Eric Abetz calls for Tony Abbott to return in Malcolm Turnbull cabinet reshuffle  :( :o


Liberal senator Eric Abetz suggests that Tony Abbott should be restored to a prominent frontbench position in Malcolm Turnbull's upcoming ministry reshuffle. Courtesy ABC NewsRadio.

    Malcolm Turnbull looks at February reshuffle
    Minister Jamie Briggs quits ministry
    Jamie Briggs, an ambitious MP who overstepped the mark
    Minister Mal Brough stands aside

Malcolm Turnbull is being urged to restore former prime minister Tony Abbott to a prominent frontbench position when the Prime Minister reshuffles his ministry - likely in February following the resignations of junior ministers Jamie Briggs and Mal Brough.

    I think if Tony Abbott were to go back in the Cabinet that would be a good way to heal the wounds of the past.
    Nationals Senator John Williams

Mr Briggs' career as a junior minister ended on Tuesday when he resigned, revealing he had been involved in a late-night incident with a female public servant in a bar in Hong Kong where he was visiting in his capacity as Cities Minister late last month.
Former prime minister Tony Abbott was sent to the backbench following the September leadership spill.

Former prime minister Tony Abbott was sent to the backbench following the September leadership spill. Photo: Andrew Meares

Mr Briggs was partying with his chief of staff, Stuart Eaton, at the time. He said he did nothing illegal, but resigned after accepting it was an "error of professional judgment" after the public servant lodged a complaint about his behaviour.
Advertisement

Mr Turnbull used the cover of Mr Briggs sensational revelations to announce that Mr Brough would be standing aside as Special Minister of State because of the ongoing police investigation into the James Ashby affair, after weeks of sustained pressure from Labor in Parliament. 

Acting Opposition Leader Tanya Plibersek said Mr Brough's departure was the more significant of the two and questioned why Mr Turnbull had waited so long to drop his beleaguered minister. "This incident certainly shows a lack of judgment," she said.
Liberal Senator Eric Abetz says Tony Abbott should return to the frontbench in a cabinet reshuffle.

Liberal Senator Eric Abetz says Tony Abbott should return to the frontbench in a cabinet reshuffle. Photo: Alex Ellinghausen

Conservative Senator Eric Abetz, who was dropped from the cabinet in Mr Turnbull's September reshuffle, said on Wednesday when politicians "mucked up" it was their families who suffered the most.

"I feel extremely for the families of the two gentlemen involved, we in politics we are the volunteers, we're the ones who go into battles but when we muck up it is the families and children that suffer," Senator Abetz told the ABC on Wednesday.

Senator Abetz urged Mr Turnbull to heal the divisions caused by the September coup and restoring Mr Abbott to the cabinet would be important for unity within the Liberal Party.
Mal Brough and Jamie Briggs both lost their portfolios on Tuesday.

Mal Brough and Jamie Briggs both lost their portfolios on Tuesday.

"I hope that he stays in the Parliament and I hope that there will be a place for him, a prominent place for him in a future ministry, should he decide to stay ... and I think the Australian people would welcome that," he said.

"Just as much as when other leaders have been deposed they have been rehabilitated into cabinet or shadow cabinet and I think that is important for the unity of the party, if that is at all possible."

Nationals Senator John Williams backed Senator Abetz's call, describing Mr Abbott as a man of experience and compassion.

"I think if Tony Abbott were to go back in the cabinet that would be a good way to heal the wounds of the past," Senator Williams told ABC Radio National.
February reshuffle

Speculation is mounting that Mr Turnbull will reshuffle his frontbench in February after Nationals Leader and Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss makes a decision on his own future.  Many Nationals privately believe Mr Truss, the Infrastructure Minister, will retire, paving the way for Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce to become Nationals leader. 

"If Warren is to make an announcement that he's going to stand down, and that's a big if ... then of course that would be a time for a reshuffle, but that might not eventuate," Senator Williams said.

If Mr Joyce were to keep his own portfolio it would leave open a cabinet vacancy and the two junior ministerial positions vacated by Mr Briggs and Mr Brough.  Currently their responsibilities are being divided between Environment Minister Greg Hunt, Finance Minister Mathias Cormann and Defence Minister Marise Payne.

Mr Turnbull's first cabinet line-up, announced in September after he toppled Mr Abbott as leader, was widely seen as rewarding the plotters who aided his rise to the top job, including Peter Hendy, James McGrath, Scott Ryan, Wyatt Roy and Mitch Fifield.

Conservatives in particular, smarted at the dumping of veteran cabinet ministers Kevin Andrews and Mr Abetz without elevating young up and coming right-wingers like Angus Taylor or Zed Seselja.

Lets hope not.

Redmond Neck wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 8:27am:

Lets hope not.

no, no .... as a labor supporter I want tony front and center.  ;D ;D ;D ;D

I very much doubt it... look what shortarse has on his front bench....all people that were never on his side.. all swore allegiance to both krudd and gillard....

all basically not to be trusted....

and now Mal finds himself in the same position...GOOD.

they say its lonely at the top... :D.

somehow I dont think arrogant Mal will be affected by that.

cods wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 8:37am:

ook what shortarse has on his front bench.

the people that voted for him! :D :D

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 8:34am:

Redmond Neck wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:27am: Lets hope not. no, no .... as a labor supporter I want tony front and center.  ;D ;D ;D ;D

I thought you voted on issues John?

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 8:50am:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:34am: Redmond Neck wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:27am: Lets hope not. no, no .... as a labor supporter I want tony front and center.  ;D ;D ;D ;D I thought you voted on issues John?

and how have any of the 'issues' and the libs position on them changed since turncoat took office?

Lets hope he keeps that NAZI Abetz out as well.

Keep them both out of the inner circle.

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 8:44am:

cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:37am: ook what shortarse has on his front bench. the people that voted for him! :D :D

jumped ship you mean.

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 8:52am:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:50am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:34am: Redmond Neck wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:27am: Lets hope not. no, no .... as a labor supporter I want tony front and center.  ;D ;D ;D ;D I thought you voted on issues John? and how have any of the 'issues' and the libs position on them changed since turncoat took office?

You're dodging Andrei's question john. You've clearly identified yourself here as a Labor voter, without qualification, and in the past I can recall you saying you were a swing voter who voted according to the issues.
You can't be both.

Redmond Neck wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 9:19am:

Lets hope he keeps that NAZI Abetz out as well. Keep them both out of the inner circle.

oh dear.. NAZIs now... goodness me red whats going to happen when you run out of words to call them????..

maybe take a leaf out of kats book..

bogarde73 wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 9:27am:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:52am: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:50am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:34am: Redmond Neck wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:27am: Lets hope not. no, no .... as a labor supporter I want tony front and center.  ;D ;D ;D ;D I thought you voted on issues John? and how have any of the 'issues' and the libs position on them changed since turncoat took office? You're dodging Andrei's question john. You've clearly identified yourself here as a Labor voter, without qualification, and in the past I can recall you saying you were a swing voter who voted according to the issues. You can't be both.

he can hes a lefty


its you who cant... :)

hes a member of the good old Double Standards party.. ;D ;D ;D ;D

cods wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 9:27am:

Redmond Neck wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 9:19am: Lets hope he keeps that NAZI Abetz out as well. Keep them both out of the inner circle. oh dear.. NAZIs now... goodness me red whats going to happen when you run out of words to call them????.. maybe take a leaf out of kats book..

Yeah, just because Abetz had Nazis in his family doesn't make him a Nazi.

cods wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 9:27am:

Redmond Neck wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 9:19am: Lets hope he keeps that NAZI Abetz out as well. Keep them both out of the inner circle. oh dear.. NAZIs now... goodness me red whats going to happen when you run out of words to call them????.. maybe take a leaf out of kats book..

I am sure I can think up a couple more cods, dont you worry about that!

Maggot comes to mind!  ;D

cods wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 8:37am:

I very much doubt it... look what shortarse has on his front bench....all people that were never on his side.. all swore allegiance to both krudd and gillard.... all basically not to be trusted.... and now Mal finds himself in the same position...GOOD. they say its lonely at the top... :D. somehow I dont think arrogant Mal will be affected by that.

It's good to see the wounds still festering after all of this time :D LOL

Who cares.

Too big a risk I would think.

Sir lastnail wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 9:55am:

cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:37am: I very much doubt it... look what shortarse has on his front bench....all people that were never on his side.. all swore allegiance to both krudd and gillard.... all basically not to be trusted.... and now Mal finds himself in the same position...GOOD. they say its lonely at the top... :D. somehow I dont think arrogant Mal will be affected by that. It's good to see the wounds still festering after all of this time :D LOL

I see the convicted DRUG DEALERS wife spitting her venom and hate on your ABC over the last two days

Ugly Pollack peasant    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 8:34am:

Redmond Neck wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:27am: Lets hope not. no, no .... as a labor supporter I want tony front and center.  ;D ;D ;D ;D

Or perhaps in the Ministry, undermining Turnbull.

The best place for Abbott IMO is out of politics altogether. Except for MacMahon who stayed in Parliament for nearly 10 years, no ex-PM in the past 50 years has lasted more than about three years in Parliament once they lost the office of PM.

Time in Parliament after being PM:
Menzies - 3 weeks (retired as PM)
Holt - none (died in office)
McEwen - 3 years, 2 months (caretaker PM)
Gorton - 4 years, 8 months
McMahon - 9 years, 3 months
Whitlam - 2 years, 7 months (2 years as Opposition leader)
Fraser - 2 months
Hawke - 2 months
Keating - 1½ months
Howard - none (lost seat at election)
Rudd (1st) - 3 years, 5 months
Gillard - 2½ months
Rudd (2nd) - 2 months

Rudd lasted longer than most after his first stint as PM, look what happened. Whitlam stayed on for 2 years as Opposition leader and then left Parliament 7 months after losing the 1977 election.

It has been 3 months since Abbott lost the office of PM. He has already stayed in Parliament after losing the PM office longer than his six predecessors except for Rudd's first stint.

Is this significant? Does Abbott still hold out hope of being PM again? If not, why does he stay on in Parliament? Perhaps he wants to leave office at the next election, but if so, why is there no announcement? Leaving it late makes it hard for the Liberals to preselect a good replacement for the Division of Warringah. Perhaps Abbott is still making up his mind. Or is Abbott planning a similar comeback to Rudd?

