Honestly, I cannot believe the depths to which Labor is stooping now. It has gone far beyond being a joke. As a once swinging voter, I have made a vow to never vote for Labor again, at least not until every single one of this 72 despicable mob are gone from the party.

I was watching Sky News with my 13 year old at the time, and even he knows what's going on, and too is disgusted at the contempt that Labor has for us, and the stupidity that they seem to think we possess. I can't wait for the 15 minute speech, it should be great viewing.

Craig Thomson says union rival once threatened to ‘set him up with hookers'
From: AAP May 11, 2012 7:33PM


FEDERAL MP Craig Thomson claims a rival union official threatened eight years ago to ruin his career by setting him up with prostitutes.


Mr Thomson's lawyers last month sent Fair Work Australia (FWA) a submission which says the unnamed rival was witnessed in 2004 threatening to "ruin Mr Thomson's life, to destroy his political ambitions and to set him up with a bunch of hookers", the Nine Network reported today.

Mr Thomson has accused FWA of failing to investigate the claim, which is expected to be a key focus of the suspended Labor MP's long-awaited explanation to federal parliament later this month, Nine said.

An FWA report alleges that as head of the Health Services Union from 2002 to 2007, Mr Thomson misused union funds to pay for prostitutes, lavish travel and meals, and to fund his 2007 election campaign.

Mr Thomson - elected as a Labor MP but now sitting on the crossbenches after being suspended from the party - denies all wrongdoing.

Prime Minister Julia Gillard says she is confident key independent MPs will honour their agreement to allow her government to run its full term, despite concerns about Labor continuing to accept Mr Thomson's independent vote.

Independent MP Rob Oakeshott has expressed concern that when he entered into the "good faith agreement" with Ms Gillard to support Labor to form a minority government after the 2010 election he was not aware of the allegations against Mr Thomson.

Mr Oakeshott says he will listen carefully to what Mr Thomson has to say in a statement to parliament on May 21 before deciding whether to back some form of censure.

However, Ms Gillard today said she was "very confident" her government would last through to the election due in late 2013.

"The election is due in the second half of 2013 and it'll be held on the normal time," she said in Adelaide.

Another independent with an agreement with the Government, Tony Windsor, said in an open letter to media across the country that he would not be supporting any action by the parliament against Mr Thomson.

"Every Australian has rights that include a presumption of innocence until proven guilty," Mr Windsor said.

He was backed by another independent, Bob Katter, who said he did not want to be cast in the role of judging other MPs.

Meanwhile, HSU general secretary Kathy Jackson wants the union's national executive to back a motion, at a national executive meeting on Monday, to sue Mr Thomson, who now sits as a federal independent MP after being suspended from the ALP.

Ms Jackson is seeking legal advice on whether Mr Thomson can be forced to pay the money back with interest.

Mr Thomson said he planned to make a 30-minute statement on May 21.

"This really is the first opportunity I've had to respond to the Fair Work report," he said.

"It will be a broad, extensive response and will take around half an hour - it's not going to be a two-minute statement."

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/craig-thomson-says-union-rival-once-threatened-to-set-him-up-with-hookers/story-e6frf7l6-1226353332655

Your giving up on the basic legal principal of the accused being innocent unless proven otherwise?
I assume that if you have you will also denounce Abbott for being accused of indecent assault and vandalism in the 1970's?

adelcrow wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:35pm:

Your giving up on the basic legal principal of the accused being innocent unless proven otherwise? I assume that if you have you will also denounce Abbott for being accused of indecent assault and vandalism in the 1970's?

The presumption of innocence only applies when charges are presented. Has he been charged yet? The court of public opinion has no handbrake.

Is Abbott's case from the 1970's still active? Must be another FWA investigation.

salad in wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:41pm:

adelcrow wrote on May 11th, 2012 at 9:35pm: Your giving up on the basic legal principal of the accused being innocent unless proven otherwise? I assume that if you have you will also denounce Abbott for being accused of indecent assault and vandalism in the 1970's? The presumption of innocence only applies when charges are presented. Has he been charged yet? The court of public opinion has no handbrake. Is Abbott's case from the 1970's still active? Must be another FWA investigation.

So  a person is presumed guilty until charges are laid..Im glad your not a lawyer

adelcrow wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:35pm:

Your giving up on the basic legal principal of the accused being innocent unless proven otherwise? I assume that if you have you will also denounce Abbott for being accused of indecent assault and vandalism in the 1970's?

Abbott's 1970 case (whatever that is, I don't know) wasn't found to have breached 156 contraventions of a union, was it? Also bearing in mind that FWA is a government body, and wasn't it Labor that set it up?  ::)

john_g wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:44pm:

adelcrow wrote on May 11th, 2012 at 9:35pm: Your giving up on the basic legal principal of the accused being innocent unless proven otherwise? I assume that if you have you will also denounce Abbott for being accused of indecent assault and vandalism in the 1970's? Abbott's 1970 case (whatever that is, I don't know) wasn't found to have breached 156 contraventions of a union, was it? Also bearing in mind that FWA is a government body, and wasn't it Labor that set it up?  ::)

The basic legal principals remain the same and it makes no difference that Abbott wants to grab power without having an election

Maybe the threat was more like "if you dont do this for me, I will let everyone know what it is you are doing with your credit card"

This is a very desperate claim by Thomson. I hope he has some sort of proof to cough up.

GoddyofOz wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 10:05pm:

This is a very desperate claim by Thomson. I hope he has some sort of proof to cough up.

Like his mate (the ex labor head) that says the bag that is as big as a cars boot, is in fact his work briefcase, so the police cant search it.

These guys and labor are an absolute joke.

Under the current Fair Work Australia legislation (devised and introduced by one J. Gillard), there is no presumption of innocence. Section 361 of the Fair Work Act reverses the onus of proof applicable to civil proceedings. The onus is on the accused to to clear him/herself.

This is why, among so many other ironies, this is perhaps the more splendid. As far as the members of the HSU are concerned, the onus is on Thompson to clear himself. And the law (Julia's law) is on their side. Talk about buggered with your own petard.

Soren wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 10:24pm:

Under the current Fair Work Australia legislation (devised and introduced by one J. Gillard), there is no presumption of innocence. Section 361 of the Fair Work Act reverses the onus of proof applicable to civil proceedings. The onus is on the accused to to clear him/herself. This is why, among so many other ironies, this is perhaps the more splendid. As far as the members of the HSU are concerned, the onus is on Thompson to clear himself. And the law (Julia's law) is on their side. Talk about buggered with your own petard.

That is hilarious

Senator Brandis suggested Labor's changes to the Fair Work Act were coming back to haunt the government.

''What this means is that far from enjoying the presumption of innocence, as a result of Section 361 of the Fair Work Act, there is a presumption against Slipper,'' he said.

''Those Labor politicians including the Prime Minister [Julia Gillard] and the Attorney-General [Nicola Roxon] who say Slipper is entitled to presumption of innocence are ignoring the fact that they themselves removed the presumption of innocence in cases of this kind and replaced it with a presumption of guilt.''


http://www.canberratimes.com.au/national/slipper-is-presumed-guilty-libs-20120427-1xqqy.html

Soren and progs, good one! Yet that won't stop Gillard and cronies from going on about the presumption of innocence for both, DESPITE THEIR OWN AMENDMENT.

Excuse the language, but could Labor get any more fu cked up!

john_g wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 10:40pm:

Excuse the language, but could Labor get any more fu cked up!

Yes, they could - stand by.

Forgiven.

john_g wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 10:40pm:

Soren and progs, good one! Yet that won't stop Gillard and cronies from going on about the presumption of innocence for both, DESPITE THEIR OWN AMENDMENT. Excuse the language, but could Labor get any more fu cked up!

This divide the nation and class warefare is going to be their legacy of fu..ed up. Big time. It is going to get ugly and embarrassing as they think they are on a winner.

progressiveslol wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 10:49pm:

john_g wrote on May 11th, 2012 at 10:40pm: Soren and progs, good one! Yet that won't stop Gillard and cronies from going on about the presumption of innocence for both, DESPITE THEIR OWN AMENDMENT. Excuse the language, but could Labor get any more fu cked up! This divide the nation and class warefare is going to be their legacy of fu..ed up. Big time. It is going to get ugly and embarrassing as they think they are on a winner.

This country needs a massive political revival of working class values but this corrupt Government is just teasing and mocking for political expediency - they are whores for big business and care nothing for our families or their future. 8-)

still lying about everything I see CW  or is it Sock No. 6?

So a pollie does wrong.!  WOW , scandalous.
This divide the nation and class warefare is going to be their legacy of fu..ed up. Big time. It is going to get ugly and embarrassing as they think they are on a winner.

WORKED for HOWARD.!!


Give it a rest morons.
Your heroes are more corrupt and 'wrong' ..... all you have is this crap??

Get a life. :D 8-)

progressiveslol wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 10:36pm:

Soren wrote on May 11th, 2012 at 10:24pm: Under the current Fair Work Australia legislation (devised and introduced by one J. Gillard), there is no presumption of innocence. Section 361 of the Fair Work Act reverses the onus of proof applicable to civil proceedings. The onus is on the accused to to clear him/herself. This is why, among so many other ironies, this is perhaps the more splendid. As far as the members of the HSU are concerned, the onus is on Thompson to clear himself. And the law (Julia's law) is on their side. Talk about buggered with your own petard. That is hilarious Senator Brandis suggested Labor's changes to the Fair Work Act were coming back to haunt the government. ''What this means is that far from enjoying the presumption of innocence, as a result of Section 361 of the Fair Work Act, there is a presumption against Slipper,'' he said. ''Those Labor politicians including the Prime Minister [Julia Gillard] and the Attorney-General [Nicola Roxon] who say Slipper is entitled to presumption of innocence are ignoring the fact that they themselves removed the presumption of innocence in cases of this kind and replaced it with a presumption of guilt.'' http://www.canberratimes.com.au/national/slipper-is-presumed-guilty-libs-20120427-1xqqy.html

Section 361 of the Fair Work Act reverses the onus of proof applicable to civil proceedings. The onus is on the accused to to clear him/herself.

Why would the fair work act apply to civil procedings as the vast majority of civil procedings are not associated with fair work legislation?

How would civil proceding have an impact on Slipper etc? Their is no criminal charge associated and no impact on a politicians position in parlament from a civil action.

You have to wonder what Brandis has been smoking.

JuLIAR working class hero my 'rse.  She has been in bed with big business running mass skills migration programs for them and suckholing us to the US - she is a  suckhole and the ALP and Greens are corporate maggots, we know your game.  We see all.
http://www.thefilmleague.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/the_matrix-11347.jpeg 8-)

You see all??  We see all? 
Ah sorry,  who'd that be.  The LNP???  LNP supporters???  Schizoid paranoics???

CW we have all heard your lies before... so I guess you're lying now.

U R on the NOSE ,  distinctly noxious smelly bit of work.  Still, with  people ? like U supporting them, good luck LNP.!!   ::) :D :D
Looney Tunes, but to a different beat this go round eh? :)

Emma wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 1:02am:

You see all??  We see all?

And he's posted that silly looking green picture again.....

Frances wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 1:13am:

Emma wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 1:02am: You see all??  We see all?  And he's posted that silly looking green picture again.....

He's right, Gillard has no right to say that she supports working class people, when she supports this piece of filth!

I  have no love for any Political Party - dont you know loose cannons rock solo?  Why do the Greens and ALP run racist invasion programs on my Nieces country?  Why do the push birth control and abortion on Aboriginal people? 8-)

adelcrow wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:50pm:

john_g wrote on May 11th, 2012 at 9:44pm: adelcrow wrote on May 11th, 2012 at 9:35pm: Your giving up on the basic legal principal of the accused being innocent unless proven otherwise? I assume that if you have you will also denounce Abbott for being accused of indecent assault and vandalism in the 1970's? Abbott's 1970 case (whatever that is, I don't know) wasn't found to have breached 156 contraventions of a union, was it? Also bearing in mind that FWA is a government body, and wasn't it Labor that set it up?  ::) The basic legal principals remain the same and it makes no difference that Abbott wants to grab power without having an election

no wonder the BIKIES are running rampant in SA... you are basically claiming that even if the police do do a raid then they are still innocent..

I am wondering what you would call evidence if you were a lawyer?????


you are not a lawyer and neither am I so we are both in the wilderness with this one...

but you are the one insisting.....how much evidence is evidence then????

I mean some have been found guilty of murder even though there is no body...


how do we come to those conclusions????.. and take someone to trial..


someone has to say... We believe that person is guilty of a crime We think we have enough evidence to prove it.. lets take him  before the courts.


so far THOMO has been named by FWA.so far he has been named in police reports.so far he has been named in HSU investigations.

so far he has been suspended from the ALP. so far he has been asked by the PM to remove himself from the Labor Benches ]smirk smirk but we will of course accept your vote]

so far the ALP are paying out god only knows what on lawyers....

now he plans to make a speech defending himself..[why he is innocent isnt he?]

and by all accounts using someone.. [who is nameless] as threatening him with prostitutes...


