and Paul anything but "the best"



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Brown#Personal_life

I do think its strange he has done it NOW... bizarre in fact.

cods wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 9:47am:

I do think its strange he has done it NOW... bizarre in fact.

Can only be because he is a coward. He could have stayed for a little while after July without causing issues for the greens party, but is getting out before his carbon tax comes into affect.

buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 9:44am:

Why is is it ANY politician who retires ( ... ironically, at around retirement age) is either "jumping a sinking ship" or was "stabbed in the back"

Because the wretched one-thought wonders on this board are so terminally stupid that that's the best they can manage.


progressiveslol wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 9:52am:

cods wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:47am: I do think its strange he has done it NOW... bizarre in fact. Can only be because he is a coward. He could have stayed for a little while after July without causing issues for the greens party, but is getting out before his carbon tax comes into affect.

See? They need our pity. The poor things need whatever they can get!

I heard he has accepted the role as Captain of the star ship Enterprise. ;)

I’m sure he thinks he’s one of those blue aliens from Pandora.  :D

adelcrow wrote on Apr 15^th, 2012 at 9:32am:

Bob is 67 yrs old and has contributed more to this countries future than Abbott or Gillard ever will and you want to know why he has retired  ;D Dont worry because Im betting he will have even a greater influence on public policy once hes out of parliament.

so why not retire at the next election as he said all along? I think he is sick. It certainly makes more sense than any other argument. And after his embararssing 'fellow earthians' speech perhaps he has realised he needs to get out now before he makes any more mistakes like that. I hope it isnt dementia but I would not be surprised if it is.

kika wrote on Apr 15^th, 2012 at 11:00pm:

bob did not jump nor was he pushed. our law requires all senators approaching the end of their six year terms to nominate before june this year if they wish to stand again for re-election.  bob has explained that, at the age of 67, he prefers to step aside for younger people, rather than keep on working as a senator until he is 73. good decision.  he will continue working to try and save our environment and to promote the greens both here and overseas.  he is a decent man and a politician of integrity.  i especially admire the way to refuses to offend or insult those who, in their ignorance, abuse him.

Very well said.

Gist wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 10:06am:

buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:44am: Why is is it ANY politician who retires ( ... ironically, at around retirement age) is either "jumping a sinking ship" or was "stabbed in the back" Because the wretched one-thought wonders on this board are so terminally stupid that that's the best they can manage. progressiveslol wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:52am: cods wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:47am: I do think its strange he has done it NOW... bizarre in fact. Can only be because he is a coward. He could have stayed for a little while after July without causing issues for the greens party, but is getting out before his carbon tax comes into affect. See? They need our pity. The poor things need whatever they can get!

NUP not pity just some decent answers that will do... but I wont hold my breath.. cant remember the last time a lefty answered a question honestly to be honest.

here we have a bloke who has done his level best to get a CARBON PRICE...he was elated when it happened....

now he is going before the glory gets here.... mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm


sorry if I see something sinister in all this...but yes I do.. he isnt a shrinking violet when it comes.. to the old...


LOOK WHAT WE HAVE DONE...

maybe he can see the labs going down down down.. and the thought of the greens going down with them is too much to bare..

like a rat leaving a sinking ship... they always jump first.

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 9:52am:

cods wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:47am: I do think its strange he has done it NOW... bizarre in fact. Can only be because he is a coward. He could have stayed for a little while after July ...

Mr Brown yesterday said senate nominations had to be lodged before July and he did not want to commit to another six years.


http://www.news.com.au/national/bob-brown-quits-before-carbon-tax-falls/story-e6frfkvr-1226326291918#ixzz1sAFooJyV




http://www.youcanrun.com.au/shop/images/medium/its_not_rocket_science_graphic.jpg

MOTR wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 10:37am:

kika wrote on Apr 15th, 2012 at 11:00pm: bob did not jump nor was he pushed. our law requires all senators approaching the end of their six year terms to nominate before june this year if they wish to stand again for re-election.  bob has explained that, at the age of 67, he prefers to step aside for younger people, rather than keep on working as a senator until he is 73. good decision.  he will continue working to try and save our environment and to promote the greens both here and overseas.  he is a decent man and a politician of integrity.  i especially admire the way to refuses to offend or insult those who, in their ignorance, abuse him. Very well said.

he already said he was no standing for re-election. that is very different to quitting MID TERM.

cods wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 9:47am:

I do think its strange he has done it NOW... bizarre in fact.

He will be 68 before the next election and you do not understand why he does not want to commit to the job till he is 75 years old.

Gee thats tough, why not insist that he stays till he drops.

He jumped, wasn't pushed.

Who'd want to be a MP into their 70's?

Oh, John Howard... 'nuff said.

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 3:31pm:

MOTR wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 10:37am: kika wrote on Apr 15th, 2012 at 11:00pm: bob did not jump nor was he pushed. our law requires all senators approaching the end of their six year terms to nominate before june this year if they wish to stand again for re-election.  bob has explained that, at the age of 67, he prefers to step aside for younger people, rather than keep on working as a senator until he is 73. good decision.  he will continue working to try and save our environment and to promote the greens both here and overseas.  he is a decent man and a politician of integrity.  i especially admire the way to refuses to offend or insult those who, in their ignorance, abuse him. Very well said. he already said he was no standing for re-election. that is very different to quitting MID TERM.

Can you think of a better time for a change in leadership. It just seems like a logical time to step down. The reasoning behind his decision seems to make perfect sense to me.

MOTR wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 9:08pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 3:31pm: MOTR wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 10:37am: kika wrote on Apr 15th, 2012 at 11:00pm: bob did not jump nor was he pushed. our law requires all senators approaching the end of their six year terms to nominate before june this year if they wish to stand again for re-election.  bob has explained that, at the age of 67, he prefers to step aside for younger people, rather than keep on working as a senator until he is 73. good decision.  he will continue working to try and save our environment and to promote the greens both here and overseas.  he is a decent man and a politician of integrity.  i especially admire the way to refuses to offend or insult those who, in their ignorance, abuse him. Very well said. he already said he was no standing for re-election. that is very different to quitting MID TERM. Can you think of a better time for a change in leadership. It just seems like a logical time to step down. The reasoning behind his decision seems to make perfect sense to me.

Remind me, what was his reason for quiting early?

Quote:

Bob Brown should've changed his name to Germaine Green, given his hatred of Australian business, Australian coal and Australian mining.

;D

My tip is Bob is suffereing dementia. not because he is a moron but because of some of the idiotic things he has been saying of late and even dumb by Green standards.