Turnbull may recoup many of the Lib supporters that turned their back on the Party when he backstabbed Abbott, if Abbott returned to the Front Bench. I will not vote Liberal if Turnbull leads the Coalition come Election time.

Fuzzball wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 10:14am:

Turnbull may recoup many of the Lib supporters that turned their back on the Party when he backstabbed Abbott, if Abbott returned to the Front Bench. I will not vote Liberal if Turnbull leads the Coalition come Election time.

it wont happen this LIb still wont vote for him...

we cant be BOUGHT like some lefties..

a dirty deed done by a sneaky person is not for me...

you guys love em... you are welcome the them..

I guess you have no choice in the matter your team is very dirty and sneaky..all the way through.

Bam wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 10:11am:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:34am: Redmond Neck wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:27am: Lets hope not. no, no .... as a labor supporter I want tony front and center.  ;D ;D ;D ;D Or perhaps in the Ministry, undermining Turnbull. The best place for Abbott IMO is out of politics altogether. Except for MacMahon who stayed in Parliament for nearly 10 years, no ex-PM in the past 50 years has lasted more than about three years in Parliament once they lost the office of PM. Time in Parliament after being PM: Menzies - 3 weeks (retired as PM) Holt - none (died in office) McEwen - 3 years, 2 months (caretaker PM) Gorton - 4 years, 8 months McMahon - 9 years, 3 months Whitlam - 2 years, 7 months (2 years as Opposition leader) Fraser - 2 months Hawke - 2 months Keating - 1½ months Howard - none (lost seat at election) Rudd (1st) - 3 years, 5 months Gillard - 2½ months Rudd (2nd) - 2 months Rudd lasted longer than most after his first stint as PM, look what happened. Whitlam stayed on for 2 years as Opposition leader and then left Parliament 7 months after losing the 1977 election. It has been 3 months since Abbott lost the office of PM. He has already stayed in Parliament after losing the PM office longer than his six predecessors except for Rudd's first stint. Is this significant? Does Abbott still hold out hope of being PM again? If not, why does he stay on in Parliament? Perhaps he wants to leave office at the next election, but if so, why is there no announcement? Leaving it late makes it hard for the Liberals to preselect a good replacement for the Division of Warringah. Perhaps Abbott is still making up his mind. Or is Abbott planning a similar comeback to Rudd?

it is undermining..... gillard learnt that in a BIG WAY....leave him on the back bench.....he can do what he wants.. no ones business.......gillard should never have given krudd a portfolio...

I cant speak for Abbott but he doesnt strike me as a dirty deed payback type...but who knows...

bogarde73 wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 9:27am:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:52am: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:50am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:34am: Redmond Neck wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:27am: Lets hope not. no, no .... as a labor supporter I want tony front and center.  ;D ;D ;D ;D I thought you voted on issues John? and how have any of the 'issues' and the libs position on them changed since turncoat took office? You're dodging Andrei's question john. You've clearly identified yourself here as a Labor voter, without qualification, and in the past I can recall you saying you were a swing voter who voted according to the issues. You can't be both.

I generally, but not always, vote labor. I voted labor at the last 3 federal elections and so feel that I qualify as a labor voter.  ..... The libs despite all their promises and claims, are only ever interested in undermining employees rights and wages, and helping their corporate mates at the expense of the general public. If you think that is not an issue then I can't help you.

cods wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 9:29am:

bogarde73 wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 9:27am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:52am: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:50am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:34am: Redmond Neck wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:27am: Lets hope not. no, no .... as a labor supporter I want tony front and center.  ;D ;D ;D ;D I thought you voted on issues John? and how have any of the 'issues' and the libs position on them changed since turncoat took office? You're dodging Andrei's question john. You've clearly identified yourself here as a Labor voter, without qualification, and in the past I can recall you saying you were a swing voter who voted according to the issues. You can't be both. he can hes a lefty its you who cant... :) hes a member of the good old Double Standards party.. ;D ;D ;D ;D

no double standards cods ... it's not my fault the libs fail on all the major issues

cods wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 10:21am:

I cant speak for Abbott but he doesnt strike me as a dirty deed payback type...but who knows.

:D :D :D :D

who do you think has been orchestrating the leaks against turncoat?

cods wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 10:18am:

we cant be BOUGHT like some lefties..

but you can ...  Howard proved that

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 10:26am:

cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:18am: we cant be BOUGHT like some lefties.. but you can ...  Howard proved that

yeah he went to the election with the GST and I voted for it..


oh was that me being bought??.. I didnt realise that. ::)

cods wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 10:35am:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:26am: cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:18am: we cant be BOUGHT like some lefties.. but you can ...  Howard proved that yeah he went to the election with the GST and I voted for it.. oh was that me being bought??.. I didnt realise that. ::)

no, that was the democrats being bought. The majority of people (by a long way) voted against the GST

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 10:38am:

cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:35am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:26am: cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:18am: we cant be BOUGHT like some lefties.. but you can ...  Howard proved that yeah he went to the election with the GST and I voted for it.. oh was that me being bought??.. I didnt realise that. ::) no, that was the democrats being bought. The majority of people (by a long way) voted against the GST

That's bullshit !  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

aussie100percent wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 10:40am:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:38am: cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:35am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:26am: cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:18am: we cant be BOUGHT like some lefties.. but you can ...  Howard proved that yeah he went to the election with the GST and I voted for it.. oh was that me being bought??.. I didnt realise that. ::) no, that was the democrats being bought. The majority of people (by a long way) voted against the GST That's bullshit !  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

no it's not. I don't remember the exact number off hand but it was something like 55% voted against the libs and their GST.

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 10:44am:

aussie100percent wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:40am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:38am: cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:35am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:26am: cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:18am: we cant be BOUGHT like some lefties.. but you can ...  Howard proved that yeah he went to the election with the GST and I voted for it.. oh was that me being bought??.. I didnt realise that. ::) no, that was the democrats being bought. The majority of people (by a long way) voted against the GST That's bullshit !  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D no it's not. I don't remember the exact number off hand but it was something like 55% voted against the libs and their GST.

Parliament Seats
Coalition      
 
54.05%

;D ;D
Labor      
 
45.27%
Independents      
 
0.68

aussie100percent wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 10:55am:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:44am: aussie100percent wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:40am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:38am: cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:35am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:26am: cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:18am: we cant be BOUGHT like some lefties.. but you can ...  Howard proved that yeah he went to the election with the GST and I voted for it.. oh was that me being bought??.. I didnt realise that. ::) no, that was the democrats being bought. The majority of people (by a long way) voted against the GST That's bullshit !  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D no it's not. I don't remember the exact number off hand but it was something like 55% voted against the libs and their GST. Parliament Seats Coalition         54.05% ;D ;D Labor         45.27% Independents         0.68

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_federal_election,_1998

Labor      40.10%
Liberal      33.89%
One Nation 8.43%
National     5.29%
Democrats       5.13%
Greens      2.14%
CLP           0.32%
Independents      1.76%
Other      2.94%

Two Party Preferred Vote
Labor      50.98%
Coalition      49.02%

Parliament Seats
Coalition      54.05%
Labor      45.27%
Independents      0.68%


Damn Lies & Statistics

Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 11:46am:

aussie100percent wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:55am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:44am: aussie100percent wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:40am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:38am: cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:35am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:26am: cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:18am: we cant be BOUGHT like some lefties.. but you can ...  Howard proved that yeah he went to the election with the GST and I voted for it.. oh was that me being bought??.. I didnt realise that. ::) no, that was the democrats being bought. The majority of people (by a long way) voted against the GST That's bullshit !  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D no it's not. I don't remember the exact number off hand but it was something like 55% voted against the libs and their GST. Parliament Seats Coalition         54.05% ;D ;D Labor         45.27% Independents         0.68 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_federal_election,_1998 Labor      40.10% Liberal      33.89% One Nation 8.43% National     5.29% Democrats       5.13% Greens      2.14% CLP           0.32% Independents      1.76% Other      2.94% Two Party Preferred Vote Labor      50.98% Coalition      49.02% Parliament Seats Coalition      54.05% Labor      45.27% Independents      0.68% Damn Lies & Statistics

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY0WxgSXdEE

Another righty bites the dust, and another one gone and another one gone  ;D

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 10:44am:

aussie100percent wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:40am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:38am: cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:35am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:26am: cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:18am: we cant be BOUGHT like some lefties.. but you can ...  Howard proved that yeah he went to the election with the GST and I voted for it.. oh was that me being bought??.. I didnt realise that. ::) no, that was the democrats being bought. The majority of people (by a long way) voted against the GST That's bullshit !  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D no it's not. I don't remember the exact number off hand but it was something like 55% voted against the libs and their GST.

Wasn't that the election that the Libs won with 49% of the vote.

The Vote in the senate was a landslide against the GST.

The GST was only passed because the Democrats back flipped from their solid as a rock election commitment.

The only reason that the Democrats no longer exist is that the people who voted for them were voting against the GST and as a result of their backflip never voted for them again.

aussie100percent wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 10:55am:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:44am: aussie100percent wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:40am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:38am: cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:35am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:26am: cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:18am: we cant be BOUGHT like some lefties.. but you can ...  Howard proved that yeah he went to the election with the GST and I voted for it.. oh was that me being bought??.. I didnt realise that. ::) no, that was the democrats being bought. The majority of people (by a long way) voted against the GST That's bullshit !  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D no it's not. I don't remember the exact number off hand but it was something like 55% voted against the libs and their GST. Parliament Seats Coalition         54.05% ;D ;D Labor         45.27% Independents         0.68

I would tell you your stats are lying, but others have already done that for me. Try again next time.

A bit like the unmandated Carbon Tax Jonathon?  :D

Swagman wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 12:32pm:

A bit like the unmandated Carbon Tax Jonathon?  :D

nothing like the carbon tax Swag ....

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 12:25pm:

aussie100percent wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:55am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:44am: aussie100percent wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:40am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:38am: cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:35am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:26am: cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:18am: we cant be BOUGHT like some lefties.. but you can ...  Howard proved that yeah he went to the election with the GST and I voted for it.. oh was that me being bought??.. I didnt realise that. ::) no, that was the democrats being bought. The majority of people (by a long way) voted against the GST That's bullshit !  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D no it's not. I don't remember the exact number off hand but it was something like 55% voted against the libs and their GST. Parliament Seats Coalition         54.05% ;D ;D Labor         45.27% Independents         0.68 I would tell you your stats are lying, but others have already done that for me. Try again next time.