OMG...

but yet we have not a shred of evidence to point at this poor man

life as they say is a beach.

adelcrow wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:35pm:

Your giving up on the basic legal principal of the accused being innocent unless proven otherwise? I assume that if you have you will also denounce Abbott for being accused of indecent assault and vandalism in the 1970's?

Are you saying you believe that load of absolute, utter crap???

john_g wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:24pm:

Craig Thomson says union rival once threatened to ‘set him up with hookers' From: AAP May 11, 2012 7:33PM FEDERAL MP Craig Thomson claims a rival union official threatened eight years ago to ruin his career by setting him up with prostitutes. Mr Thomson's lawyers last month sent Fair Work Australia (FWA) a submission which says the unnamed rival was witnessed in 2004 threatening to "ruin Mr Thomson's life, to destroy his political ambitions and to set him up with a bunch of hookers", the Nine Network reported today. Mr Thomson has accused FWA of failing to investigate the claim, which is expected to be a key focus of the suspended Labor MP's long-awaited explanation to federal parliament later this month, Nine said. An FWA report alleges that as head of the Health Services Union from 2002 to 2007, Mr Thomson misused union funds to pay for prostitutes, lavish travel and meals, and to fund his 2007 election campaign. Mr Thomson - elected as a Labor MP but now sitting on the crossbenches after being suspended from the party - denies all wrongdoing. Prime Minister Julia Gillard says she is confident key independent MPs will honour their agreement to allow her government to run its full term, despite concerns about Labor continuing to accept Mr Thomson's independent vote. Independent MP Rob Oakeshott has expressed concern that when he entered into the "good faith agreement" with Ms Gillard to support Labor to form a minority government after the 2010 election he was not aware of the allegations against Mr Thomson. Mr Oakeshott says he will listen carefully to what Mr Thomson has to say in a statement to parliament on May 21 before deciding whether to back some form of censure. However, Ms Gillard today said she was "very confident" her government would last through to the election due in late 2013. "The election is due in the second half of 2013 and it'll be held on the normal time," she said in Adelaide. Another independent with an agreement with the Government, Tony Windsor, said in an open letter to media across the country that he would not be supporting any action by the parliament against Mr Thomson. "Every Australian has rights that include a presumption of innocence until proven guilty," Mr Windsor said. He was backed by another independent, Bob Katter, who said he did not want to be cast in the role of judging other MPs. Meanwhile, HSU general secretary Kathy Jackson wants the union's national executive to back a motion, at a national executive meeting on Monday, to sue Mr Thomson, who now sits as a federal independent MP after being suspended from the ALP. Ms Jackson is seeking legal advice on whether Mr Thomson can be forced to pay the money back with interest. Mr Thomson said he planned to make a 30-minute statement on May 21. "This really is the first opportunity I've had to respond to the Fair Work report," he said. "It will be a broad, extensive response and will take around half an hour - it's not going to be a two-minute statement." http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/craig-thomson-says-union-rival-once-threatened-to-set-him-up-with-hookers/story-e6frf7l6-1226353332655

Unnamed rival - in plain English, that means this is a load of crap and I am desperately doing anything I can to get out of this mess I created.

corporate_whitey wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 1:25am:

I  have no love for any Political Party - dont you know loose cannons rock solo?  Why do the Greens and ALP run racist invasion programs on my Nieces country?  Why do the push birth control and abortion on Aboriginal people? 8-)

My god not only are you a total looser but you are abusing the plight of an indigenous peoples for your own gain. You only show yourself as a pathetic at every turn. Get off the self-pity bus and do something useful.

From the Daily Telegraph...

"Mr Thomson also claimed that at least three other witnesses were prepared to testify to FWA about an official complaint, made in 2005 to then-Victorian HSU boss Kathy Jackson, that one of her officials admitted trying to set Mr Thomson up with prostitutes.

Ms Jackson yesterday accused Mr Thomson of an "utter fabrication" and dismissed his claims any union official had tried to set him up with escorts or that she had been told of any allegations."

It's pretty obvious what this is - a desperate attempt by Thomson to weasel out of this mess by placing suspicion on someone else - namely Jackson.

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 7:07am:

From the Daily Telegraph... "Mr Thomson also claimed that at least three other witnesses were prepared to testify to FWA about an official complaint, made in 2005 to then-Victorian HSU boss Kathy Jackson, that one of her officials admitted trying to set Mr Thomson up with prostitutes. Ms Jackson yesterday accused Mr Thomson of an "utter fabrication" and dismissed his claims any union official had tried to set him up with escorts or that she had been told of any allegations." It's pretty obvious what this is - a desperate attempt by Thomson to weasel out of this mess by placing suspicion on someone else - namely Jackson.

And i was set up with that joint i smoked too. ;D ;D ;D ;D someone just handed it to me.

nairbe wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 7:17am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 7:07am: From the Daily Telegraph... "Mr Thomson also claimed that at least three other witnesses were prepared to testify to FWA about an official complaint, made in 2005 to then-Victorian HSU boss Kathy Jackson, that one of her officials admitted trying to set Mr Thomson up with prostitutes. Ms Jackson yesterday accused Mr Thomson of an "utter fabrication" and dismissed his claims any union official had tried to set him up with escorts or that she had been told of any allegations." It's pretty obvious what this is - a desperate attempt by Thomson to weasel out of this mess by placing suspicion on someone else - namely Jackson. And i was set up with that joint i smoked too. ;D ;D ;D ;D someone just handed it to me.

How the hell do you get set up to sleep with a prostitute? Oh, maybe the conversation with the hooker goes something like, "I didn't really wanna have sex with you - I'm being forced to by my boss!". If that imbecile really thinks anyone is going to believe him, he's in for a rude shock.

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 7:38am:

nairbe wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 7:17am: Armchair_Politician wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 7:07am: From the Daily Telegraph... "Mr Thomson also claimed that at least three other witnesses were prepared to testify to FWA about an official complaint, made in 2005 to then-Victorian HSU boss Kathy Jackson, that one of her officials admitted trying to set Mr Thomson up with prostitutes. Ms Jackson yesterday accused Mr Thomson of an "utter fabrication" and dismissed his claims any union official had tried to set him up with escorts or that she had been told of any allegations." It's pretty obvious what this is - a desperate attempt by Thomson to weasel out of this mess by placing suspicion on someone else - namely Jackson. And i was set up with that joint i smoked too. ;D ;D ;D ;D someone just handed it to me. How the hell do you get set up to sleep with a prostitute? Oh, maybe the conversation with the hooker goes something like, "I didn't really wanna have sex with you - I'm being forced to by my boss!". If that imbecile really thinks anyone is going to believe him, he's in for a rude shock.

at least we know now AP it was that nameless union rep that stole his phone and made the call to the brothel from his room in the hotel he wasnt in....same in Sydney.... seems odd doesnt it that it happened more than once and he has never dobbed this guy in before..I mean it isnt as if this has just this minute come out is it????..

I do know if that was me I would have been yelling this guys name out since day one..


IT WASNT ME IT WAS HIM...

this guy has so much to lose..and now he thinks this will get him off the hook..

he would have to be Dumb and Dumber.

Just saw Thomson shoot himself in the head on the Today show on Channel 9. He claims that from 2004 he was set up by Union officials, yet Laurie Oakes pointed out that his misuse of funds dates from well before 2004. Thomson's argument is weaker than wet paper!!!  ;D ;D ;D

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 8:00am:

Just saw Thomson shoot himself in the head on the Today show on Channel 9. He claims that from 2004 he was set up by Union officials, yet Laurie Oakes pointed out that his misuse of funds dates from well before 2004. Thomson's argument is weaker than wet paper!!!  ;D ;D ;D

I think blind freddy would be able to see through all this..I am surprised someone doesnt tell him he is digging the hole deeper. maybe his wife believes it all.

Soren wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 10:24pm:

Under the current Fair Work Australia legislation (devised and introduced by one J. Gillard), there is no presumption of innocence. Section 361 of the Fair Work Act reverses the onus of proof applicable to civil proceedings. The onus is on the accused to to clear him/herself. This is why, among so many other ironies, this is perhaps the more splendid. As far as the members of the HSU are concerned, the onus is on Thompson to clear himself. And the law (Julia's law) is on their side. Talk about buggered with your own petard.

Yes but he cannot loose his seat because of any findings under fair work Australia ... fair works findings don't mean diddly squat in the real world ....to loose his seat he has to be found guilty in a court of law ... and to that he is entitled to a presumption of innocence until he is found guilty ....the burden of proof falls onto the prosecutors ... this applies even more so if charges haven't even been laid yet

It s a lot better than being kidnapped by aliens - I think that was Gillard's excuse

It would be funny if the girl who serviced Craig made a statement
about her high profile guest at Saucy Suzis massage parlor.  ;D

Maybe she could identify a tattoo on a private part of his anatomy?

Bobby. wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 10:33am:

It would be funny if the girl who serviced Craig made a statement about her high profile guest at Saucy Suzis massage parlor.  ;D Maybe she could identify a tattoo on a private part of his anatomy?

One reason never to have a tattoo.

After 4 years - this is the best the ALP could come up with???!!!!!

After 4 years this is the worst the Lieberals could come up with?

Gist wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 11:16am:

After 4 years this is the worst the Lieberals could come up with?

Another copycat, with slight amendments. Typical labor.

What happened to the cases of several Liberal Party members of parliament that have been investigated and convicted for various crimes during the Howard and Abbott eras?
With all those cases both Howard and Abbott were happy to except their votes in both houses.

angeleyes wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 11:20am:

Gist wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 11:16am: After 4 years this is the worst the Lieberals could come up with? Another copycat, with slight amendments. Typical labor.

Good response. It's even topical.  :)

You call it copying. We'd claim we're into recycling on our side of the fence.

Strange how mobile phone calls from Craig's phone were sent
on the same day of the credit card expenditure -
to the massage parlor.

It must have been a very clever set up.  ;)

Anyway - someone must have got their knob sucked really hard for $6,000 -
it must have been like a vacuum cleaner.  ;D

Who was it?

I'm surprised one of the girls hasn't come forward. I'm sure the girls in question must have seen his mug somewhere in the media.

Bobby. wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 12:14pm:

Anyway - someone must have got their knob sucked really hard for $6,000 - it must have been like a vacuum cleaner.  ;D Who was it?

It wasn't me but I have been told I out suck a Dyson.

angeleyes wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 12:43pm:

Bobby. wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 12:14pm: Anyway - someone must have got their knob sucked really hard for $6,000 - it must have been like a vacuum cleaner.  ;D Who was it? It wasn't me but I have been told I out suck a Dyson.

It must have been the best blo job in town.  ;D

adelcrow wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:50pm:

john_g wrote on May 11th, 2012 at 9:44pm: adelcrow wrote on May 11th, 2012 at 9:35pm: Your giving up on the basic legal principal of the accused being innocent unless proven otherwise? I assume that if you have you will also denounce Abbott for being accused of indecent assault and vandalism in the 1970's? Abbott's 1970 case (whatever that is, I don't know) wasn't found to have breached 156 contraventions of a union, was it? Also bearing in mind that FWA is a government body, and wasn't it Labor that set it up?  ::) The basic legal principals remain the same and it makes no difference that Abbott wants to grab power without having an election

Well Gillard gained power after LOSING an election so your point is what?

Well when you thought the Thomson affair couldnt get worse... it just did. Just when you think that the ALP and Thomson couldnt screwup this scandal worse than they already have, they do.

Truly unbelievable.

The scandal has been brewing for over 5 years and NOW he comes up with this truly unbelievable excuse that he was set up? All he is doing is making matters far, far worse for himself. The evidence that he used hookers is substantial and the polic who investigated it confirmed that it did indeed happen. And I suppose he is going to try and lay the blam on the misappropriation of $500,000 on someone else as well despite the fact that he was the one who personally spent it?

I am gobsmacked by just how incredibly stupid this new excuse is. It is beyond daft. It is below the standard excuse of a 6yo caught stealing biscuits from his mothers pantry.

Welll Windsor wants to support him. Let's see how he feels after 30minutes of Thomson claiming it 'wasnt me' and defaming someone else in the process.

and this is the crazy fool that Gillard is protecting??? If you are going to risk your political future on another person then you shoudl ensure that person is worthy of it. Just another bad judgement call from Giilard.

Longweekend,
A man is innocent until proven guilty.

You are just part of Abbott's lynch mob.

Bobby. wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 5:26pm:

Longweekend, A man is innocent until proven guilty. You are just part of Abbott's lynch mob.

oh its woody and his lynch mob theory the ones standing right now outside parliament house... you have seen them as well..funny old world isnt it..ALIENS and Lynch mobs.. whatever next???

I know! they will swear THOMO is telling it as it happened...

does he realize its already been confirmed one needs a drivers licence to get credit at a brothel...


he claims all sorts had his credit card number..[he.he.]  but what about the drivers licence????..

I will also be interested in who twisted his arm to take the American Express card he had for at least 2 years.


he signed off on over $500.000 worth of credit card payments..is he really claiming the nasties only used it to fix him up.....


longy did you come down with yesterdays shower??? I know I didnt.

Bobby. wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 5:26pm:

Longweekend, A man is innocent until proven guilty. You are just part of Abbott's lynch mob.

After this morning's farcial interview with Laurie Oakes on the Today show, I think even Thomson himself has joined the lynch mob. He certainly didn't help his cause one iota!

Yes Arm & Cods,

I must admit it doesn't look good for Craig.
It looks like he had a very very very good time with battlers money.  ;D

Bobby. wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 5:49pm:

Yes Arm & Cods, I must admit it doesn't look good for Craig. It looks like he had a very very very good time with battlers money.  ;D

Seems not all massages have a happy ending!

longweekend58 wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 1:33pm:

adelcrow wrote on May 11th, 2012 at 9:50pm: john_g wrote on May 11th, 2012 at 9:44pm: adelcrow wrote on May 11th, 2012 at 9:35pm: Your giving up on the basic legal principal of the accused being innocent unless proven otherwise? I assume that if you have you will also denounce Abbott for being accused of indecent assault and vandalism in the 1970's? Abbott's 1970 case (whatever that is, I don't know) wasn't found to have breached 156 contraventions of a union, was it? Also bearing in mind that FWA is a government body, and wasn't it Labor that set it up?  ::) The basic legal principals remain the same and it makes no difference that Abbott wants to grab power without having an election Well Gillard gained power after LOSING an election so your point is what?

Yes..thats why Labor is in government.
Abbott would probably have got the independents onside if he had behaved more professionally after the election instead of threatening them.
Abbott only has himself and the LNP to blame for being in opposition

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 5:51pm:

Bobby. wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 5:49pm: Yes Arm & Cods, I must admit it doesn't look good for Craig. It looks like he had a very very very good time with battlers money.  ;D Seems not all massages have a happy ending!

Would have been fun for him on the night
but now he's paying for it.

angeleyes wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 12:43pm:

Bobby. wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 12:14pm: Anyway - someone must have got their knob sucked really hard for $6,000 - it must have been like a vacuum cleaner.  ;D Who was it? It wasn't me but I have been told I out suck a Dyson.

So you admit you suck big time?

Gist wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 6:38pm:

angeleyes wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 12:43pm: Bobby. wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 12:14pm: Anyway - someone must have got their knob sucked really hard for $6,000 - it must have been like a vacuum cleaner.  ;D Who was it? It wasn't me but I have been told I out suck a Dyson. So you admit you suck big time?

Matty must have been to a few Alan Jones parties  ;D

He reckons he was "set up". How do you prove something like that? After the Pauling Hanson thing I tend to wonder . . . heck they *could* be setting him up. . . .i mean it will get rid of the govt wont it? Pretty good motive . . .

SOB

http://media.fakeposters.com/results/2012/03/05/1bfy49r465.jpg

Bobby. wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 5:26pm:

Longweekend, A man is innocent until proven guilty. You are just part of Abbott's lynch mob.

ONLY in a court of law. IN every other area of life, gulit is assigned based on the known facts which even you must admit is hardly flattering.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 6:44pm:

He reckons he was "set up". How do you prove something like that? After the Pauling Hanson thing I tend to wonder . . . heck they *could* be setting him up. . . .i mean it will get rid of the govt wont it? Pretty good motive . . . SOB

Does the word gullible mean anything to you? It should as you are a perfect example.

Mr Thomson said this morning that resentment within the Health Services Union (HSU) led to a rival official setting up an elaborate plot to ruin his burgeoning political career.

"I was in a very dysfunctional union for a long time and in about 2004, amongst a whole range of other threats that were made to me, one was that they would ruin my potential political career ... by setting me up with hookers," Mr Thomson claimed.


http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/8466465/abbott-says-thomson-story-not-believable

Do you think Craig Thomson was set up??

Yes  5848

No    33557


I worry about the 5,848 loonies.

longweekend58 wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 7:50pm:

Bobby. wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 5:26pm: Longweekend, A man is innocent until proven guilty. You are just part of Abbott's lynch mob. ONLY in a court of law. IN every other area of life, gulit is assigned based on the known facts which even you must admit is hardly flattering.

In that case, you're up sh!t creek well and truly.

angeleyes wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 8:05pm:

Do you think Craig Thomson was set up?? Yes  5848 No    33557 I worry about the 5,848 loonies.

Its probably the same person pressing "Yes" nearly 6000 times somehow...

angeleyes wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 8:05pm:

Do you think Craig Thomson was set up?? Yes  5848 No    33557 I worry about the 5,848 loonies.

17%, that's amazingly high. I believe Craig Thomson is entitled to the presumption of innocence but that doesn't stop me from jumping to my own conclusions. Is there something I'm missing here. I would have voted yes.

MOTR wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 8:18pm:

angeleyes wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 8:05pm: Do you think Craig Thomson was set up?? Yes  5848 No    33557 I worry about the 5,848 loonies. 17%, that's amazingly high. I believe Craig Thomson is entitled to the presumption of innocence but that doesn't stop me from jumping to my own conclusions. Is there something I'm missing here. I would have voted yes.

Of course you would have, you poor misguided, gullible soul.

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 8:20pm:

MOTR wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 8:18pm: angeleyes wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 8:05pm: Do you think Craig Thomson was set up?? Yes  5848 No    33557 I worry about the 5,848 loonies. 17%, that's amazingly high. I believe Craig Thomson is entitled to the presumption of innocence but that doesn't stop me from jumping to my own conclusions. Is there something I'm missing here. I would have voted yes. Of course you would have, you poor misguided, gullible soul.

Damn, you beat me to it.  ;)

adelcrow wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 6:42pm:

Gist wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 6:38pm: angeleyes wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 12:43pm: Bobby. wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 12:14pm: Anyway - someone must have got their knob sucked really hard for $6,000 - it must have been like a vacuum cleaner.  ;D Who was it? It wasn't me but I have been told I out suck a Dyson. So you admit you suck big time? Matty must have been to a few Alan Jones parties  ;D

Where is Matty? Is angeleyes supposed to be Matty?

Anyway, the interview with Oakes this morning was an absolute joke. I can't imagine the next depth to which Labor will stoop. I didn't think that it would get this low. It beggars belief/

MOTR wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 8:18pm:

angeleyes wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 8:05pm: Do you think Craig Thomson was set up?? Yes  5848 No    33557 I worry about the 5,848 loonies. 17%, that's amazingly high. I believe Craig Thomson is entitled to the presumption of innocence but that doesn't stop me from jumping to my own conclusions. Is there something I'm missing here. I would have voted yes.

Oh do come on, really!

john_g wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 9:01pm:

Anyway, the interview with Oakes this morning was an absolute joke. I can't imagine the next depth to which Labor will stoop. I didn't think that it would get this low. It beggars belief/

I know you present yourself as a swinging voter but do you realise this has nothing to do with swapping wives with your neighbour on election eve?

If you want to claim Labor is responsible for Oakeshott you'd need to supply some kind of justification. Y'know, reasoned argument beyond saying "Labor is crap" all the time.

Gist wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 9:26pm:

john_g wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 9:01pm: Anyway, the interview with Oakes this morning was an absolute joke. I can't imagine the next depth to which Labor will stoop. I didn't think that it would get this low. It beggars belief/ I know you present yourself as a swinging voter but do you realise this has nothing to do with swapping wives with your neighbour on election eve? If you want to claim Labor is responsible for Oakeshott you'd need to supply some kind of justification. Y'know, reasoned argument beyond saying "Labor is crap" all the time.

I am sorry, but I really have no idea what you're trying to say. Could you please explain, because I am beyond lost.

I AM a swinging voter, I don't just represent myself as such.

john_g   Online
Senior Member
Australian Politics

Posts: 455


   MOTR wrote Today at 8:18pm:

angeleyes wrote Today at 8:05pm:

Do you think Craig Thomson was set up??

Yes  5848

No    33557


I worry about the 5,848 loonies.


17%, that's amazingly high. I believe Craig Thomson is entitled to the presumption of innocence but that doesn't stop me from jumping to my own conclusions. Is there something I'm missing here. I would have voted yes.


Oh do come on, really! 



:) :) 8-) 8-)  Me too.!!  How stupid would a person have to be??? to do what is charged, ??

Any video footage of any worth???

>>  No not inside morons.!! Who is gullible here. ?  Hmm?

john_g wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 9:30pm:

Gist wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 9:26pm: john_g wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 9:01pm: Anyway, the interview with Oakes this morning was an absolute joke. I can't imagine the next depth to which Labor will stoop. I didn't think that it would get this low. It beggars belief/ I know you present yourself as a swinging voter but do you realise this has nothing to do with swapping wives with your neighbour on election eve? If you want to claim Labor is responsible for Oakeshott you'd need to supply some kind of justification. Y'know, reasoned argument beyond saying "Labor is crap" all the time. I am sorry, but I really have no idea what you're trying to say. Could you please explain, because I am beyond lost. I AM a swinging voter, I don't just represent myself as such.

You come on here bagging what Oakeshott said this morning and then in the next breath you say there's no depth to which Labor will stoop. You DO realise Oakeshott is not in the Labor party don't you? Is there some reason you are blaming Labor for what he said? Believe it or not, many people didn't see the interview. Explain yourself!

Especially in the light  of the acknowledgment by Mal Brough ... former Liberal MP in the Howard yrs...., Remember him?

Who  said he had in fact spoken to the young man Ash?? something.. accusing Peter Slipper , had in fact spoken to him on several occassions prior to the laying of accusations in the media. Had  advised him to go with it, blah blah..  I heard and saw him saying this.  :-? :-? :o

Seems a mite suspicious to me...!!!!

All seems rather orchestrated to throw mud as far as possible.  And we know whose only forte that is.   
Yep Abbott and his nasty cronies. 

Wouldn't trust them as far as I could kick them.!!!!

I remember the whole lead-up up to this joke of a parliament.....  and I know who are responsible.
Just watch Question Time. 

Then imagine ...?  no  'tis too foul a thought.!!! >:(

Gist wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 9:49pm:

john_g wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 9:30pm: Gist wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 9:26pm: john_g wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 9:01pm: Anyway, the interview with Oakes this morning was an absolute joke. I can't imagine the next depth to which Labor will stoop. I didn't think that it would get this low. It beggars belief/ I know you present yourself as a swinging voter but do you realise this has nothing to do with swapping wives with your neighbour on election eve? If you want to claim Labor is responsible for Oakeshott you'd need to supply some kind of justification. Y'know, reasoned argument beyond saying "Labor is crap" all the time. I am sorry, but I really have no idea what you're trying to say. Could you please explain, because I am beyond lost. I AM a swinging voter, I don't just represent myself as such. You come on here bagging what Oakeshott said this morning and then in the next breath you say there's no depth to which Labor will stoop. You DO realise Oakeshott is not in the Labor party don't you? Is there some reason you are blaming Labor for what he said? Believe it or not, many people didn't see the interview. Explain yourself!

Mate, could you kindly go back and actually read my post?

john_g wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 9:53pm:

Mate, could you kindly go back and actually read my post?

Did you mean Laurie Oakes? If that's the case that's my fault and my apologies again. I misunderstood you to be talking about Oakeshott.

But in that case, I have even less of an idea what on earth you're posting about than I did before. What are you bagging Labor for?

Gist wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 9:49pm:

. You DO realise Oakeshott is not in the Labor party don't you?

Well he's fooled everyone. He is certainly not representing the people of Port Macquarie, that's for sure!!! He may have the seat but he is not representing the people.

how would you know Soren?

Who are all these criminals and sleaze bags running my country? 8-)

Emma wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 2:33am:

how would you know Soren?

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2012/s3499407.htm

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 8:20pm:

MOTR wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 8:18pm: angeleyes wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 8:05pm: Do you think Craig Thomson was set up?? Yes  5848 No    33557 I worry about the 5,848 loonies. 17%, that's amazingly high. I believe Craig Thomson is entitled to the presumption of innocence but that doesn't stop me from jumping to my own conclusions. Is there something I'm missing here. I would have voted yes. Of course you would have, you poor misguided, gullible soul.

Wow, that was a mistake. I actually meant I would have voted no. I was thinking yes he is guilty. I'm still wondering why the yes vote was so high. Perhaps others made the same error as me.

john_g wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 9:03pm:

MOTR wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 8:18pm: angeleyes wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 8:05pm: Do you think Craig Thomson was set up?? Yes  5848 No    33557 I worry about the 5,848 loonies. 17%, that's amazingly high. I believe Craig Thomson is entitled to the presumption of innocence but that doesn't stop me from jumping to my own conclusions. Is there something I'm missing here. I would have voted yes. Oh do come on, really!

Sorry, my mistake. I'm jumping to the same conclusion as the rest of you. But then I also thought Lindy Chamberlain was guilty.