;D ;D  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_results_for_the_Australian_federal_election,_1998

Try this link buggernuckle  ;D

aussie100percent wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 12:34pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 12:25pm: aussie100percent wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:55am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:44am: aussie100percent wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:40am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:38am: cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:35am: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:26am: cods wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:18am: we cant be BOUGHT like some lefties.. but you can ...  Howard proved that yeah he went to the election with the GST and I voted for it.. oh was that me being bought??.. I didnt realise that. ::) no, that was the democrats being bought. The majority of people (by a long way) voted against the GST That's bullshit !  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D no it's not. I don't remember the exact number off hand but it was something like 55% voted against the libs and their GST. Parliament Seats Coalition         54.05% ;D ;D Labor         45.27% Independents         0.68 I would tell you your stats are lying, but others have already done that for me. Try again next time. ;D ;D  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_results_for_the_Australian_federal_election,_1998 Try this link buggernuckle  ;D

Smithy put up the numbers for you


Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 11:46am:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_federal_election,_1998 Labor      40.10% Liberal      33.89% One Nation 8.43% National     5.29% Democrats       5.13% Greens      2.14% CLP           0.32% Independents      1.76% Other      2.94% Two Party Preferred Vote Labor      50.98% Coalition      49.02% Parliament Seats Coalition      54.05% Labor      45.27% Independents      0.68%

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tV-wgZBGfCo

Hump day funny  ;D

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 12:34pm:

Swagman wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 12:32pm: A bit like the unmandated Carbon Tax Jonathon?  :D nothing like the carbon tax Swag ....

...for stuffing the economy  :D

Swagman wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 12:42pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 12:34pm: Swagman wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 12:32pm: A bit like the unmandated Carbon Tax Jonathon?  :D nothing like the carbon tax Swag .... ...for stuffing the economy  :D

yeah ... cause it's was going gangbusters before and after  :D :D :D

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 12:45pm:

Swagman wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 12:42pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 12:34pm: Swagman wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 12:32pm: A bit like the unmandated Carbon Tax Jonathon?  :D nothing like the carbon tax Swag .... ...for stuffing the economy  :D yeah ... cause it's was going gangbusters before and after  :D :D :D

I can't believe how many major resource projects are approved and under way since the Libs abolished the CT and MRRT  :(

If Turnbull allows Abbott back into the tent he will be working on the same theory as Gillard.

"Keep your friends close & your enemies even closer"

It will dispel any thought of a MODERATE LNP & frankly with Abbott back & his henchmen calling the shots combined with a possible Trump election win in the states there will be nowhere to hide as we march once again down the road to  mass annihilation.

---

Swagman wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 12:32pm:

A bit like the unmandated Carbon Tax Jonathon?  :D

Well, no.

For starters the carbon tax WAS mandated.

Yes, but there must be a.spot for a talented Jobs prime minister, shurely.

Swagman wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 12:42pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 12:34pm: Swagman wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 12:32pm: A bit like the unmandated Carbon Tax Jonathon?  :D nothing like the carbon tax Swag .... ...for stuffing the economy  :D

Would not be 1000th the impact of increasing the GST by 5% that so many of the fixed carbon price opponents support.

Remember the years the conservatives spent crying about a piddling little nothing much carbon price who now support the greatest tax increase in Australia's history.

Its time wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 1:19pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 12:45pm: Swagman wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 12:42pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 12:34pm: Swagman wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 12:32pm: A bit like the unmandated Carbon Tax Jonathon?  :D nothing like the carbon tax Swag .... ...for stuffing the economy  :D yeah ... cause it's was going gangbusters before and after  :D :D :D I can't believe how many major resource projects are approved and under way since the Libs abolished the CT and MRRT  :(

all ZERO of them?  ........ yeah , what a success that turned out to be :D :D

Kat wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 1:21pm:

Swagman wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 12:32pm: A bit like the unmandated Carbon Tax Jonathon?  :D Well, no. For starters the carbon tax WAS mandated.

really oh thats right By the three Musketeers....its amazing how you forget isnt it?..

there will be NO CARBON TAX under a govt I lead..

means the dead set opposite....

in labor speak..

got it!

Its time wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 1:19pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 12:45pm: Swagman wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 12:42pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 12:34pm: Swagman wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 12:32pm: A bit like the unmandated Carbon Tax Jonathon?  :D nothing like the carbon tax Swag .... ...for stuffing the economy  :D yeah ... cause it's was going gangbusters before and after  :D :D :D I can't believe how many major resource projects are approved and under way since the Libs abolished the CT and MRRT  :(

you havent taken any notice of the senate have you dear?...

major resources....you dont mean GAS by any chance do you?...

no I didnt think so...

.trying hard to think about any other MAJOR RESOURCE ...

oh your talking about MONEY THAT COMES OUT OF FRESH AIR>>

dont you remember silly......the CT turned our mining resource into a  spiraling death throes....

there is no mining to TAX anymore...

hasnt anyone told you....tsk tsk.

cods wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 10:18am:

Fuzzball wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 10:14am: Turnbull may recoup many of the Lib supporters that turned their back on the Party when he backstabbed Abbott, if Abbott returned to the Front Bench. I will not vote Liberal if Turnbull leads the Coalition come Election time. it wont happen this LIb still wont vote for him... we cant be BOUGHT like some lefties.. a dirty deed done by a sneaky person is not for me... you guys love em... you are welcome the them.. I guess you have no choice in the matter your team is very dirty and sneaky..all the way through.

I TOTALLY agree with Cods.

I shall "maintain the rage" for as long as the lefties did when Gough got the chop by the Aussie population, or until Turncoat leaves Parliament with his tail between his legs.

This is not about Tony Abbott, it is about his "Team" and their deceit, treachery, betrayal and insincerity. I will NEVER award somebody for that behaviour.

cods wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 3:20pm:

Kat wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 1:21pm: Swagman wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 12:32pm: A bit like the unmandated Carbon Tax Jonathon?  :D Well, no. For starters the carbon tax WAS mandated. really oh thats right By the three Musketeers....its amazing how you forget isnt it?.. there will be NO CARBON TAX under a govt I lead.. means the dead set opposite.... in labor speak.. got it!

So

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VN-hbWVXsyE

Means the EXACT opposite in LNP speak Cods?

Gillard broke her word to secure power, maybe not forgivable but understandable in some context.

What's Tones's excuse, please don't say Labor debt because Tones/LNP has now doubled that so Thrift is not available as a reason.

cods wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 3:20pm:

Kat wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 1:21pm: Swagman wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 12:32pm: A bit like the unmandated Carbon Tax Jonathon?  :D Well, no. For starters the carbon tax WAS mandated. really oh thats right By the three Musketeers....its amazing how you forget isnt it?.. MY memory is just fine. there will be NO CARBON TAX under a govt I lead but let it be known that I fully intend to price carbon. Show the WHOLE quote, for once... Oh, and BTW, it was NEVER a 'tax' - that was another LNP lie. means the dead set opposite.... No, it means exactly what she said. Not her fault or mine that fools deliberately misquoted her. in labor speak.. At least Labor spokespeople don't have forked tongues. got it! Somehow I doubt that.

Tony would be great on the front bench but Turncoat doesn't deserve to have him on it...

Even now the media still listens and reports more on what Tony says as he has been 100% right on national and international issues. .

And as.Bob Hawk said a day or two ago - Tony_Abbott is a thoroughly Decent Man...

He's still working within the community non stop.. with schools. . With the CFA etc etc .... one of the hardest working Public Servants in Aust... :)

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 3:56pm:

And as.Bob Hawk said a day or two ago - Tony_Abbott is a thoroughly Decent Man...

............but a hopeless Prime Minister

Did you miss that bit?

Tony to make a comeback?


In revenge of the sith.

http://screenrant.com/wp-content/uploads/Star-Wars-7-Rumor-Emperor-Returning.jpg

Abbott is under threat in his own electorate, and if that was not enough to keep him on the back bench......there is also the old rule of.....when you have your opponent on the ground, put your foot on his throat and keep him there.

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 3:56pm:

Tony would be great on the front bench but Turncoat doesn't deserve to have him on it... Even now the media still listens and reports more on what Tony says as he has been 100% right on national and international issues. . And as.Bob Hawk said a day or two ago - Tony_Abbott is a thoroughly Decent Man... He's still working within the community non stop.. with schools. . With the CFA etc etc .... one of the hardest working Public Servants in Aust... :)

Exactly. Tony Abbott is a decent man. Anyone who thinks he will sit, sogging in his armchair at home is up themselves. Tony has definitely worked his way into Heaven when he carks it. I doubt I will see him there.  ;)

Aussie wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 4:26pm:

Abbott is under threat in his own electorate, and if that was not enough to keep him on the back bench......there is also the old rule of.....when you have your opponent on the ground, put your foot on his throat and keep him there.

Get a grip! Why are you so brutal? Not getting any at home?

Tony has other interests than Parliament.

Is Clive still "doing things for Fairfax"? ;D ;D

It seems to me that if Mr Abbott had been a decent leader, articulate, competent, honest and actually leading there would be no need for him to make a come back....

Given there is a need for him to maybe make said come back, he clearly needs to work on a few aspects of his presentation and leadership style...

I realise he does a lot of volunteer work (fire fighting and Surf Life Saving) so can only imagine him to be a bit of a decent bloke at heart. Politically though, he is a bombastic and toxic win at all costs regardless of collateral damage attack dog... That is not great for a PM - clearly effective as a leader of opposition, perhaps after the next election he and his party might be better placed for this alleged come back to occur - he did make an effective opposition leader to some extent after all.