MOTR wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 11:10am:

john_g wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 9:03pm: MOTR wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 8:18pm: angeleyes wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 8:05pm: Do you think Craig Thomson was set up?? Yes  5848 No    33557 I worry about the 5,848 loonies. 17%, that's amazingly high. I believe Craig Thomson is entitled to the presumption of innocence but that doesn't stop me from jumping to my own conclusions. Is there something I'm missing here. I would have voted yes. Oh do come on, really! Sorry, my mistake. I'm jumping to the same conclusion as the rest of you. But then I also thought Lindy Chamberlain was guilty.

Yes all well and good but the idea of a set up by Jackson's husband particularly with the venomous way she has intentionally torn down the union, could be the real juicy stuff to keep us entertained for months.

Emma wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 9:52pm:

Especially in the light  of the acknowledgment by Mal Brough ... former Liberal MP in the Howard yrs...., Remember him? Who  said he had in fact spoken to the young man Ash?? something.. accusing Peter Slipper , had in fact spoken to him on several occassions prior to the laying of accusations in the media. Had  advised him to go with it, blah blah..  I heard and saw him saying this.  :-? :-? :o Seems a mite suspicious to me...!!!! All seems rather orchestrated to throw mud as far as possible.  And we know whose only forte that is.    Yep Abbott and his nasty cronies.  Wouldn't trust them as far as I could kick them.!!!! I remember the whole lead-up up to this joke of a parliament.....  and I know who are responsible. Just watch Question Time.  Then imagine ...?  no  'tis too foul a thought.!!! >:(

Sorry, Jalane, I think you might be on your own here. The only missing piece of the puzzle is why haven't any of the girls worked out there might be a bit of money in an expose. There's the interview then the cover of Zoo Magazine.

People do dumb things when they think they are immune from accountability.

Soren wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 11:05pm:

Gist wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 9:49pm: . You DO realise Oakeshott is not in the Labor party don't you? Well he's fooled everyone. He is certainly not representing the people of Port Macquarie, that's for sure!!! He may have the seat but he is not representing the people.

WOW the ignorance stuns me. You know Port Macquarie do you? I lived for a very long time on the mid-north coast and the only politician that ever stood up was Oakeshott. The rest are completely useless national party lap dogs that do nothing but what the liberal party tell them. They have got nothing for the area achieved in the way of infrastructure, jobs and social development. The whole area has gone through decades of neglect as labor won't help and the nat's take them for granted. They have only cared since Oakeshott started rubbing their noses in their own arrogance now he faces the full weight of the lies and deceit of the nationals and their shock jock mates like Haddley. 

I did think Thompson's use of the word "Hookers" was a bit strange.  I would have thought a Politician may have used the word "Prostitute".  I don't know, it just implied a degree of familiarity.
BTW, First post, thanks for having me !

Agent Basil wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 11:51am:

I did think Thompson's use of the word "Hookers" was a bit strange.  I would have thought a Politician may have used the word "Prostitute".  I don't know, it just implied a degree of familiarity. BTW, First post, thanks for having me !

The jury is still out on that one.

nairbe wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 11:30am:

Soren wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 11:05pm: Gist wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 9:49pm: . You DO realise Oakeshott is not in the Labor party don't you? [url][/url] Well he's fooled everyone. He is certainly not representing the people of Port Macquarie, that's for sure!!! He may have the seat but he is not representing the people. WOW the ignorance stuns me. You know Port Macquarie do you? I lived for a very long time on the mid-north coast and the only politician that ever stood up was Oakeshott. The rest are completely useless national party lap dogs that do nothing but what the liberal party tell them. They have got nothing for the area achieved in the way of infrastructure, jobs and social development. The whole area has gone through decades of neglect as labor won't help and the nat's take them for granted. They have only cared since Oakeshott started rubbing their noses in their own arrogance now he faces the full weight of the lies and deceit of the nationals and their shock jock mates like Haddley.

Well, as the poet says, no worries, then eh?  They'll re-elect him with an increased margin.  But until then, what to do with this piece of polling news:

Mr Oakeshott's primary support in Lyne, on the NSW mid-north coast, has collapsed from 47.1 per cent at the time of the election to 26 per cent. Mr Windsor's support in New England, which adjoins Lyne, has slumped from 61.9 per cent to 33 per cent

longweekend58 wrote on May 12^th, 2012 at 7:50pm:

Bobby. wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 5:26pm: Longweekend, A man is innocent until proven guilty. You are just part of Abbott's lynch mob. ONLY in a court of law. IN every other area of life, gulit is assigned based on the known facts which even you must admit is hardly flattering.

Hi Longweekend,
Haven't you ever looked at some of the women in your
church congregation with lascivious eyes?

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

Soren wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 12:37pm:

nairbe wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 11:30am: Soren wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 11:05pm: Gist wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 9:49pm: . You DO realise Oakeshott is not in the Labor party don't you? [url][/url] Well he's fooled everyone. He is certainly not representing the people of Port Macquarie, that's for sure!!! He may have the seat but he is not representing the people. WOW the ignorance stuns me. You know Port Macquarie do you? I lived for a very long time on the mid-north coast and the only politician that ever stood up was Oakeshott. The rest are completely useless national party lap dogs that do nothing but what the liberal party tell them. They have got nothing for the area achieved in the way of infrastructure, jobs and social development. The whole area has gone through decades of neglect as labor won't help and the nat's take them for granted. They have only cared since Oakeshott started rubbing their noses in their own arrogance now he faces the full weight of the lies and deceit of the nationals and their shock jock mates like Haddley.  Well, as the poet says, no worries, then eh?  They'll re-elect him with an increased margin.  But until then, what to do with this piece of polling news: Mr Oakeshott's primary support in Lyne, on the NSW mid-north coast, has collapsed from 47.1 per cent at the time of the election to 26 per cent. Mr Windsor's support in New England, which adjoins Lyne, has slumped from 61.9 per cent to 33 per cent

Yes that is fine, my position on the IQ of the electorate is no secret. They both suffering from being in conservative area's who were angry but in the end would rather maintain a conservate presence in their seat even though the have never had nothing but indifferent neglect from the National Party for 40+ years. They will do as they wish and the hung parlament was always death for the independents as they were damed if they did and screwing the country if they didn't.   

nairbe wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 1:10pm:

Soren wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 12:37pm: nairbe wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 11:30am: Soren wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 11:05pm: Gist wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 9:49pm: . You DO realise Oakeshott is not in the Labor party don't you? [url][/url] Well he's fooled everyone. He is certainly not representing the people of Port Macquarie, that's for sure!!! He may have the seat but he is not representing the people. WOW the ignorance stuns me. You know Port Macquarie do you? I lived for a very long time on the mid-north coast and the only politician that ever stood up was Oakeshott. The rest are completely useless national party lap dogs that do nothing but what the liberal party tell them. They have got nothing for the area achieved in the way of infrastructure, jobs and social development. The whole area has gone through decades of neglect as labor won't help and the nat's take them for granted. They have only cared since Oakeshott started rubbing their noses in their own arrogance now he faces the full weight of the lies and deceit of the nationals and their shock jock mates like Haddley.  Well, as the poet says, no worries, then eh?  They'll re-elect him with an increased margin.  But until then, what to do with this piece of polling news: Mr Oakeshott's primary support in Lyne, on the NSW mid-north coast, has collapsed from 47.1 per cent at the time of the election to 26 per cent. Mr Windsor's support in New England, which adjoins Lyne, has slumped from 61.9 per cent to 33 per cent Yes that is fine, my position on the IQ of the electorate is no secret. They both suffering from being in conservative area's who were angry but in the end would rather maintain a conservate presence in their seat even though the have never had nothing but indifferent neglect from the National Party for 40+ years. They will do as they wish and the hung parlament was always death for the independents as they were damed if they did and screwing the country if they didn't.

I don't agree with that highlighted section. Had there been no lie by Gillard on the carbon tax and the ALP not obssessed with eating its own then the Independents may have had a better chance of being re-elected. Had the Independents also supported a no confidence motion in the ALP sooner, they may have also increased their chances. But now they are tied to the sinking ship SS Gillard and will go down to the bottom with the Captain for their inability to serve in the best interests of the people.

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 2:01pm:

nairbe wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 1:10pm: Soren wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 12:37pm: nairbe wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 11:30am: Soren wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 11:05pm: Gist wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 9:49pm: . You DO realise Oakeshott is not in the Labor party don't you? [url][/url] Well he's fooled everyone. He is certainly not representing the people of Port Macquarie, that's for sure!!! He may have the seat but he is not representing the people. WOW the ignorance stuns me. You know Port Macquarie do you? I lived for a very long time on the mid-north coast and the only politician that ever stood up was Oakeshott. The rest are completely useless national party lap dogs that do nothing but what the liberal party tell them. They have got nothing for the area achieved in the way of infrastructure, jobs and social development. The whole area has gone through decades of neglect as labor won't help and the nat's take them for granted. They have only cared since Oakeshott started rubbing their noses in their own arrogance now he faces the full weight of the lies and deceit of the nationals and their shock jock mates like Haddley.  Well, as the poet says, no worries, then eh?  They'll re-elect him with an increased margin.  But until then, what to do with this piece of polling news: Mr Oakeshott's primary support in Lyne, on the NSW mid-north coast, has collapsed from 47.1 per cent at the time of the election to 26 per cent. Mr Windsor's support in New England, which adjoins Lyne, has slumped from 61.9 per cent to 33 per cent Yes that is fine, my position on the IQ of the electorate is no secret. They both suffering from being in conservative area's who were angry but in the end would rather maintain a conservate presence in their seat even though the have never had nothing but indifferent neglect from the National Party for 40+ years. They will do as they wish and the hung parlament was always death for the independents as they were damed if they did and screwing the country if they didn't.    I don't agree with that highlighted section. Had there been no lie by Gillard on the carbon tax and the ALP not obssessed with eating its own then the Independents may have had a better chance of being re-elected. Had the Independents also supported a no confidence motion in the ALP sooner, they may have also increased their chances. But now they are tied to the sinking ship SS Gillard and will go down to the bottom with the Captain for their inability to serve in the best interests of the people.

You are so off track and need to check yourself as your conservative fervor is overtaking you.  The independents were re-elected at the last election strongly after Gillard replaced Rudd. From the moment the election was done Abbott was lining them up to hang the crap on them if he did not get power. After all they were from National seats and they had a right to them. The chances of either ever backing the coalition they had so viciously split with were remote at best but impossible with a fool like Abbott bouncing around angrily. Ever since the election they have faced a media barrage backed by Nationals who want their birthright returned. The Nationals are the singularly most over represented and useless party in this country and they need a serious routing to put them in their place. OH and it is a permit system that transits to an ETS, very different to Tony's preferred Tax that he will give us.

The Independents left the National Party because they considered it a joke that was nothing more then making up the numbers for a Liberal Party that could never beat Labor without them.
So the question is given the unprofessional approach Abbott made to them after the election and the National Party filling the media with abuse and threats towards them why should they have signed up with Abbott?
If the answer is.."to save their own skin" that's probably an indicator of how shallow, tribal and corrupt the two major parties and the Nationals have become and the low expectations of their rusted followers.

adelcrow wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 3:12pm:

The Independents left the National Party because they considered it a joke that was nothing more then making up the numbers for a Liberal Party that could never beat Labor without them. So the question is given the unprofessional approach Abbott made to them after the election and the National Party filling the media with abuse and threats towards them why should they have signed up with Abbott? If the answer is.."to save their own skin" that's probably an indicator of how shallow, tribal and corrupt the two major parties and the Nationals have become and the low expectations of their rusted followers.

Tony Windsor was originally going to be a candidate for the National Party for the seat of New England.....


In the 1991 election, Windsor was first elected to the New South Wales Legislative Assembly as the Member for Tamworth. Windsor was originally a National Party candidate for this seat, but allegations in regards to a drink-driving incident arose on the day of his pre-selection, and the National Party endorsed another candidate.

So now you have the reason WHY he is an Independent!!!!!

adelcrow wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 3:12pm:

The Independents left the National Party because they considered it a joke

Tony Windsor didn't actually leave the party of his own free-will - rather the National Party endorsed another candidate because of Windsor's drink driving related issues.

That's hardly like walking out on policy issues is it?

Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 3:37pm:

adelcrow wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 3:12pm: The Independents left the National Party because they considered it a joke Tony Windsor didn't actually leave the party of his own free-will - rather the National Party endorsed another candidate because of Windsor's drink driving related issues. That's hardly like walking out on policy issues is it?

Im surprised they would accept his vote given those circumstances and their newly found high moral standards

adelcrow wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 4:15pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 3:37pm: adelcrow wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 3:12pm: The Independents left the National Party because they considered it a joke Tony Windsor didn't actually leave the party of his own free-will - rather the National Party endorsed another candidate because of Windsor's drink driving related issues. That's hardly like walking out on policy issues is it? Im surprised they would accept his vote given those circumstances and their newly found high moral standards

But they cannot accept his vote on the floor they have set out those moral standards for themselves now. Bet that one haunts them for a long time.

How can you not accept a vote from the cross benches. Can the sponsor of a bill tell the speaker not to accept a certain vote, or would you have to force one of your own to abstain.

I love it when we keep referring to these guys as INDEPENDENTS..no they are not.. they signed up with a PARTY it doesnt really matter which party..

in this case it was labor...

they signed to really really agree with that parties policies.....

since then they have all backed the THERE WILL BE NO CARBON TAX POLICY..


even though from what I have read.. Oakeshott in particular voted with labor against his constituents prime wishes..

they have still gone along with everything this govt has said or done/not done...

so to call them INDEPENDENTS to my way of thinking couldnt be further from the truth...

they are members of the labor party just not members of the ALP>..

I do not think a real INDEPENDENT would sit back and watch this THOMO saga without having a say...


now Oakeshott is saying ...OMG..


THOMO had better have something good to say when he returns to parliament....




OR WHAT OAKESHOTT????

WHAT WILL YOU DO..???????


I AM SURE THE GOOD PEOPLE OF LYNE ARE MORE THAN INTERESTED.

smirking Windsor...he hasnt been charged with anything.. of course he is innocent...


a good question would have to be...


WHY HASNT HE BEEN CHARGED WITH ANYTHING?


IS SOMEONE BEING PAID. TO HOLD OFF ON THAT HAPPENING UNTIL THE ELECTION...


I would not put anything past this govt...thats my opinion of them

MOTR wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 4:42pm:

How can you not accept a vote from the cross benches. Can the sponsor of a bill tell the speaker not to accept a certain vote, or would you have to force one of your own to abstain.

he should have been suspended like slipper......

or would that be too fair?

nairbe wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 3:03pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 2:01pm: nairbe wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 1:10pm: Soren wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 12:37pm: nairbe wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 11:30am: Soren wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 11:05pm: Gist wrote on May 12th, 2012 at 9:49pm: . You DO realise Oakeshott is not in the Labor party don't you? [url][/url] Well he's fooled everyone. He is certainly not representing the people of Port Macquarie, that's for sure!!! He may have the seat but he is not representing the people. WOW the ignorance stuns me. You know Port Macquarie do you? I lived for a very long time on the mid-north coast and the only politician that ever stood up was Oakeshott. The rest are completely useless national party lap dogs that do nothing but what the liberal party tell them. They have got nothing for the area achieved in the way of infrastructure, jobs and social development. The whole area has gone through decades of neglect as labor won't help and the nat's take them for granted. They have only cared since Oakeshott started rubbing their noses in their own arrogance now he faces the full weight of the lies and deceit of the nationals and their shock jock mates like Haddley.  Well, as the poet says, no worries, then eh?  They'll re-elect him with an increased margin.  But until then, what to do with this piece of polling news: Mr Oakeshott's primary support in Lyne, on the NSW mid-north coast, has collapsed from 47.1 per cent at the time of the election to 26 per cent. Mr Windsor's support in New England, which adjoins Lyne, has slumped from 61.9 per cent to 33 per cent Yes that is fine, my position on the IQ of the electorate is no secret. They both suffering from being in conservative area's who were angry but in the end would rather maintain a conservate presence in their seat even though the have never had nothing but indifferent neglect from the National Party for 40+ years. They will do as they wish and the hung parlament was always death for the independents as they were damed if they did and screwing the country if they didn't.    I don't agree with that highlighted section. Had there been no lie by Gillard on the carbon tax and the ALP not obssessed with eating its own then the Independents may have had a better chance of being re-elected. Had the Independents also supported a no confidence motion in the ALP sooner, they may have also increased their chances. But now they are tied to the sinking ship SS Gillard and will go down to the bottom with the Captain for their inability to serve in the best interests of the people. You are so off track and need to check yourself as your conservative fervor is overtaking you.  The independents were re-elected at the last election strongly after Gillard replaced Rudd. From the moment the election was done Abbott was lining them up to hang the crap on them if he did not get power. After all they were from National seats and they had a right to them. The chances of either ever backing the coalition they had so viciously split with were remote at best but impossible with a fool like Abbott bouncing around angrily. Ever since the election they have faced a media barrage backed by Nationals who want their birthright returned. The Nationals are the singularly most over represented and useless party in this country and they need a serious routing to put them in their place. OH and it is a permit system that transits to an ETS, very different to Tony's preferred Tax that he will give us.

Prior to Gillard/Brown announcing that we must have a carbon tax or perish - despite a promise by Gillard not to introduce one. Once again, you've shown what a narrow view you have of history.

cods wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 4:50pm:

MOTR wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 4:42pm: How can you not accept a vote from the cross benches. Can the sponsor of a bill tell the speaker not to accept a certain vote, or would you have to force one of your own to abstain. he should have been suspended like slipper...... or would that be too fair?

How can you suspend him from the house. Are there any constitutional provisions for this? Slipper has not been suspended from the house, he has stood down as Speaker.

MOTR wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 5:02pm:

How can you suspend him from the house. Are there any constitutional provisions for this?

What about if Police decide to charge him? Could he or should he be suspended then? I think he should be - not sure if there is a rule saying he could be.

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 5:04pm:

MOTR wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:02pm: How can you suspend him from the house. Are there any constitutional provisions for this? What about if Police decide to charge him? Could he or should he be suspended then? I think he should be - not sure if there is a rule saying he could be.

I don't believe so.

MOTR wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 5:07pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:04pm: MOTR wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:02pm: How can you suspend him from the house. Are there any constitutional provisions for this? What about if Police decide to charge him? Could he or should he be suspended then? I think he should be - not sure if there is a rule saying he could be. I don't believe so.

I thought if someone was charged with a criminal offence, they were not eligible to hold a seat in parliament?

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 5:10pm:

MOTR wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:07pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:04pm: MOTR wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:02pm: How can you suspend him from the house. Are there any constitutional provisions for this? What about if Police decide to charge him? Could he or should he be suspended then? I think he should be - not sure if there is a rule saying he could be. I don't believe so. I thought if someone was charged with a criminal offence, they were not eligible to hold a seat in parliament?

Mary Jo fisher,sock mistress. ::).

MOTR wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 5:02pm:

cods wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 4:50pm: MOTR wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 4:42pm: How can you not accept a vote from the cross benches. Can the sponsor of a bill tell the speaker not to accept a certain vote, or would you have to force one of your own to abstain. he should have been suspended like slipper...... or would that be too fair? How can you suspend him from the house. Are there any constitutional provisions for this? Slipper has not been suspended from the house, he has stood down as Speaker.

I think he was given a choice... he took that...and I dont blame him on full pay and perks..good luck to him..


I accept this THOMO saga is one of a kind... gawd dont we all hope so...

but honestly he has sat there now for at least two years with this investigation [more than one ]going on...

all the while the ALP have been paying his legal bills..[ this has just come out btw]

as things come out.. and with 1100 pages of ONE investigation..there are bound to be lots of leaks....

NONE OF THEM GOOD>>>


he claims he was trying to do good for a dysfunctional union......


yet doesn't explain what he was trying to achieve  or for that matter what he did achieve.

he is painting himself as the victim here and using parliament to point the finger... at someone who really doesnt have the right to stand in parliament and call him a liar...

since when has any pollie been asked to explain himself??????????????????????..

why I am so ropeable is because this is setting a precedent..god knows what the future will bring if any other sleazeball gets elected...

hr id dmilling all over the paper this morning... what the hell has he got to smile about???

he should at least be a little bit humble even apologetic...nup there he is in full blown posturing.

skippy. wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 5:13pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:10pm: MOTR wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:07pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:04pm: MOTR wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:02pm: How can you suspend him from the house. Are there any constitutional provisions for this? What about if Police decide to charge him? Could he or should he be suspended then? I think he should be - not sure if there is a rule saying he could be. I don't believe so. I thought if someone was charged with a criminal offence, they were not eligible to hold a seat in parliament? Mary Jo fisher,sock mistress. ::).

I am hoping skippy someone in your family has a mental breakdown and does something stupid like that...we shall see how funny you find it..

did you know 1 in 4 people are very likely to have a break down in public like that... it could happen to you!

cods wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 5:19pm:

skippy. wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:13pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:10pm: MOTR wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:07pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:04pm: MOTR wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:02pm: How can you suspend him from the house. Are there any constitutional provisions for this? What about if Police decide to charge him? Could he or should he be suspended then? I think he should be - not sure if there is a rule saying he could be. I don't believe so. I thought if someone was charged with a criminal offence, they were not eligible to hold a seat in parliament? Mary Jo fisher,sock mistress. ::). I am hoping skippy someone in your family has a mental breakdown and does something stupid like that...we shall see how funny you find it.. did you know 1 in 4 people are very likely to have a break down in public like that... it could happen to you!

I'd say it's highly likely when Skippy goes to the shops the day after the election, buys a newspaper and see's Labor reduced to just a handful of seats with a picture of Tony Abbott sitting in the PM's chair.

Skippy, won't be the only one.

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 5:22pm:

cods wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:19pm: skippy. wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:13pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:10pm: MOTR wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:07pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:04pm: MOTR wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:02pm: How can you suspend him from the house. Are there any constitutional provisions for this? What about if Police decide to charge him? Could he or should he be suspended then? I think he should be - not sure if there is a rule saying he could be. I don't believe so. I thought if someone was charged with a criminal offence, they were not eligible to hold a seat in parliament? Mary Jo fisher,sock mistress. ::). I am hoping skippy someone in your family has a mental breakdown and does something stupid like that...we shall see how funny you find it.. did you know 1 in 4 people are very likely to have a break down in public like that... it could happen to you! I'd say it's highly likely when Skippy goes to the shops the day after the election, buys a newspaper and see's Labor reduced to just a handful of seats with a picture of Tony Abbott sitting in the PM's chair.

Im looking forward to seeing how Abbott is going to shove his regressive legislation through a hostile Senate  ;D

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 5:10pm:

MOTR wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:07pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:04pm: MOTR wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:02pm: How can you suspend him from the house. Are there any constitutional provisions for this? What about if Police decide to charge him? Could he or should he be suspended then? I think he should be - not sure if there is a rule saying he could be. I don't believe so. I thought if someone was charged with a criminal offence, they were not eligible to hold a seat in parliament?

nope. have to be convicted and the offences has to have a jail term of one year or more onthe books. In other words the offence might only draw probation or a fine but if the max term is a jail sentence of a year or more you are therefore toast.

adelcrow wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 5:58pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:22pm: cods wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:19pm: skippy. wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:13pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:10pm: MOTR wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:07pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:04pm: MOTR wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:02pm: How can you suspend him from the house. Are there any constitutional provisions for this? What about if Police decide to charge him? Could he or should he be suspended then? I think he should be - not sure if there is a rule saying he could be. I don't believe so. I thought if someone was charged with a criminal offence, they were not eligible to hold a seat in parliament? Mary Jo fisher,sock mistress. ::). I am hoping skippy someone in your family has a mental breakdown and does something stupid like that...we shall see how funny you find it.. did you know 1 in 4 people are very likely to have a break down in public like that... it could happen to you! I'd say it's highly likely when Skippy goes to the shops the day after the election, buys a newspaper and see's Labor reduced to just a handful of seats with a picture of Tony Abbott sitting in the PM's chair. Im looking forward to seeing how Abbott is going to shove his regressive legislation through a hostile Senate  ;D

not a problem. easy as.

two options. the labor option (surrender) or the liberal option (negotiate or take it to a DD). Ultimately the Greens learn to play with others or are removed. See how the GST got passed thrua  hostile senate? negotiation.

longweekend58 wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 6:05pm:

adelcrow wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:58pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:22pm: cods wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:19pm: skippy. wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:13pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:10pm: MOTR wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:07pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:04pm: MOTR wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 5:02pm: How can you suspend him from the house. Are there any constitutional provisions for this? What about if Police decide to charge him? Could he or should he be suspended then? I think he should be - not sure if there is a rule saying he could be. I don't believe so. I thought if someone was charged with a criminal offence, they were not eligible to hold a seat in parliament? Mary Jo fisher,sock mistress. ::). I am hoping skippy someone in your family has a mental breakdown and does something stupid like that...we shall see how funny you find it.. did you know 1 in 4 people are very likely to have a break down in public like that... it could happen to you! I'd say it's highly likely when Skippy goes to the shops the day after the election, buys a newspaper and see's Labor reduced to just a handful of seats with a picture of Tony Abbott sitting in the PM's chair. Im looking forward to seeing how Abbott is going to shove his regressive legislation through a hostile Senate  ;D not a problem. easy as. two options. the labor option (surrender) or the liberal option (negotiate or take it to a DD). Ultimately the Greens learn to play with others or are removed. See how the GST got passed thrua  hostile senate? negotiation.