Phemanderac wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 4:37pm:

It seems to me that if Mr Abbott had been a decent leader, articulate, competent, honest and actually leading there would be no need for him to make a come back.... Given there is a need for him to maybe make said come back, he clearly needs to work on a few aspects of his presentation and leadership style... I realise he does a lot of volunteer work (fire fighting and Surf Life Saving) so can only imagine him to be a bit of a decent bloke at heart. Politically though, he is a bombastic and toxic win at all costs regardless of collateral damage attack dog... That is not great for a PM - clearly effective as a leader of opposition, perhaps after the next election he and his party might be better placed for this alleged come back to occur - he did make an effective opposition leader to some extent after all.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/LAMHiVcfRho/hqdefault.jpg

Neferti wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 4:36pm:

Tony has other interests than Parliament.

true ... he and Peta have so much more time together now :D :D

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 4:48pm:

Neferti wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 4:36pm: Tony has other interests than Parliament. true ... he and Peta have so much more time together now :D :D

Yeah, right and I KNOW that you and Marla/Lisa/Agnes et al are having "cybersex", right here under our very eyes!  Does your wife realise?  ;D

Neferti wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 5:01pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 4:48pm: Neferti wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 4:36pm: Tony has other interests than Parliament. true ... he and Peta have so much more time together now :D :D Yeah, right and I KNOW that you and Marla/Lisa/Agnes et al are having "cybersex", right here under our very eyes!  Does your wife realise?  ;D

of course she does. Does yours?

No way, I think he should remain on the backbench and undermine Turnbull every chance he gets. Retribution to that disgusting wolf in sheep's clothing.

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 5:37pm:

No way, I think he should remain on the backbench and undermine Turnbull every chance he gets. Retribution to that disgusting wolf in sheep's clothing.

so you won't be voting liberal matty?

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 5:37pm:

No way, I think he should remain on the backbench and undermine Turnbull every chance he gets. Retribution to that disgusting wolf in sheep's clothing.

How very Christian of you Matthew

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 5:37pm:

No way, I think he should remain on the backbench and undermine Turnbull every chance he gets. Retribution to that disgusting wolf in sheep's clothing.

No given the chance he will go to the front bench and undermine Turnbull every chance he gets much more effectively.

Aussie wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 4:26pm:

Abbott is under threat in his own electorate, and if that was not enough to keep him on the back bench......there is also the old rule of.....when you have your opponent on the ground, put your foot on his throat and keep him there.

absolute garbage. ..

if he stands in his seat at the next election he'll poo it in..

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 7:31pm:

Aussie wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 4:26pm: Abbott is under threat in his own electorate, and if that was not enough to keep him on the back bench......there is also the old rule of.....when you have your opponent on the ground, put your foot on his throat and keep him there. absolute garbage. .. if he stands in his seat at the next election he'll poo it in..

Probably....but the Liberal people there clearly would prefer that he not be their candidate.

Abbott will not get a Ministry.  No way.

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 5:39pm:

matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 5:37pm: No way, I think he should remain on the backbench and undermine Turnbull every chance he gets. Retribution to that disgusting wolf in sheep's clothing. so you won't be voting liberal matty?

Not while Turnbull is leader.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 5:58pm:

matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 5:37pm: No way, I think he should remain on the backbench and undermine Turnbull every chance he gets. Retribution to that disgusting wolf in sheep's clothing. How very Christian of you Matthew

Oh smithy, what a great pleasure to talk to you again.

An eye for an eye - Exodus 21.

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 7:36pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 5:39pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 5:37pm: No way, I think he should remain on the backbench and undermine Turnbull every chance he gets. Retribution to that disgusting wolf in sheep's clothing. so you won't be voting liberal matty? Not while Turnbull is leader.

does that mean you'll preference the libs after labor Matty?

Funny how the Left's hate for Abbott is still so palpable. Like how they went on on about him wearing a speedo, pathetic and ridiculous. Just envious that he still looks that good in his 50s and that he does more charity work than Gillard, Rudd and Tunrbull combined times 1000.

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 7:37pm:

matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:36pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 5:39pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 5:37pm: No way, I think he should remain on the backbench and undermine Turnbull every chance he gets. Retribution to that disgusting wolf in sheep's clothing. so you won't be voting liberal matty? Not while Turnbull is leader. does that mean you'll preference the libs after labor Matty?

No John, I will put in a blank vote if I even bother turning up at all.

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 7:41pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:37pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:36pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 5:39pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 5:37pm: No way, I think he should remain on the backbench and undermine Turnbull every chance he gets. Retribution to that disgusting wolf in sheep's clothing. so you won't be voting liberal matty? Not while Turnbull is leader. does that mean you'll preference the libs after labor Matty? No John, I will put in a blank vote if I even bother turning up at all.

ahhh, so your taking the cowards route. If you really wanted to protest, you'd lodge a protest vote. That's how it works ... all you are doing by not turning up is having a hissy fit.

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 7:40pm:

Funny how the Left's hate for Abbott is still so palpable. Like how they went on on about him wearing a speedo, pathetic and ridiculous. Just envious that he still looks that good in his 50s and that he does more charity work than Gillard, Rudd and Tunrbull combined times 1000.

yes but its easy to do charity work when taxpayers are forking the bill.

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 7:43pm:

matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:41pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:37pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:36pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 5:39pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 5:37pm: No way, I think he should remain on the backbench and undermine Turnbull every chance he gets. Retribution to that disgusting wolf in sheep's clothing. so you won't be voting liberal matty? Not while Turnbull is leader. does that mean you'll preference the libs after labor Matty? No John, I will put in a blank vote if I even bother turning up at all. ahhh, so your taking the cowards route. If you really wanted to protest, you'd lodge a protest vote. That's how it works ... all you are doing by not turning up is having a hissy fit.

Uhh no. Your point has no Logic. Going by your logic (or lack thereof) how would someone point in a protest vote if they hated Labor, Liberal, the Greens and other parties standing?

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 7:44pm:

matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:40pm: Funny how the Left's hate for Abbott is still so palpable. Like how they went on on about him wearing a speedo, pathetic and ridiculous. Just envious that he still looks that good in his 50s and that he does more charity work than Gillard, Rudd and Tunrbull combined times 1000. yes but its easy to do charity work when taxpayers are forking the bill.

Link please? He has been a surf lifesaver and volunteer firefighter for years, how has the taxpayer footed the bill for any of that?

The left just hates Abbott and wants to find reasons to hate Abbott. Like I said, somewhere wearing a speedos also makes him bad, and even when he does something good like all the charity work, they turn that around to try make him look bad. Pathetic and ridiculous.

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 7:46pm:

how would someone point in a protest vote if they hated Labor, Liberal, the Greens and other parties standing?

by voting for the opposite of what the person they are protesting about wants ... if that means you vote for someone you don't like, then so be it.

If people who didn't like turnbull simply didn't turn up, turnbull would romp it in. Not voting has a neutral outcome on the end result. You didn't vote for him, but you didn't vote against him. As far as he or anyone else is concerned, you're irrelevant.

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 7:49pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:44pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:40pm: Funny how the Left's hate for Abbott is still so palpable. Like how they went on on about him wearing a speedo, pathetic and ridiculous. Just envious that he still looks that good in his 50s and that he does more charity work than Gillard, Rudd and Tunrbull combined times 1000. yes but its easy to do charity work when taxpayers are forking the bill. Link please? He has been a surf lifesaver and volunteer firefighter for years, how has the taxpayer footed the bill for any of that? The left just hates Abbott and wants to find reasons to hate Abbott. Like I said, somewhere wearing a speedos also makes him bad, and even when he does something good like all the charity work, they turn that around to try make him look bad. Pathetic and ridiculous.

What did Wyatt Roy do, Matty?

Aussie wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 7:50pm:

matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:49pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:44pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:40pm: Funny how the Left's hate for Abbott is still so palpable. Like how they went on on about him wearing a speedo, pathetic and ridiculous. Just envious that he still looks that good in his 50s and that he does more charity work than Gillard, Rudd and Tunrbull combined times 1000. yes but its easy to do charity work when taxpayers are forking the bill. Link please? He has been a surf lifesaver and volunteer firefighter for years, how has the taxpayer footed the bill for any of that? The left just hates Abbott and wants to find reasons to hate Abbott. Like I said, somewhere wearing a speedos also makes him bad, and even when he does something good like all the charity work, they turn that around to try make him look bad. Pathetic and ridiculous. What did Wyatt Roy do, Matty?

I already told you, Aussie. He voted for Turnbull.

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 7:49pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:44pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:40pm: Funny how the Left's hate for Abbott is still so palpable. Like how they went on on about him wearing a speedo, pathetic and ridiculous. Just envious that he still looks that good in his 50s and that he does more charity work than Gillard, Rudd and Tunrbull combined times 1000. yes but its easy to do charity work when taxpayers are forking the bill. Link please? .

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-08/abbott-denies-taking-taxpayers-for-ride-over-pollie-pedal/5008456

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 7:50pm:

matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:46pm: how would someone point in a protest vote if they hated Labor, Liberal, the Greens and other parties standing? by voting for the opposite of what the person they are protesting about wants ... if that means you vote for someone you don't like, then so be it. If people who didn't like turnbull simply didn't turn up, turnbull would romp it in. Not voting has a neutral outcome on the end result. You didn't vote for him, but you didn't vote against him. As far as he or anyone else is concerned, you're irrelevant.

However, if someone can't stand all of the parties and is opposed to them, then for whom does such person vote?

Nobody who pays more than their fair share of taxes is irrelevant. I am sick of that argument.

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 7:51pm:

Aussie wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:50pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:49pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:44pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:40pm: Funny how the Left's hate for Abbott is still so palpable. Like how they went on on about him wearing a speedo, pathetic and ridiculous. Just envious that he still looks that good in his 50s and that he does more charity work than Gillard, Rudd and Tunrbull combined times 1000. yes but its easy to do charity work when taxpayers are forking the bill. Link please? He has been a surf lifesaver and volunteer firefighter for years, how has the taxpayer footed the bill for any of that? The left just hates Abbott and wants to find reasons to hate Abbott. Like I said, somewhere wearing a speedos also makes him bad, and even when he does something good like all the charity work, they turn that around to try make him look bad. Pathetic and ridiculous. What did Wyatt Roy do, Matty? I already told you, Aussie. He voted for Turnbull.

Why select just him?  Seems pretty obvious he had quite a few fellow travellers.