Exactly - the Greens would be suicidal to vote against legislation that Abbott would clearly have an overwhelming majority to introduce to parliament. If the Greens do feel like opposing legislation that will repeal the carbon tax, they'll most certainly feel the wrath of voters at the double dissolution election when they are reduced to one or two Senators - if that.

longweekend58 wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 6:05pm:

not a problem. easy as. two options. the labor option (surrender) or the liberal option (negotiate or take it to a DD). Ultimately the Greens learn to play with others or are removed. See how the GST got passed thrua  hostile senate? negotiation.

HAH! We've seen Tony's negotiation skills. He's the dick that negotiated himself OUT of governing the country. What a loser.

DD it is.

The Greens are not going to lose Greens voters by going against Abbott regressive legislation in the senate. In fact if they vote with Abbott they will go the way the Democrats did when they voted for the GST.
I say bring on an Abbott led govt with a hostile senate using Abbotts theory that an opposition is only there to oppose everything and to unsettle the elected govt.

adelcrow wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 7:34pm:

The Greens are not going to lose Greens voters by going against Abbott regressive legislation in the senate. In fact if they vote with Abbott they will go the way the Democrats did when they voted for the GST. I say bring on an Abbott led govt with a hostile senate using Abbotts theory that an opposition is only there to oppose everything and to unsettle the elected govt.

unfortunately, you define 'regressive legislation' as that which teh Greens dont support but everybody else does. and there is the real problem. They only beleive in what teh Greens want. best for the country or *shock horror* majority opinion, doesnt even ener their heads. it will lead top their demise just as it has in other countreies. Greens dont play well with others and that is not a attribute that goes down all that well with other people.

longweekend58 wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 7:57pm:

unfortunately, you define 'regressive legislation' as that which teh Greens dont support but everybody else does. and there is the real problem. They only beleive in what teh Greens want. best for the country or *shock horror* majority opinion, doesnt even ener their heads. it will lead top their demise just as it has in other countreies. Greens dont play well with others and that is not a attribute that goes down all that well with other people.

Isn't that what a political party should be about? Coming up with  a set of ideals that they stand for and promoting that within the community? If they gain support then they look to implement their ideals.

According to you, political parties are all about getting power. Doesn't matter what they do to get it, just get the power. Dispense whatever they think the public will take as long as it earns votes for the party.

We could replace your version of political parties with vending machines and save ourselves a bunch of idiots sucking off the public teat.

Yes indeed Gist.

Gist wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 8:09pm:

longweekend58 wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 7:57pm: unfortunately, you define 'regressive legislation' as that which teh Greens dont support but everybody else does. and there is the real problem. They only beleive in what teh Greens want. best for the country or *shock horror* majority opinion, doesnt even ener their heads. it will lead top their demise just as it has in other countreies. Greens dont play well with others and that is not a attribute that goes down all that well with other people. Isn't that what a political party should be about? Coming up with  a set of ideals that they stand for and promoting that within the community? If they gain support then they look to implement their ideals. According to you, political parties are all about getting power. Doesn't matter what they do to get it, just get the power. Dispense whatever they think the public will take as long as it earns votes for the party. We could replace your version of political parties with vending machines and save ourselves a bunch of idiots sucking off the public teat.

so you think what the greens the indies and the Labor did was fair and square...and nothjing at all to do with POWER..


hahahaha.. ooops excuse the mirth, because it really isnt funny at all.

abbott wouldnt give the indies a guarantee he wouldnt call an early election.....

so did they want to take that risk   I doubt it very much...thinking about myself in that situation I dont think I would take that risk..


POWER when are you going to get used to it.. its always been about POWER..stop b eing naive


most saw the salivating when booby stood on the podium when accepting half the blame..oooppps.. credit for the CARBON TAX!!


surely you havent forgotten that already..

why do you think he has left the stage so early??????

cods wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 8:23am:

Gist wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 8:09pm: longweekend58 wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 7:57pm: unfortunately, you define 'regressive legislation' as that which teh Greens dont support but everybody else does. and there is the real problem. They only beleive in what teh Greens want. best for the country or *shock horror* majority opinion, doesnt even ener their heads. it will lead top their demise just as it has in other countreies. Greens dont play well with others and that is not a attribute that goes down all that well with other people. Isn't that what a political party should be about? Coming up with  a set of ideals that they stand for and promoting that within the community? If they gain support then they look to implement their ideals. According to you, political parties are all about getting power. Doesn't matter what they do to get it, just get the power. Dispense whatever they think the public will take as long as it earns votes for the party. We could replace your version of political parties with vending machines and save ourselves a bunch of idiots sucking off the public teat. so you think what the greens the indies and the Labor did was fair and square...and nothjing at all to do with POWER.. hahahaha.. ooops excuse the mirth, because it really isnt funny at all. abbott wouldnt give the indies a guarantee he wouldnt call an early election..... so did they want to take that risk   I doubt it very much...thinking about myself in that situation I dont think I would take that risk.. POWER when are you going to get used to it.. its always been about POWER..stop b eing naive most saw the salivating when booby stood on the podium when accepting half the blame..oooppps.. credit for the CARBON TAX!! surely you havent forgotten that already.. why do you think he has left the stage so early??????

Intersting point cods

Booby claimed the credit for the Carbon Tax but did not remain in office long enough to see it through

I wonder by he abandoned ship?

Maqqa wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 9:19am:

cods wrote on May 15th, 2012 at 8:23am: Gist wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 8:09pm: longweekend58 wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 7:57pm: unfortunately, you define 'regressive legislation' as that which teh Greens dont support but everybody else does. and there is the real problem. They only beleive in what teh Greens want. best for the country or *shock horror* majority opinion, doesnt even ener their heads. it will lead top their demise just as it has in other countreies. Greens dont play well with others and that is not a attribute that goes down all that well with other people. Isn't that what a political party should be about? Coming up with  a set of ideals that they stand for and promoting that within the community? If they gain support then they look to implement their ideals. According to you, political parties are all about getting power. Doesn't matter what they do to get it, just get the power. Dispense whatever they think the public will take as long as it earns votes for the party. We could replace your version of political parties with vending machines and save ourselves a bunch of idiots sucking off the public teat. so you think what the greens the indies and the Labor did was fair and square...and nothjing at all to do with POWER.. hahahaha.. ooops excuse the mirth, because it really isnt funny at all. abbott wouldnt give the indies a guarantee he wouldnt call an early election..... so did they want to take that risk   I doubt it very much...thinking about myself in that situation I dont think I would take that risk.. POWER when are you going to get used to it.. its always been about POWER..stop b eing naive most saw the salivating when booby stood on the podium when accepting half the blame..oooppps.. credit for the CARBON TAX!! surely you havent forgotten that already.. why do you think he has left the stage so early?????? Intersting point cods Booby claimed the credit for the Carbon Tax but did not remain in office long enough to see it through I wonder by he abandoned ship?

he could well have had a chat with his ALIEN friends and they told him to get out whilst he still had life.....ha.ha.ha..


seems to me he jumped ship at an extraordinary time..YYYYYY.. I will always wonder YYYYYYY.

now we have flannery pushing the old PANIC BUTTON AGAIN..weird....

who in heavens name believe them anymore?..

mind you flannery needs to justify his $180.000 a year doesnt he?


booby has left them all holding the candle..

cods wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 10:08am:

Maqqa wrote on May 15th, 2012 at 9:19am: cods wrote on May 15th, 2012 at 8:23am: Gist wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 8:09pm: longweekend58 wrote on May 13th, 2012 at 7:57pm: unfortunately, you define 'regressive legislation' as that which teh Greens dont support but everybody else does. and there is the real problem. They only beleive in what teh Greens want. best for the country or *shock horror* majority opinion, doesnt even ener their heads. it will lead top their demise just as it has in other countreies. Greens dont play well with others and that is not a attribute that goes down all that well with other people. Isn't that what a political party should be about? Coming up with  a set of ideals that they stand for and promoting that within the community? If they gain support then they look to implement their ideals. According to you, political parties are all about getting power. Doesn't matter what they do to get it, just get the power. Dispense whatever they think the public will take as long as it earns votes for the party. We could replace your version of political parties with vending machines and save ourselves a bunch of idiots sucking off the public teat. so you think what the greens the indies and the Labor did was fair and square...and nothjing at all to do with POWER.. hahahaha.. ooops excuse the mirth, because it really isnt funny at all. abbott wouldnt give the indies a guarantee he wouldnt call an early election..... so did they want to take that risk   I doubt it very much...thinking about myself in that situation I dont think I would take that risk.. POWER when are you going to get used to it.. its always been about POWER..stop b eing naive most saw the salivating when booby stood on the podium when accepting half the blame..oooppps.. credit for the CARBON TAX!! surely you havent forgotten that already.. why do you think he has left the stage so early?????? Intersting point cods Booby claimed the credit for the Carbon Tax but did not remain in office long enough to see it through I wonder by he abandoned ship? he could well have had a chat with his ALIEN friends and they told him to get out whilst he still had life.....ha.ha.ha.. seems to me he jumped ship at an extraordinary time..YYYYYY.. I will always wonder YYYYYYY. now we have flannery pushing the old PANIC BUTTON AGAIN..weird.... who in heavens name believe them anymore?.. mind you flannery needs to justify his $180.000 a year doesnt he? booby has left them all holding the candle..

Unlikely because according to Brown's latest pearl of wisdom, aliens have extincted themselves due to too much pollution.

gotta love that (non)word 'extincted. only the Greens could be so poorly spoken.

and so people
we hear today he has been cleared of most of the allegations about mis-use of union funds..... with around $17,000 still to be explained.

Sorry?/ do I hear any second thoughts??   that might remove the hysteria from your quite irrational discussions.....   everybody knows the facts..!!!  OH YEAH??

Morons.  Such venom, based on the lies we're told, EVERYDAY. >:(

Just to say, as a person who has been subject to media misrepresentation, I don't believe any slanderous crap printed in newspapers, and reported on TV or on-line. 

If you are so inclined, be prepared for disappointment and despair, if it happens to you one day.
Hope you got lots of dough.!!! >:( >:( [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

Emma wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 8:03pm:

and so people we hear today he has been cleared of most of the allegations about mis-use of union funds..... with around $17,000 still to be explained. Sorry?/ do I hear any second thoughts??   that might remove the hysteria from your quite irrational discussions.....   everybody knows the facts..!!!  OH YEAH?? Morons.  Such venom, based on the lies we're told, EVERYDAY. >:( Just to say, as a person who has been subject to media misrepresentation, I don't believe any slanderous crap printed in newspapers, and reported on TV or on-line.  If you are so inclined, be prepared for disappointment and despair, if it happens to you one day. Hope you got lots of dough.!!! >:( >:( [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

The case is far from over. There are still the travel findings, prostitutes and dining. I keenly await his speech on Monday. You are really fooling yourself if you think that he is innocent and/or in the clear. He is neither, and if he were, do you really think that he would have been disendorsed?

Emma wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 8:03pm:

and so people we hear today he has been cleared of most of the allegations about mis-use of union funds..... with around $17,000 still to be explained. Sorry?/ do I hear any second thoughts??   that might remove the hysteria from your quite irrational discussions.....   everybody knows the facts..!!!  OH YEAH?? Morons.  Such venom, based on the lies we're told, EVERYDAY. >:( Just to say, as a person who has been subject to media misrepresentation, I don't believe any slanderous crap printed in newspapers, and reported on TV or on-line.  If you are so inclined, be prepared for disappointment and despair, if it happens to you one day. Hope you got lots of dough.!!! >:( >:( [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

The mob is never wrong..BURN THE WITCH..Abbott said so.

ah yes

and the slavering mobs howl for the blood of the righteous.!!
just like the little old ladies knitting, screeching laughter, watching the heads fall before Madame  Guillotine.

I hate to say this,  but Abbott has really tapped in to the lowest common denominator when it comes to propaganda. He knows how to appeal to the 'self-interest' and fear of 'difference and change' commonly held by Australians. Sad but true.  Lets hope people smarten up a bit before the election.  fingers crossed that lies and smear tactics will be recognised for what they are.

Have to say, what little I saw of Gillard talking to the Unions the other day, was truly a heartening thing to hear.

Those are the fundamental motivations I SEEK  in our leader.

:)

Emma wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 8:29pm:

ah yes and the slavering mobs howl for the blood of the righteous.!! just like the little old ladies knitting, screeching laughter, watching the heads fall before Madame  Guillotine. I hate to say this,  but Abbott has really tapped in to the lowest common denominator when it comes to propaganda. He knows how to appeal to the 'self-interest' and fear of 'difference and change' commonly held by Australians. Sad but true.  Lets hope people smarten up a bit before the election.  fingers crossed that lies and smear tactics will be recognised for what they are. Have to say, what little I saw of Gillard talking to the Unions the other day, was truly a heartening thing to hear. Those are the fundamental motivations I SEEK  in our leader. :)

Abbott has tapped into the fervor that has propelled hard line hate mongers into power for thousands of years.
Maybe people are just beginning to see how Abbott, his billionaire puppet masters and the junk media have manipulated them.