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 7:51pm:

matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:49pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:44pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:40pm: Funny how the Left's hate for Abbott is still so palpable. Like how they went on on about him wearing a speedo, pathetic and ridiculous. Just envious that he still looks that good in his 50s and that he does more charity work than Gillard, Rudd and Tunrbull combined times 1000. yes but its easy to do charity work when taxpayers are forking the bill. Link please? . http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-08/abbott-denies-taking-taxpayers-for-ride-over-pollie-pedal/5008456

Okay, one thing. However what about all the years of firefighting and lifesaving? That was before he entered Parliament.

Aussie wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 7:59pm:

matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:51pm: Aussie wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:50pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:49pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:44pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:40pm: Funny how the Left's hate for Abbott is still so palpable. Like how they went on on about him wearing a speedo, pathetic and ridiculous. Just envious that he still looks that good in his 50s and that he does more charity work than Gillard, Rudd and Tunrbull combined times 1000. yes but its easy to do charity work when taxpayers are forking the bill. Link please? He has been a surf lifesaver and volunteer firefighter for years, how has the taxpayer footed the bill for any of that? The left just hates Abbott and wants to find reasons to hate Abbott. Like I said, somewhere wearing a speedos also makes him bad, and even when he does something good like all the charity work, they turn that around to try make him look bad. Pathetic and ridiculous. What did Wyatt Roy do, Matty? I already told you, Aussie. He voted for Turnbull. Why select just him?  Seems pretty obvious he had quite a few fellow travellers.

Absolutely, I would love to see all 55 fry. He just seems the one that is more probably to happen though.

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 7:58pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:50pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:46pm: how would someone point in a protest vote if they hated Labor, Liberal, the Greens and other parties standing? by voting for the opposite of what the person they are protesting about wants ... if that means you vote for someone you don't like, then so be it. If people who didn't like turnbull simply didn't turn up, turnbull would romp it in. Not voting has a neutral outcome on the end result. You didn't vote for him, but you didn't vote against him. As far as he or anyone else is concerned, you're irrelevant. However, if someone can't stand all of the parties and is opposed to them, then for whom does such person vote? Nobody who pays more than their fair share of taxes is irrelevant. I am sick of that argument.

sick of it or not, you are irrelevant, as soon as you don't vote. The ONLY importance you have to any politician is your vote. You throw that away and you mean no more to them then your neighbors cat.

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 7:59pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:51pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:49pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:44pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:40pm: Funny how the Left's hate for Abbott is still so palpable. Like how they went on on about him wearing a speedo, pathetic and ridiculous. Just envious that he still looks that good in his 50s and that he does more charity work than Gillard, Rudd and Tunrbull combined times 1000. yes but its easy to do charity work when taxpayers are forking the bill. Link please? . http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-08/abbott-denies-taking-taxpayers-for-ride-over-pollie-pedal/5008456 Okay, one thing. However what about all the years of firefighting and lifesaving? That was before he entered Parliament.

he's been in parliament for most of his working life .... how do you know what he claimed and didn't claim? He's already proven he has no morals when claiming these sorts of expenses.

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 8:01pm:

matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:58pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:50pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:46pm: how would someone point in a protest vote if they hated Labor, Liberal, the Greens and other parties standing? by voting for the opposite of what the person they are protesting about wants ... if that means you vote for someone you don't like, then so be it. If people who didn't like turnbull simply didn't turn up, turnbull would romp it in. Not voting has a neutral outcome on the end result. You didn't vote for him, but you didn't vote against him. As far as he or anyone else is concerned, you're irrelevant. However, if someone can't stand all of the parties and is opposed to them, then for whom does such person vote? Nobody who pays more than their fair share of taxes is irrelevant. I am sick of that argument. sick of it or not, you are irrelevant, as soon as you don't vote. The ONLY importance you have to any politician is your vote. You throw that away and you mean no more to them then your neighbors cat.

I am not talking about politicians, I am talking about the wider community. Those who pay more tax matter than those who pay less. They're the ones who have to give the most, and get back the least in return.

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 8:03pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:01pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:58pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:50pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:46pm: how would someone point in a protest vote if they hated Labor, Liberal, the Greens and other parties standing? by voting for the opposite of what the person they are protesting about wants ... if that means you vote for someone you don't like, then so be it. If people who didn't like turnbull simply didn't turn up, turnbull would romp it in. Not voting has a neutral outcome on the end result. You didn't vote for him, but you didn't vote against him. As far as he or anyone else is concerned, you're irrelevant. However, if someone can't stand all of the parties and is opposed to them, then for whom does such person vote? Nobody who pays more than their fair share of taxes is irrelevant. I am sick of that argument. sick of it or not, you are irrelevant, as soon as you don't vote. The ONLY importance you have to any politician is your vote. You throw that away and you mean no more to them then your neighbors cat. I am not talking about politicians, I am talking about the wider community. Those who pay more tax matter than those who pay less. They're the ones who have to give the most, and get back the least in return.

wider community my arse ... you were talking about protesting against Turncoat

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 8:02pm:

matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:59pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:51pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:49pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:44pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:40pm: Funny how the Left's hate for Abbott is still so palpable. Like how they went on on about him wearing a speedo, pathetic and ridiculous. Just envious that he still looks that good in his 50s and that he does more charity work than Gillard, Rudd and Tunrbull combined times 1000. yes but its easy to do charity work when taxpayers are forking the bill. Link please? . http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-08/abbott-denies-taking-taxpayers-for-ride-over-pollie-pedal/5008456 Okay, one thing. However what about all the years of firefighting and lifesaving? That was before he entered Parliament. he's been in parliament for most of his working life .... how do you know what he claimed and didn't claim? He's already proven he has no morals when claiming these sorts of expenses.

I know that he did charity work before he entered Parliament. People outside of politics have talked about what a good man he is. Even your beloved Hawke said recently that he is a decent man.

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 8:05pm:

matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:03pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:01pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:58pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:50pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:46pm: how would someone point in a protest vote if they hated Labor, Liberal, the Greens and other parties standing? by voting for the opposite of what the person they are protesting about wants ... if that means you vote for someone you don't like, then so be it. If people who didn't like turnbull simply didn't turn up, turnbull would romp it in. Not voting has a neutral outcome on the end result. You didn't vote for him, but you didn't vote against him. As far as he or anyone else is concerned, you're irrelevant. However, if someone can't stand all of the parties and is opposed to them, then for whom does such person vote? Nobody who pays more than their fair share of taxes is irrelevant. I am sick of that argument. sick of it or not, you are irrelevant, as soon as you don't vote. The ONLY importance you have to any politician is your vote. You throw that away and you mean no more to them then your neighbors cat. I am not talking about politicians, I am talking about the wider community. Those who pay more tax matter than those who pay less. They're the ones who have to give the most, and get back the least in return. wider community my arse ... you were talking about protesting against Turncoat

I was talking about Turnbull, correct. However I then went on to talk about how anyone who pays taxes has the right to have a say about how the country is run. Forfeiting your vote does not mean forfeiting your say. The more tax you pay, the more right you have to a say about this country is run.

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 8:09pm:

Forfeiting your vote does not mean forfeiting your say.

yes it does .... your ONLY say that really counts is at election time. Everything else is just blowing hot air to make you feel good.

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 8:09pm:

The more tax you pay, the more right you have to a say about this country is run.

;D ;D ;D ;D

ohh grow up and stop being so naive. Everyone has an equal right . the amount of tax paid is irrelevant

Quote:

I know that he did charity work before he entered Parliament. People outside of politics have talked about what a good man he is. Even your beloved Hawke said recently that he is a decent man.

You know he did charity work before he entered Parliament?  Great.  Produce a link which confirms that.  As far as I am concerned the only charity work the arsehole ever did was 'at home,' where 'charity begins.'  His whole life has been......"It is all about me."

I disagree with the decrepit mind of Bob Hawke who has lost the perception he had, along with his marbles.  I reckon Bob is looking for support from the Libs so that when he drops off the perch, they will all say great things about him at his State Funeral.

Abbott is a lousy human being.  He is a thug, woman basher, a flake, Mummy's Boy, liar, philanderer, bully boy, misogynist, likely illegal as a politician, candidate for The Hague (Operation Sovereign Borders....'by hook or by crook,') and a failure as  a Prime Minister.....and that is just off the top of my head.

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 7:37pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 5:58pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 5:37pm: No way, I think he should remain on the backbench and undermine Turnbull every chance he gets. Retribution to that disgusting wolf in sheep's clothing. How very Christian of you Matthew Oh smithy, what a great pleasure to talk to you again. An eye for an eye - Exodus 21.

So your not a Christian but a Jew
Seeing exodus is the 2nd book of the Torah
Jesus is the New Testament not the old.

Aussie wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 7:33pm:

Abbott will not get a Ministry.  No way.

You're right ... the Catholic church don't ordain married men as priests.

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 8:09pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:05pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:03pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:01pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:58pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:50pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:46pm: how would someone point in a protest vote if they hated Labor, Liberal, the Greens and other parties standing? by voting for the opposite of what the person they are protesting about wants ... if that means you vote for someone you don't like, then so be it. If people who didn't like turnbull simply didn't turn up, turnbull would romp it in. Not voting has a neutral outcome on the end result. You didn't vote for him, but you didn't vote against him. As far as he or anyone else is concerned, you're irrelevant. However, if someone can't stand all of the parties and is opposed to them, then for whom does such person vote? Nobody who pays more than their fair share of taxes is irrelevant. I am sick of that argument. sick of it or not, you are irrelevant, as soon as you don't vote. The ONLY importance you have to any politician is your vote. You throw that away and you mean no more to them then your neighbors cat. I am not talking about politicians, I am talking about the wider community. Those who pay more tax matter than those who pay less. They're the ones who have to give the most, and get back the least in return. wider community my arse ... you were talking about protesting against Turncoat I was talking about Turnbull, correct. However I then went on to talk about how anyone who pays taxes has the right to have a say about how the country is run. Forfeiting your vote does not mean forfeiting your say. The more tax you pay, the more right you have to a say about this country is run.

No, that's just bullsh1t.

John Smith wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 8:12pm:

matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:09pm: Forfeiting your vote does not mean forfeiting your say. yes it does .... your ONLY say that really counts is at election time. Everything else is just blowing hot air to make you feel good.

I am talking in the context of situations such as these. For example, political conversations that are had on this forum.

Aussie wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 8:22pm:

Quote: I know that he did charity work before he entered Parliament. People outside of politics have talked about what a good man he is. Even your beloved Hawke said recently that he is a decent man. You know he did charity work before he entered Parliament?  Great.  Produce a link which confirms that.  As far as I am concerned the only charity work the arsehole ever did was 'at home,' where 'charity begins.'  His whole life has been......"It is all about me." I disagree with the decrepit mind of Bob Hawke who has lost the perception he had, along with his marbles.  I reckon Bob is looking for support from the Libs so that when he drops off the perch, they will all say great things about him at his State Funeral. Abbott is a lousy human being.  He is a thug, woman basher, a flake, Mummy's Boy, liar, philanderer, bully boy, misogynist, likely illegal as a politician, candidate for The Hague (Operation Sovereign Borders....'by hook or by crook,') and a failure as  a Prime Minister.....and that is just off the top of my head.

Here we go again with the abuse and allegations without substance. Where is the evidence that he is any of those things, particularly a woman basher?

Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 8:42pm:

matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:37pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 5:58pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 5:37pm: No way, I think he should remain on the backbench and undermine Turnbull every chance he gets. Retribution to that disgusting wolf in sheep's clothing. How very Christian of you Matthew Oh smithy, what a great pleasure to talk to you again. An eye for an eye - Exodus 21. So your not a Christian but a Jew Seeing exodus is the 2nd book of the Torah Jesus is the New Testament not the old.

The Old Testament is still a part of the Christian Bible.

Kat wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 9:26pm:

matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:09pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:05pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:03pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:01pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:58pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:50pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:46pm: how would someone point in a protest vote if they hated Labor, Liberal, the Greens and other parties standing? by voting for the opposite of what the person they are protesting about wants ... if that means you vote for someone you don't like, then so be it. If people who didn't like turnbull simply didn't turn up, turnbull would romp it in. Not voting has a neutral outcome on the end result. You didn't vote for him, but you didn't vote against him. As far as he or anyone else is concerned, you're irrelevant. However, if someone can't stand all of the parties and is opposed to them, then for whom does such person vote? Nobody who pays more than their fair share of taxes is irrelevant. I am sick of that argument. sick of it or not, you are irrelevant, as soon as you don't vote. The ONLY importance you have to any politician is your vote. You throw that away and you mean no more to them then your neighbors cat. I am not talking about politicians, I am talking about the wider community. Those who pay more tax matter than those who pay less. They're the ones who have to give the most, and get back the least in return. wider community my arse ... you were talking about protesting against Turncoat I was talking about Turnbull, correct. However I then went on to talk about how anyone who pays taxes has the right to have a say about how the country is run. Forfeiting your vote does not mean forfeiting your say. The more tax you pay, the more right you have to a say about this country is run. No, that's just bullsh1t.

In your opinion and in John's opinion. You can't handle people having opinions opposed to yours.

Rich and middle class people arr unfairly forced to pay more tax, and hence they contribute more to the services and infrastructure in society, eg roads, hospitals and educational facilities. They also pay the benefits of dole bludgers like you and therefore, based on this contribution, I believe their say is worth more.

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 9:49pm:

Kat wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 9:26pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:09pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:05pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:03pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:01pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:58pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:50pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:46pm: how would someone point in a protest vote if they hated Labor, Liberal, the Greens and other parties standing? by voting for the opposite of what the person they are protesting about wants ... if that means you vote for someone you don't like, then so be it. If people who didn't like turnbull simply didn't turn up, turnbull would romp it in. Not voting has a neutral outcome on the end result. You didn't vote for him, but you didn't vote against him. As far as he or anyone else is concerned, you're irrelevant. However, if someone can't stand all of the parties and is opposed to them, then for whom does such person vote? Nobody who pays more than their fair share of taxes is irrelevant. I am sick of that argument. sick of it or not, you are irrelevant, as soon as you don't vote. The ONLY importance you have to any politician is your vote. You throw that away and you mean no more to them then your neighbors cat. I am not talking about politicians, I am talking about the wider community. Those who pay more tax matter than those who pay less. They're the ones who have to give the most, and get back the least in return. wider community my arse ... you were talking about protesting against Turncoat I was talking about Turnbull, correct. However I then went on to talk about how anyone who pays taxes has the right to have a say about how the country is run. Forfeiting your vote does not mean forfeiting your say. The more tax you pay, the more right you have to a say about this country is run. No, that's just bullsh1t. In your opinion and in John's opinion. You can't handle people having opinions opposed to yours. Rich and middle class people arr unfairly forced to pay more tax, and hence they contribute more to the services and infrastructure in society, eg roads, hospitals and educational facilities. They also pay the benefits of dole bludgers like you and therefore, based on this contribution, I believe their say is worth more.

Also, Matty, they can afford more prayers at mass and they get into Heaven - with decent people like us. It’s all in the Holy Bible.

The only place for the dolebludging leftards is Hell.

They won’t be laughing then, Matty.

But we will.

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 8:09pm:

The more tax you pay, the more right you have to a say about this country is run.

Just a point, as a percentage the poor pay more tax than just about anyone, the "middle class" pay the most but also get a considerable amount back in welfare, the rich pay hardly anything.

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 9:45pm:

Aussie wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:22pm: Quote: I know that he did charity work before he entered Parliament. People outside of politics have talked about what a good man he is. Even your beloved Hawke said recently that he is a decent man. You know he did charity work before he entered Parliament?  Great.  Produce a link which confirms that.  As far as I am concerned the only charity work the arsehole ever did was 'at home,' where 'charity begins.'  His whole life has been......"It is all about me." I disagree with the decrepit mind of Bob Hawke who has lost the perception he had, along with his marbles.  I reckon Bob is looking for support from the Libs so that when he drops off the perch, they will all say great things about him at his State Funeral. Abbott is a lousy human being.  He is a thug, woman basher, a flake, Mummy's Boy, liar, philanderer, bully boy, misogynist, likely illegal as a politician, candidate for The Hague (Operation Sovereign Borders....'by hook or by crook,') and a failure as  a Prime Minister.....and that is just off the top of my head. Here we go again with the abuse and allegations without substance. Where is the evidence that he is any of those things, particularly a woman basher?

The hideous woman gave a statement, Matty. It was supported  by two witnesses.

One was a Hindu, can you believe it? These people can’t even take a Christian oath in court.

If that’s their "evidence", they’re free to take the matter up with Mr Abbott.

He’s a Christian, so good luck with that.

ian wrote on Dec 31^st, 2015 at 12:29am:

matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:09pm: The more tax you pay, the more right you have to a say about this country is run. Just a point, as a percentage the poor pay more tax than just about anyone, the "middle class" pay the most but also get a considerable amount back in welfare, the rich pay hardly anything.

Yes, but what Matty meant is that the rich should still have the most say no matter how much tax they pay.

They do buy things from poor people, you know. Mr Abbott recently bought a bar fridge on Gumtree.

That’s what the trickle-down theory of economics is all about. If you people don’t like it, you can suck it up.

We get the most say, you know.

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 8:09pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:05pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:03pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:01pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:58pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:50pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:46pm: how would someone point in a protest vote if they hated Labor, Liberal, the Greens and other parties standing? by voting for the opposite of what the person they are protesting about wants ... if that means you vote for someone you don't like, then so be it. If people who didn't like turnbull simply didn't turn up, turnbull would romp it in. Not voting has a neutral outcome on the end result. You didn't vote for him, but you didn't vote against him. As far as he or anyone else is concerned, you're irrelevant. However, if someone can't stand all of the parties and is opposed to them, then for whom does such person vote? Nobody who pays more than their fair share of taxes is irrelevant. I am sick of that argument. sick of it or not, you are irrelevant, as soon as you don't vote. The ONLY importance you have to any politician is your vote. You throw that away and you mean no more to them then your neighbors cat. I am not talking about politicians, I am talking about the wider community. Those who pay more tax matter than those who pay less. They're the ones who have to give the most, and get back the least in return. wider community my arse ... you were talking about protesting against Turncoat I was talking about Turnbull, correct. However I then went on to talk about how anyone who pays taxes has the right to have a say about how the country is run. Forfeiting your vote does not mean forfeiting your say. The more tax you pay, the more right you have to a say about this country is run.

Exactly. You went to.Dunedin and Rhode Island to avoid the carbon tax, so you deserve a greater say than the miserable retards who stayed, Matty.

Imagine hanging around to pay tax. What a bunch of losers.

ian wrote on Dec 31^st, 2015 at 12:29am:

matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:09pm: The more tax you pay, the more right you have to a say about this country is run. Just a point, as a percentage the poor pay more tax than just about anyone, the "middle class" pay the most but also get a considerable amount back in welfare, the rich pay hardly anything.

So....  Jo and Joe Bloggs pay income tax far higher than.... (Kerry Packer) pays..... and pay proportionately more of their income via 'sales tax/GST'... and there are MILLIONS of Joe and Jo Bloggs out there.......... but they pay less tax?


;D  ;D  ;D  ;D  ;D

Must be an ochlocracy in which those with the least enforce payment from those with the most....

;D  ;D  ;D  ;D  ;D

Get a job and start paying some taxes, you loafer.... you can't become a psychistrist (sic) unless you are a Doctor of Medicine..... and what 'doctor of medicine' would spend time on a politics forum discussing drivel?

;D  ;D  ;D  ;D  ;D

Im not a loafer, i pay plenty of tax.

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 9:49pm:

Kat wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 9:26pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:09pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:05pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:03pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:01pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:58pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:50pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 7:46pm: how would someone point in a protest vote if they hated Labor, Liberal, the Greens and other parties standing? by voting for the opposite of what the person they are protesting about wants ... if that means you vote for someone you don't like, then so be it. If people who didn't like turnbull simply didn't turn up, turnbull would romp it in. Not voting has a neutral outcome on the end result. You didn't vote for him, but you didn't vote against him. As far as he or anyone else is concerned, you're irrelevant. However, if someone can't stand all of the parties and is opposed to them, then for whom does such person vote? Nobody who pays more than their fair share of taxes is irrelevant. I am sick of that argument. sick of it or not, you are irrelevant, as soon as you don't vote. The ONLY importance you have to any politician is your vote. You throw that away and you mean no more to them then your neighbors cat. I am not talking about politicians, I am talking about the wider community. Those who pay more tax matter than those who pay less. They're the ones who have to give the most, and get back the least in return. wider community my arse ... you were talking about protesting against Turncoat I was talking about Turnbull, correct. However I then went on to talk about how anyone who pays taxes has the right to have a say about how the country is run. Forfeiting your vote does not mean forfeiting your say. The more tax you pay, the more right you have to a say about this country is run. No, that's just bullsh1t. In your opinion and in John's opinion. You can't handle people having opinions opposed to yours. Rich and middle class people arr unfairly forced to pay more tax, and hence they contribute more to the services and infrastructure in society, eg roads, hospitals and educational facilities. They also pay the benefits of dole bludgers like you and therefore, based on this contribution, I believe their say is worth more.