The Government legalized this stuff and forced it on our neighborhoods and we cant do anything about it - if we object, the Government always supports profits and vice ahead of community wishes.  They force this stuff on our people to debase and degrade us.

corporate_whitey wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 8:39pm:

The Government legalized this stuff and forced it on our neighborhoods and we cant do anything about it - if we object, the Government always supports profits and vice ahead of community wishes.  They force this stuff on our people to debase and degrade us.

Thats only because they are all childless fags

Re: Thomson - "I was forced to be with prostitutes".

There are a number of people who I expect to post with titles as dishonest as this - you are not one of them - dissapointing.

Dnarever wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 8:44pm:

Re: Thomson - "I was forced to be with prostitutes". There are a number of people who I expect to post with titles as dishonest as this - you are not one of them - dissapointing.

The mob is never wrong..sometimes they are forced to stretch the truth to bring non believers and dirty communists along..but they are never wrong.

john_g wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 8:15pm:

Emma wrote on May 16th, 2012 at 8:03pm: and so people we hear today he has been cleared of most of the allegations about mis-use of union funds..... with around $17,000 still to be explained. Sorry?/ do I hear any second thoughts??   that might remove the hysteria from your quite irrational discussions.....   everybody knows the facts..!!!  OH YEAH?? Morons.  Such venom, based on the lies we're told, EVERYDAY. >:( Just to say, as a person who has been subject to media misrepresentation, I don't believe any slanderous crap printed in newspapers, and reported on TV or on-line.  If you are so inclined, be prepared for disappointment and despair, if it happens to you one day. Hope you got lots of dough.!!! >:( >:( [smiley=thumbdown.gif] The case is far from over. There are still the travel findings, prostitutes and dining. I keenly await his speech on Monday. You are really fooling yourself if you think that he is innocent and/or in the clear. He is neither, and if he were, do you really think that he would have been disendorsed?

This is true. The case is not over.
I don't BELIEVE either of your options.
I don't know the facts.  Therefore I have formed NO CONCLUSION.!!!

So you base your opinion on the fact he was disendorsed?  Was He?  Didn't notice...  and the PM was basically forced to do so, by all the hysteria.  She would have preferred to wait until the 'case' had been fully examined in Law.  And rightly so.
If every slanderous accusation, or allegations of malfeasance ,  were to have the effect of the 'accused' being dumped, we'd hear nothing else but such allegations.  ( IE. be prepared for more crap)..... no way to run a Country. 
BUT   -  in this case,  the media ,  and other interested parties, have made it THE media circus of the yr so far.  Or, have we just forgotten all the other disruptive efforts undertaken? because they were basically a pile of steaming  f----y?
As I said - Abbott knows all the nasty bits to hit in the Aus psyche, and he's pushing those buttons everytime he opens his mouth.

I forgive you all your weakness and vulnerability to manipulation,
peace and harmony
:)

As each charge is dropped or disproved the Libs and their billionaire puppet masters will keep finding more charges until something sticks.

No No Adelcrow-  thats ...faggots.!!
corporate_whitey wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 8:39pm:

The Government legalized this stuff and forced it on our neighborhoods and we cant do anything about it - if we object, the Government always supports profits and vice ahead of community wishes.  They force this stuff on our people to debase and degrade us.

Come on CW  - we know you are a stooge, already.
CW  =  Covert Whiner.!  You couldn't care less about the community ... and as for its wishes??
Give over-  I doremember things gone before.  You are a sock puppet..... you speak with forked tongue.!! :P

The ALP & The Greens also want to profit off my community with drug addiction...

adelcrow wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 8:59pm:

As each charge is dropped or disproved the Libs and their billionaire puppet masters will keep finding more charges until something sticks.

Eventually they may roll out the conservative employees that they gagged in 2003.

corporate_whitey wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 9:05pm:

The ALP & The Greens also want to profit off my community with drug addiction...

:-? :-? ::)
Looney tunes at it again.
Wipe Whitey.!!!  Wipe Whitey!!  with a reality CHUX.! ::)

And back to the real deal.  :)

If Abbott / LNP supporters think that their pollies have done no wrong... go take a look at the Howard yrs.!!!!!!!!!!!
Many REALLY BAD offences were covered up, and the culpable - no penalty.

EXAMPLE??????
.
OH just off the top of my head like :)
The Australian Wheat Board.  Ring any bells abbott stooges????

Emma wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 9:05pm:

No No Adelcrow-  thats ...faggots.!! corporate_whitey wrote on May 16th, 2012 at 8:39pm: The Government legalized this stuff and forced it on our neighborhoods and we cant do anything about it - if we object, the Government always supports profits and vice ahead of community wishes.  They force this stuff on our people to debase and degrade us. Come on CW  - we know you are a stooge, already. CW  =  Covert Whiner.!  You couldn't care less about the community ... and as for its wishes?? Give over-  I doremember things gone before.  You are a sock puppet..... you speak with forked tongue.!! :P

We are victims of this Government, I myself have been subject to torture.

you deserved it.!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;D ;D :D

Emma wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 9:23pm:

you deserved it.!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;D ;D :D

Emma wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 9:23pm:

you deserved it.!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;D ;D :D

What, because I wont suckhole to the corporate maggot and I object to the Governments vice trading industries I deserve to be tortured?

So people... its time for a rethink, don't you think??

Don't you think??

I will never suckhole to the corporate maggot or wave the white flag to traitors and vice dealers....

Nor will I - which is why I take issue with your on-going propaganda. Not that anyone with sense would agree with you, ...and many others wouldn't have a clue.  Bit like you really. :)

but  you are off topic, -- 'cos this, believe it or not,  is NOT about YOU. YOU are a disrupter... else provide some real posts to prove me wrong.  You r not capable,  U are culpable.!!

Just like your heroes, Abbott and Costello.!!  No, sadly, I'm not talking about the comedic duo of yesteryear, but the tragicomedic duopoly, which now, including Hockey,  becomes
the dohockypoly.......   in other words.... a BAD JOKE.!!!


Just like U, Sock Puppet Moron. :)

and hey where are the rest of the posters.  ??
Don't let the puppet put you off.

Any OTHERS thoughts???

Emma wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 9:18pm:

And back to the real deal.  :) If Abbott / LNP supporters think that their pollies have done no wrong... go take a look at the Howard yrs.!!!!!!!!!!! Many REALLY BAD offences were covered up, and the culpable - no penalty. EXAMPLE?????? . OH just off the top of my head like :) The Australian Wheat Board.  Ring any bells abbott stooges????

the WBA was investigated...................

btw it didnt take 3.5.years either..

Howard was found to have not a thing to answer too.....


suck it up sweetheart.

Emma wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 10:30pm:

Nor will I - which is why I take issue with your on-going propaganda. Not that anyone with sense would agree with you, ...and many others wouldn't have a clue.  Bit like you really. :) but  you are off topic, -- 'cos this, believe it or not,  is NOT about YOU. YOU are a disrupter... else provide some real posts to prove me wrong.  You r not capable,  U are culpable.!! Just like your heroes, Abbott and Costello.!!  No, sadly, I'm not talking about the comedic duo of yesteryear, but the tragicomedic duopoly, which now, including Hockey,  becomes the dohockypoly.......   in other words.... a BAD JOKE.!!! Just like U, Sock Puppet Moron. :) and hey where are the rest of the posters.  ?? Don't let the puppet put you off. Any OTHERS thoughts???

hahahahaha you really mean gutless gillard.. Corbet. and swan dont you...

they are in charge darling.. not Abbott.. as much as you wish it was he that was driving this ship towards its doom...

anyone know what all this mumbo jumbo has to do with THOMO and his prostitues?????

I don't like the morals and bad ethics of this MP.
He is a family man and he lies and cheats.

He is not a good role model and he should resign I believe.

the WBA was investigated...................

btw it didnt take 3.5.years either..

Howard was found to have not a thing to answer too.....


suck it up sweetheart.   
Reply #149 - Today at 10:54pm 

cods   Offline
Gold Member
Any OTHERS thoughts???




hahahahaha you really mean gutless gillard.. Corbet. and swan dont you...

they are in charge darling.. not Abbott.. as much as you wish it was he that was driving this ship towards its doom...   



Well isn't that just hunky dory. ::) Darling Sweetie, you are just another enabler of putrid politics.  Do you really enjoy whats happening in Aus today... all this swill fed to the pigs by the media?

Oh but hang on... you believe all that , don't you Cods.?? Swallowed hook line and sinker.!!  Or perhaps??? you know something?? have an inside line.? talked to by God????

Seriously tho,  if any person, who earns less than say55,000K per yr  supports the LNP they need their heads read.! 'Cos u are less than garbage to them, you are an expense.!! Something to be eradicated.!!

Cods. you may have a personal dislike of the PM, particularly, and Labor, generally.... but  if you assess them objectively  ( likely impossible for you, brainwshed as you are)  you would see that Gillard genuinely believes in right and wrong, .. has a clear understanding of what is correct, and lawful, and is prepared to fight for those genuinely held principles.
On the other hand, we know Abbott is a puppet, who longs for the good old days, and is prepared to undo every act Labor has undertaken to alleviate hardship for our society's most needy, and return to the wealthy those perks the rich never deserved in the first place.

So laugh on Cods.  You'll laugh on the other side of your face if YOU TOO are a low income earner.  If u r not... if you are enjoying the wealth that Australia currently possesses,  then you wouldn't want to share it??
So..if after all the rubbish, you are on < average wage, you are truly a fool.  And that goes for all the rest who get sfa but think the sun shines out of a's ass.  You'll deserve what you get, because you refuse to see that  the LNP are so corrupted by their bias as to be incapable of govt.
Suck that.

Emma wrote on May 17^th, 2012 at 12:06am:

the WBA was investigated................... btw it didnt take 3.5.years either.. Howard was found to have not a thing to answer too..... suck it up sweetheart.    Reply #149 - Today at 10:54pm  cods   Offline Gold Member Any OTHERS thoughts??? hahahahaha you really mean gutless gillard.. Corbet. and swan dont you... they are in charge darling.. not Abbott.. as much as you wish it was he that was driving this ship towards its doom...    Well isn't that just hunky dory. ::) Darling Sweetie, you are just another enabler of putrid politics.  Do you really enjoy whats happening in Aus today... all this swill fed to the pigs by the media? Oh but hang on... you believe all that , don't you Cods.?? Swallowed hook line and sinker.!!  Or perhaps??? you know something?? have an inside line.? talked to by God???? Seriously tho,  if any person, who earns less than say55,000K per yr  supports the LNP they need their heads read.! 'Cos u are less than garbage to them, you are an expense.!! Something to be eradicated.!! Cods. you may have a personal dislike of the PM, particularly, and Labor, generally.... but  if you assess them objectively  ( likely impossible for you, brainwshed as you are)  you would see that Gillard genuinely believes in right and wrong, .. has a clear understanding of what is correct, and lawful, and is prepared to fight for those genuinely held principles. On the other hand, we know Abbott is a puppet, who longs for the good old days, and is prepared to undo every act Labor has undertaken to alleviate hardship for our society's most needy, and return to the wealthy those perks the rich never deserved in the first place. So laugh on Cods.  You'll laugh on the other side of your face if YOU TOO are a low income earner.  If u r not... if you are enjoying the wealth that Australia currently possesses,  then you wouldn't want to share it?? So..if after all the rubbish, you are on < average wage, you are truly a fool.  And that goes for all the rest who get sfa but think the sun shines out of a's ass.  You'll deserve what you get, because you refuse to see that  the LNP are so corrupted by their bias as to be incapable of govt. Suck that.

you dont know a thing about me.... so I would be very very careful what you claim about me..

when you know what you are talking about let us all know.. as it it this thread is about THOMO it isnt about what YOU think you know about other people..

Faulkner calls on ALP to disclose funds02:46 AEDT Thu May 17 2012
           

A Labor senator has called on the party to release details about the funds it contributed towards Craig Thomson's legal bills.

Senator John Faulkner has asked for full disclosure of the payments to be made to ALP members, The Australian reports.

An ALP spokesman said this would happen at the NSW branch membership me


d/telegraph.


not before time I wouldnt think..

along with a few other things that we dont know about as well wouldnt go amiss..

like WHO gave permission or directed   the ALP to pay his bills in the first place!

That makes you a rusted on Liberal, OP.

MOTR wrote on May 17^th, 2012 at 5:16am:

That makes you a rusted on Liberal, OP.

and what are you.. darling?


I am not a rusted on.. btw.. If I dont like what I see I dont vote .. for anyone..Mr Informal gets my vote.. simple really..

if someone wants my vote they need to earn it..

but I dont let myself get blind sided by one thing to make me vote or not vote for them..

like gay marriage.. fancy voting for someone on just that one thing..like GAy Marriage..ye gods and little fishes.. people do.

Darling?

That's awkward. Anyways, I was referring to john_g, who has just promised lifetime fealty to the Liberal Party.

Personally, I'm one of those true believers who has voted Green for the last few elections. I'm tempted to vote Labor in the lower house at the next election as a thank you to Gillard for shepherding through the carbon tax.