You really are a pathetic little worm, aren't you?

An elitist worm, at that.

Kat wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 9:26pm:

matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:09pm: The more tax you pay, the more right you have to a say about this country is run. No, that's just bullsh1t.

It's a silly opinion, but not without its benefits.

NEWS AUSTRALIA HOLDINGS PTY LIMITED
Total income ($) = $2,847,566,418
Taxable income ($) = $0
Tax payable ($) = $0

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 9:45pm:

Aussie wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:22pm: Quote: I know that he did charity work before he entered Parliament. People outside of politics have talked about what a good man he is. Even your beloved Hawke said recently that he is a decent man. You know he did charity work before he entered Parliament?  Great.  Produce a link which confirms that.  As far as I am concerned the only charity work the arsehole ever did was 'at home,' where 'charity begins.'  His whole life has been......"It is all about me." I disagree with the decrepit mind of Bob Hawke who has lost the perception he had, along with his marbles.  I reckon Bob is looking for support from the Libs so that when he drops off the perch, they will all say great things about him at his State Funeral. Abbott is a lousy human being.  He is a thug, woman basher, a flake, Mummy's Boy, liar, philanderer, bully boy, misogynist, likely illegal as a politician, candidate for The Hague (Operation Sovereign Borders....'by hook or by crook,') and a failure as  a Prime Minister.....and that is just off the top of my head. Here we go again with the abuse and allegations without substance. Where is the evidence that he is any of those things, particularly a woman basher?

Here ya go.

Link.

By the way.....in that list, I left out ~ thief.

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 8:09pm:

I was talking about Turnbull, correct. However I then went on to talk about how anyone who pays taxes has the right to have a say about how the country is run. Forfeiting your vote does not mean forfeiting your say. The more tax you pay, the more right you have to a say about this country is run.

You know that some people were saving their tax money and using it to donate and have a one on one meeting with a Liberal front bencher ? I would think way better value.

You would also understand that the people and groups that pay the least tax probably have the greatest say in government decision making ?

Dnarever wrote on Dec 31^st, 2015 at 9:56am:

matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:09pm: I was talking about Turnbull, correct. However I then went on to talk about how anyone who pays taxes has the right to have a say about how the country is run. Forfeiting your vote does not mean forfeiting your say. The more tax you pay, the more right you have to a say about this country is run. You know that some people were saving their tax money and using it to donate and have a one on one meeting with a Liberal front bencher ? I would think way better value. You would also understand that the people and groups that pay the least tax probably have the greatest say in government decision making ?

Correct.

NEWS AUSTRALIA HOLDINGS PTY LIMITED
Total income ($) = $2,847,566,418
Taxable income ($) = $0
Tax payable ($) = $0

matty wrote on Dec 30^th, 2015 at 9:44pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:12pm: matty wrote on Dec 30th, 2015 at 8:09pm: Forfeiting your vote does not mean forfeiting your say. yes it does .... your ONLY say that really counts is at election time. Everything else is just blowing hot air to make you feel good. I am talking in the context of situations such as these. For example, political conversations that are had on this forum.

conversations on these forums might make you feel better, but I doubt there is a single politician who pays attention to anything you say on here. The system is designed to make you think your opinion is valued, all the whilst the powers that be are ignoring you. They don't give a crap what you think. As long as you make your donations and don't churn up the waters too much, they're happy to let you have your say all the  whilst ignoring it. The only voices they listen to are their donors, and those that can advance their own causes.

What piffle. My parents would be considered "rich" and they pay a lot of tax. Of course when they retire they get no pension, whilst people who pay much less tax do. What a fair society in which we live.

matty wrote on Jan 1^st, 2016 at 6:57pm:

What piffle. My parents would be considered "rich" and they pay a lot of tax. Of course when they retire they get no pension, whilst people who pay much less tax do. What a fair society in which we live.

ohh, your poor parents ... how can they live with themselves knowing they are being so mistreated?  :D :D :D

John Smith wrote on Jan 1^st, 2016 at 6:59pm:

matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:57pm: What piffle. My parents would be considered "rich" and they pay a lot of tax. Of course when they retire they get no pension, whilst people who pay much less tax do. What a fair society in which we live. ohh, your poor parents ... how can they live with themselves knowing they are being so mistreated?  :D :D :D

Laugh all you want, but give me one reason why someone who saves their money pays taxes gets nothing whilst people who blow their money and pay less tax get money? Also they have to pay money because they made money on investment homes. Socialist society - punish those who are self sufficient and earn more.

matty wrote on Jan 1^st, 2016 at 7:03pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:59pm: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:57pm: What piffle. My parents would be considered "rich" and they pay a lot of tax. Of course when they retire they get no pension, whilst people who pay much less tax do. What a fair society in which we live. ohh, your poor parents ... how can they live with themselves knowing they are being so mistreated?  :D :D :D Laugh all you want, but give me one reason why someone who saves their money pays taxes gets nothing whilst people who blow their money and pay less tax get money? Also they have to pay money because they made money on investment homes. Socialist society - punish those who are self sufficient and earn more.

the govt. isn't there to be fair and to make your parents feel happy. If you want fair go to North Korea.

It's there to provide a safety net.

matty wrote on Jan 1^st, 2016 at 7:03pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:59pm: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:57pm: What piffle. My parents would be considered "rich" and they pay a lot of tax. Of course when they retire they get no pension, whilst people who pay much less tax do. What a fair society in which we live. ohh, your poor parents ... how can they live with themselves knowing they are being so mistreated?  :D :D :D Laugh all you want, but give me one reason why someone who saves their money pays taxes gets nothing whilst people who blow their money and pay less tax get money? Also they have to pay money because they made money on investment homes. Socialist society - punish those who are self sufficient and earn more.

I am struggling trying to work out how they have been punished any more or less than the rest of us.

matty wrote on Jan 1^st, 2016 at 7:03pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:59pm: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:57pm: What piffle. My parents would be considered "rich" and they pay a lot of tax. Of course when they retire they get no pension, whilst people who pay much less tax do. What a fair society in which we live. ohh, your poor parents ... how can they live with themselves knowing they are being so mistreated?  :D :D :D Laugh all you want, but give me one reason why someone who saves their money pays taxes gets nothing whilst people who blow their money and pay less tax get money? Also they have to pay money because they made money on investment homes. Socialist society - punish those who are self sufficient and earn more.

I see that you STILL have NO idea what socialism actually is or means.

John Smith wrote on Jan 1^st, 2016 at 7:07pm:

matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 7:03pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:59pm: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:57pm: What piffle. My parents would be considered "rich" and they pay a lot of tax. Of course when they retire they get no pension, whilst people who pay much less tax do. What a fair society in which we live. ohh, your poor parents ... how can they live with themselves knowing they are being so mistreated?  :D :D :D Laugh all you want, but give me one reason why someone who saves their money pays taxes gets nothing whilst people who blow their money and pay less tax get money? Also they have to pay money because they made money on investment homes. Socialist society - punish those who are self sufficient and earn more. the govt. isn't there to be fair and to make your parents feel happy. If you want fair go to North Korea. It's there to provide a safety net.

Again, one reason why those who pay more tax get back less in return, and have to pay the pensions of those who blow their money?

Aussie wrote on Jan 1^st, 2016 at 7:09pm:

matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 7:03pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:59pm: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:57pm: What piffle. My parents would be considered "rich" and they pay a lot of tax. Of course when they retire they get no pension, whilst people who pay much less tax do. What a fair society in which we live. ohh, your poor parents ... how can they live with themselves knowing they are being so mistreated?  :D :D :D Laugh all you want, but give me one reason why someone who saves their money pays taxes gets nothing whilst people who blow their money and pay less tax get money? Also they have to pay money because they made money on investment homes. Socialist society - punish those who are self sufficient and earn more. I am struggling trying to work out how they have been punished any more or less than the rest of us.

My point is not about my parents, I am using them as one example of many that are screwed by the government.

They're not even mega rich anyway, yet have to pay so much tax.

Kat wrote on Jan 1^st, 2016 at 7:11pm:

matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 7:03pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:59pm: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:57pm: What piffle. My parents would be considered "rich" and they pay a lot of tax. Of course when they retire they get no pension, whilst people who pay much less tax do. What a fair society in which we live. ohh, your poor parents ... how can they live with themselves knowing they are being so mistreated?  :D :D :D Laugh all you want, but give me one reason why someone who saves their money pays taxes gets nothing whilst people who blow their money and pay less tax get money? Also they have to pay money because they made money on investment homes. Socialist society - punish those who are self sufficient and earn more.   I see that you STILL have NO idea what socialism actually is or means.

Then enlighten me, Kate. Also maybe try not spouting In your usual abusive manner.

matty wrote on Jan 1^st, 2016 at 7:12pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 7:09pm: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 7:03pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:59pm: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:57pm: What piffle. My parents would be considered "rich" and they pay a lot of tax. Of course when they retire they get no pension, whilst people who pay much less tax do. What a fair society in which we live. ohh, your poor parents ... how can they live with themselves knowing they are being so mistreated?  :D :D :D Laugh all you want, but give me one reason why someone who saves their money pays taxes gets nothing whilst people who blow their money and pay less tax get money? Also they have to pay money because they made money on investment homes. Socialist society - punish those who are self sufficient and earn more. I am struggling trying to work out how they have been punished any more or less than the rest of us. My point is not about my parents, I am using them as one example of many that are screwed by the government. They're not even mega rich anyway, yet have to pay so much tax.

They pay no more nor less tax than the rest of us have to.  What is your problem?

Already explained Aussie. See post 122.

And what do you mean by no more or less? They do pay more than a lot of people, and I am sure that there are others who pay more. Your post implies that everyone pays the same amount of tax. If only...

matty wrote on Jan 1^st, 2016 at 7:21pm:

Already explained Aussie. See post 122. And what do you mean by no more or less? They do pay more than a lot of people, and I am sure that there are others who pay more. Your post implies that everyone pays the same amount of tax. If only...

Pay attention Matty:


Quote:

They pay no more nor less tax than the rest of us have to.

Is it really necessary to explain to you what Government does with taxation revenue, why they do it and what they do with it?

matty wrote on Jan 1^st, 2016 at 7:11pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 7:07pm: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 7:03pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:59pm: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:57pm: What piffle. My parents would be considered "rich" and they pay a lot of tax. Of course when they retire they get no pension, whilst people who pay much less tax do. What a fair society in which we live. ohh, your poor parents ... how can they live with themselves knowing they are being so mistreated?  :D :D :D Laugh all you want, but give me one reason why someone who saves their money pays taxes gets nothing whilst people who blow their money and pay less tax get money? Also they have to pay money because they made money on investment homes. Socialist society - punish those who are self sufficient and earn more. the govt. isn't there to be fair and to make your parents feel happy. If you want fair go to North Korea. It's there to provide a safety net. Again, one reason why those who pay more tax get back less in return, and have to pay the pensions of those who blow their money?

again, you're talking crap. Who says they get less? Who is more likely to use the infrastructure that govts. build. when was the last time a pensioner used the ports scattered around the country? who uses the airports more? who uses the roads more (according to Hockey)? who is in greater danger of being robbed? More resources are poured into richer suburbs than poorer suburbs. When was the last time you had the street sweeper out on your street? When I lived in what is considered a poor suburb, I lived their for 6 years and never once saw a street sweeper, or a police patrol.

matty wrote on Jan 1^st, 2016 at 7:11pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 7:07pm: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 7:03pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:59pm: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:57pm: What piffle. My parents would be considered "rich" and they pay a lot of tax. Of course when they retire they get no pension, whilst people who pay much less tax do. What a fair society in which we live. ohh, your poor parents ... how can they live with themselves knowing they are being so mistreated?  :D :D :D Laugh all you want, but give me one reason why someone who saves their money pays taxes gets nothing whilst people who blow their money and pay less tax get money? Also they have to pay money because they made money on investment homes. Socialist society - punish those who are self sufficient and earn more. the govt. isn't there to be fair and to make your parents feel happy. If you want fair go to North Korea. It's there to provide a safety net. Again, one reason why those who pay more tax get back less in return, and have to pay the pensions of those who blow their money?

that's not a reason, it's a sulk

matty wrote on Jan 1^st, 2016 at 7:14pm:

Then enlighten me, Kate. Also maybe try not spouting In your usual abusive manner.

Socialism is about everyone receiving an equal amount  .... which is exactly what you are crying for  :D :D :D

matty wrote on Jan 1^st, 2016 at 6:57pm:

What piffle..

Don’t pay any attention to them, Matty. These people are pathetic.

They won’t be laughing when you’re making $180,000, that’s for sure.

John Smith wrote on Jan 1^st, 2016 at 7:40pm:

matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 7:14pm: Then enlighten me, Kate. Also maybe try not spouting In your usual abusive manner. Socialism is about everyone receiving an equal amount  .... which is exactly what you are crying for  :D :D :D

Yes, but that’s just not fair. What if you own more than others? Why should you be discriminated against just because you have more money?

matty wrote on Jan 1^st, 2016 at 7:12pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 7:09pm: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 7:03pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:59pm: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:57pm: What piffle. My parents would be considered "rich" and they pay a lot of tax. Of course when they retire they get no pension, whilst people who pay much less tax do. What a fair society in which we live. ohh, your poor parents ... how can they live with themselves knowing they are being so mistreated?  :D :D :D Laugh all you want, but give me one reason why someone who saves their money pays taxes gets nothing whilst people who blow their money and pay less tax get money? Also they have to pay money because they made money on investment homes. Socialist society - punish those who are self sufficient and earn more. I am struggling trying to work out how they have been punished any more or less than the rest of us. My point is not about my parents, I am using them as one example of many that are screwed by the government. They're not even mega rich anyway, yet have to pay so much tax.

Why are the well off so jealous of those who have very little ?

people who blow their money and pay less tax get money?

People who pay less tax earn less, it has nothing to do with how they spend their money, you can not get tax reductions because you spend money (in most cases).

You parents like me pay more tax because we earn more money there is no need to be envious of people who are struggling and no the people who have done well do not deserve to get the lot.

Pensioners are not very well off it is a real struggle for them to get by, people save for retirement to try and avoid that situation. People want to be better off in the end than to have to rely on governments minimum payments.

matty wrote on Jan 1^st, 2016 at 7:03pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:59pm: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2016 at 6:57pm: What piffle. My parents would be considered "rich" and they pay a lot of tax. Of course when they retire they get no pension, whilst people who pay much less tax do. What a fair society in which we live. ohh, your poor parents ... how can they live with themselves knowing they are being so mistreated?  :D :D :D Laugh all you want, but give me one reason why someone who saves their money pays taxes gets nothing whilst people who blow their money and pay less tax get money? Also they have to pay money because they made money on investment homes. Socialist society - punish those who are self sufficient and earn more.

punish those who are self sufficient and earn more

People who put themselves in the position of not requiring a pension or welfare are not being punished, they are self sufficient. These people have set themselves up to have more money more assets and a better life style, hardly a type of punishment.

Your arguments are the same as claiming that working people are unfairly discriminated against because they do not get unemployment benefits.

Tony to make a comeback?

If Tony stays in parliament I would think that the odds are fairly high that he will lead the Liberal party again at some time in the future.

They are a shallow pool and under pressure tend to go to the shallow end of their shallow pool.

matty wrote on Jan 1^st, 2016 at 6:57pm:

What piffle. My parents would be considered "rich" and they pay a lot of tax. Of course when they retire they get no pension, whilst people who pay much less tax do. What a fair society in which we live.

matty wrote on Jan 1^st, 2016 at 7:03pm:

give me one reason why someone who saves their money pays taxes gets nothing whilst people who blow their money and pay less tax get money? Also they have to pay money because they made money on investment homes. Socialist society - punish those who are self sufficient and earn more.

Some of us have proposed axing the means test for the aged pension and paying for it by axing tax concessions for retirees. Wealthy retirees would actually pay more tax with this change, but they would get the aged pension and the associated benefits - concession card, cheaper medicines, etc.

The winners with this system would be those people who are currently receiving a part pension. They would be exchanging an effective tax rate that's more than 50% and frequent reporting to Centrelink with a real tax rate that's lower and annual reports to the ATO.

Kat wrote on Jan 1^st, 2016 at 7:11pm:

I see that you STILL have NO idea what socialism actually is or means.

Neither do a lot of people, apparently. 'Socialism' the most looked-up word of 2015 on Merriam-Webster

None of these posts have addressed the issue. All you've all done is what a lot of leftists do - deflect.

Why must my parents pay a lot of tax and get nothing in return, whilst those who pay less tax and blow their money do get money back from the taxpayer? It isn't fair? And my parents aren't even that rich anyway, they're only worth around 3 million. People with more money than that have to pay even more tax and top get nothing back in return.

matty wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2016 at 3:12pm:

None of these posts have addressed the issue. All you've all done is what a lot of leftists do - deflect. Why must my parents pay a lot of tax and get nothing in return.

Banned from using the roads, are they matty?

matty wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2016 at 3:12pm:

None of these posts have addressed the issue. All you've all done is what a lot of leftists do - deflect.

actually, many of the posts have addressed the issue. You've just done what righties normally do and ignored everything anyone says that doesn't conform to your beliefs

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2016 at 4:09pm:

matty wrote on Jan 3rd, 2016 at 3:12pm: None of these posts have addressed the issue. All you've all done is what a lot of leftists do - deflect. Why must my parents pay a lot of tax and get nothing in return. Banned from using the roads, are they matty?

All right then - let's remove income tax burden from those with plenty and they can pay for their own defence, infrastructure and so forth....

I'm sure if they pay enough tax to whine about it they have plenty left over to play international jetsetter...

Of course, they could also fully fund your education as psychistrist (sic).. or you could.....

BTW how did medical school go?  Can't be a psychistrist without being a doc first...

matty wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2016 at 3:12pm:

None of these posts have addressed the issue. All you've all done is what a lot of leftists do - deflect. Why must my parents pay a lot of tax and get nothing in return, whilst those who pay less tax and blow their money do get money back from the taxpayer? It isn't fair? And my parents aren't even that rich anyway, they're only worth around 3 million. People with more money than that have to pay even more tax and top get nothing back in return.

Your parents are not a national issue.

They should not be jealous of people who get a pension and don't have enough to cover their costs and buy proper meals or have any real spending money. Pensioners do it tough and anyone who is doing ok who resents pensioners getting the bare minimum is a worthless shite.

Dnarever wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2016 at 9:00pm:

matty wrote on Jan 3rd, 2016 at 3:12pm: None of these posts have addressed the issue. All you've all done is what a lot of leftists do - deflect. Why must my parents pay a lot of tax and get nothing in return, whilst those who pay less tax and blow their money do get money back from the taxpayer? It isn't fair? And my parents aren't even that rich anyway, they're only worth around 3 million. People with more money than that have to pay even more tax and top get nothing back in return. Your parents are not a national issue. They should not be jealous of people who get a pension and don't have enough to cover their costs and buy proper meals or have any real spending money. Pensioners do it tough and anyone who is doing ok who resents pensioners getting the bare minimum is a worthless shite.

Politics of envy............ ;)

matty wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2016 at 3:12pm:

None of these posts have addressed the issue. All you've all done is what a lot of leftists do - deflect. Why must my parents pay a lot of tax and get nothing in return, whilst those who pay less tax and blow their money do get money back from the taxpayer? It isn't fair? And my parents aren't even that rich anyway, they're only worth around 3 million. People with more money than that have to pay even more tax and top get nothing back in return.

Most people would agree that someone with $3 mill is indeed rich.