Emma wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 10:30pm:

Nor will I - which is why I take issue with your on-going propaganda. Not that anyone with sense would agree with you, ...and many others wouldn't have a clue.  Bit like you really. :) but  you are off topic, -- 'cos this, believe it or not,  is NOT about YOU. YOU are a disrupter... else provide some real posts to prove me wrong.  You r not capable,  U are culpable.!! Just like your heroes, Abbott and Costello.!!  No, sadly, I'm not talking about the comedic duo of yesteryear, but the tragicomedic duopoly, which now, including Hockey,  becomes the dohockypoly.......   in other words.... a BAD JOKE.!!! Just like U, Sock Puppet Moron. :) and hey where are the rest of the posters.  ?? Don't let the puppet put you off. Any OTHERS thoughts???

Hi - why then do the Green and the ALP want to peddle and tax addictive drugs to my community and why wont you address this? 8-)

cods wrote on May 17^th, 2012 at 5:22am:

MOTR wrote on May 17th, 2012 at 5:16am: That makes you a rusted on Liberal, OP. and what are you.. darling? I am not a rusted on.. btw.. If I dont like what I see I dont vote .. for anyone..Mr Informal gets my vote.. simple really.. if someone wants my vote they need to earn it.. but I dont let myself get blind sided by one thing to make me vote or not vote for them.. like gay marriage.. fancy voting for someone on just that one thing..like GAy Marriage..ye gods and little fishes.. people do.

I don't vote Green because they support gay marriages, I vote Green because they take global warming seriously. I respect them for their progressive policies which makes it easier to support them. If Turnbull had led the Liberals at the last election I would have voted Liberal in the house of reps for the first time in my life. Ostensibly because it would have garaunteed a much smoother transition to a price on carbon, and who knows he might have dragged the Liberal Party out of the 20th Century.

I come from a staunch Labor family and growing up was a big fan of Keating. I believe in the union and was a union rep for about ten years. I joined the Labor party when I was about 23 and allowed my membership to lapse soon afterwards. I tried to rejoin in my late twenties but they politely declined. I guess stapling my membership application form to a placard condemning Bob Carr didn't do me any favours. Bob Brown was my last political hero, I'm currently looking for a new one.

MOTR wrote on May 17^th, 2012 at 5:28am:

Darling? That's awkward. Anyways, I was referring to john_g, who has just promised lifetime fealty to the Liberal Party. Personally, I'm one of those true believers who has voted Green for the last few elections. I'm tempted to vote Labor in the lower house at the next election as a thank you to Gillard for shepherding through the carbon tax.

ok...
thats what I mean about voting on ONE THING... even though it wont make one iota of difference to the quality of the planet...

never mind its driving business away from our shores and killing business that has been here for many years... and lets face it that is the  greens plan..

MOTR wrote on May 17^th, 2012 at 6:23am:

cods wrote on May 17th, 2012 at 5:22am: MOTR wrote on May 17th, 2012 at 5:16am: That makes you a rusted on Liberal, OP. and what are you.. darling? I am not a rusted on.. btw.. If I dont like what I see I dont vote .. for anyone..Mr Informal gets my vote.. simple really.. if someone wants my vote they need to earn it.. but I dont let myself get blind sided by one thing to make me vote or not vote for them.. like gay marriage.. fancy voting for someone on just that one thing..like GAy Marriage..ye gods and little fishes.. people do. I don't vote Green because they support gay marriages, I vote Green because they take global warming seriously. I respect them for their progressive policies which makes it easier to support them. If Turnbull had led the Liberals at the last election I would have voted Liberal in the house of reps for the first time in my life. Ostensibly because it would have garaunteed a much smoother transition to a price on carbon, and who knows he might have dragged the Liberal Party out of the 20th Century. I come from a staunch Labor family and growing up was a big fan of Keating. I believe in the union and was a union rep for about ten years. I joined the Labor party when I was about 23 and allowed my membership to lapse soon afterwards. I tried to rejoin in my late twenties but they politely declined. I guess stapling my membership application form to a placard condemning Bob Carr didn't do me any favours. Bob Brown was my last political hero, I'm currently looking for a new one.

so Milne hasnt past the test.... she isnt gay is she???

what about Mickey Mouse? in this country we could do a lot worse.looking at what we are putting up with right now.

cods wrote on May 17^th, 2012 at 7:17am:

MOTR wrote on May 17th, 2012 at 5:28am: Darling? That's awkward. Anyways, I was referring to john_g, who has just promised lifetime fealty to the Liberal Party. Personally, I'm one of those true believers who has voted Green for the last few elections. I'm tempted to vote Labor in the lower house at the next election as a thank you to Gillard for shepherding through the carbon tax. ok... thats what I mean about voting on ONE THING... even though it wont make one iota of difference to the quality of the planet... never mind its driving business away from our shores and killing business that has been here for many years... and lets face it that is the  greens plan..

I'm not voting based on your understanding of the issue, I'm voting on my understanding of the issue. As you should appreciate my position on the issue is far removed from yours.

cods wrote on May 17^th, 2012 at 7:20am:

MOTR wrote on May 17th, 2012 at 6:23am: cods wrote on May 17th, 2012 at 5:22am: MOTR wrote on May 17th, 2012 at 5:16am: That makes you a rusted on Liberal, OP. and what are you.. darling? I am not a rusted on.. btw.. If I dont like what I see I dont vote .. for anyone..Mr Informal gets my vote.. simple really.. if someone wants my vote they need to earn it.. but I dont let myself get blind sided by one thing to make me vote or not vote for them.. like gay marriage.. fancy voting for someone on just that one thing..like GAy Marriage..ye gods and little fishes.. people do. I don't vote Green because they support gay marriages, I vote Green because they take global warming seriously. I respect them for their progressive policies which makes it easier to support them. If Turnbull had led the Liberals at the last election I would have voted Liberal in the house of reps for the first time in my life. Ostensibly because it would have garaunteed a much smoother transition to a price on carbon, and who knows he might have dragged the Liberal Party out of the 20th Century. I come from a staunch Labor family and growing up was a big fan of Keating. I believe in the union and was a union rep for about ten years. I joined the Labor party when I was about 23 and allowed my membership to lapse soon afterwards. I tried to rejoin in my late twenties but they politely declined. I guess stapling my membership application form to a placard condemning Bob Carr didn't do me any favours. Bob Brown was my last political hero, I'm currently looking for a new one. so Milne hasnt past the test.... she isnt gay is she??? what about Mickey Mouse? in this country we could do a lot worse.looking at what we are putting up with right now.

You seemed obsessed with a persons sexuality, cods. Bob Brown is a good man, this has nothing to do with his sexuality. I respected him right off the bat, I was surprised to find out, much later, that he was gay. I'd like to think that if I'd known he was gay up front it wouldn't have altered my perception of him as a person. I grew up in a very homophobic community so respect for different sexualities is something I had to grow into.

As for Christine Milne, I certainly have a lot of respect for her, but it wouldn't be seemly to commit so soon.

MOTR wrote on May 17^th, 2012 at 7:58am:

cods wrote on May 17th, 2012 at 7:20am: MOTR wrote on May 17th, 2012 at 6:23am: cods wrote on May 17th, 2012 at 5:22am: MOTR wrote on May 17th, 2012 at 5:16am: That makes you a rusted on Liberal, OP. and what are you.. darling? I am not a rusted on.. btw.. If I dont like what I see I dont vote .. for anyone..Mr Informal gets my vote.. simple really.. if someone wants my vote they need to earn it.. but I dont let myself get blind sided by one thing to make me vote or not vote for them.. like gay marriage.. fancy voting for someone on just that one thing..like GAy Marriage..ye gods and little fishes.. people do. I don't vote Green because they support gay marriages, I vote Green because they take global warming seriously. I respect them for their progressive policies which makes it easier to support them. If Turnbull had led the Liberals at the last election I would have voted Liberal in the house of reps for the first time in my life. Ostensibly because it would have garaunteed a much smoother transition to a price on carbon, and who knows he might have dragged the Liberal Party out of the 20th Century. I come from a staunch Labor family and growing up was a big fan of Keating. I believe in the union and was a union rep for about ten years. I joined the Labor party when I was about 23 and allowed my membership to lapse soon afterwards. I tried to rejoin in my late twenties but they politely declined. I guess stapling my membership application form to a placard condemning Bob Carr didn't do me any favours. Bob Brown was my last political hero, I'm currently looking for a new one. so Milne hasnt past the test.... she isnt gay is she??? what about Mickey Mouse? in this country we could do a lot worse.looking at what we are putting up with right now. You seemed obsessed with a persons sexuality, cods. Bob Brown is a good man, this has nothing to do with his sexuality. I respected him right off the bat, I was surprised to find out, much later, that he was gay. I'd like to think that if I'd known he was gay up front it wouldn't have altered my perception of him as a person. I grew up in a very homophobic community so respect for different sexualities is something I had to grow into. As for Christine Milne, I certainly have a lot of respect for her, but it wouldn't be seemly to commit so soon.

obsessed never mind MOTR this thread was all about THOMO as far as I know he isnt gay... and if you care to check I dont have an obsession with gays.. the opposite in fact..

I could 0f course point that finger at yourself..

like you say you have your opinions and I have mine..sorry but I have yet to see a greenie on here that is likely to change my mind about them


you respect Bob Brown and Al Gore.. all you like.. if you dont mind I will stick with Mother Nature.

MOTR wrote on May 17^th, 2012 at 6:23am:

cods wrote on May 17th, 2012 at 5:22am: MOTR wrote on May 17th, 2012 at 5:16am: That makes you a rusted on Liberal, OP. and what are you.. darling? I am not a rusted on.. btw.. If I dont like what I see I dont vote .. for anyone..Mr Informal gets my vote.. simple really.. if someone wants my vote they need to earn it.. but I dont let myself get blind sided by one thing to make me vote or not vote for them.. like gay marriage.. fancy voting for someone on just that one thing..like GAy Marriage..ye gods and little fishes.. people do. I don't vote Green because they support gay marriages, I vote Green because they take global warming seriously. I respect them for their progressive policies which makes it easier to support them. If Turnbull had led the Liberals at the last election I would have voted Liberal in the house of reps for the first time in my life. Ostensibly because it would have garaunteed a much smoother transition to a price on carbon, and who knows he might have dragged the Liberal Party out of the 20th Century. I come from a staunch Labor family and growing up was a big fan of Keating. I believe in the union and was a union rep for about ten years. I joined the Labor party when I was about 23 and allowed my membership to lapse soon afterwards. I tried to rejoin in my late twenties but they politely declined. I guess stapling my membership application form to a placard condemning Bob Carr didn't do me any favours. Bob Brown was my last political hero, I'm currently looking for a new one.

That is a refreshing post MOTR. I might disagree with your decision but it is nice to read bout someone who actually has a CONSIDERED opinion ontheir politics. 99% of the drivel on here is partisan cheering laced with insanity.

cods wrote on May 16^th, 2012 at 10:55pm:

anyone know what all this mumbo jumbo has to do with THOMO and his prostitues?????

you say that ?? ::) after your rambling discussion about Booby,  and Brown et al. 

You are hardly innocent Cods.

I know enough about you from what you write to comment as I have.  Because, I'm commenting about your posts, and their tone.

I'll now read some more recent posts .....   

MOTR wrote on May 17^th, 2012 at 5:28am:

Darling? That's awkward. Anyways, I was referring to john_g, who has just promised lifetime fealty to the Liberal Party. Personally, I'm one of those true believers who has voted Green for the last few elections. I'm tempted to vote Labor in the lower house at the next election as a thank you to Gillard for shepherding through the carbon tax.

Quite so MOTR....  I'm like you there,  vote Green, but I agree - I'm more than tempted to vote Labor in the Lower House come election time.

Do the Leagues Clubs, the AFL, the Green, the ALP and the Corporate Maggot want to sell Narcotics at their Pokie Venues in Redfern to Aboriginals? 8-)

Emma wrote on May 17^th, 2012 at 7:16pm:

cods wrote on May 16th, 2012 at 10:55pm: anyone know what all this mumbo jumbo has to do with THOMO and his prostitues????? you say that ?? ::) after your rambling discussion about Booby,  and Brown et al.  You are hardly innocent Cods. I know enough about you from what you write to comment as I have.  Because, I'm commenting about your posts, and their tone. I'll now read some more recent posts .....

go for it... you have nothing better to do than be personal we all realize that..

dont get upset when you get it back will you?

?????????

you started it.! :) :)
'OK - I forgive you. I understand you re even older than I am.! :)

Emma wrote on May 17^th, 2012 at 9:24pm:

????????? you started it.! :) :) 'OK - I forgive you. I understand you re even older than I am.! :)

yes, with age comes wisdom..with wisdom comes commonsense.

commonsense brings with it respect.


some have it most don't.

personally I prefer to debate the topic.

in a public forum like this one.

and quite right too Cods

altho... age doesn't ALWAYS bring wisdom. Not a comment on you - OK ?..  but I've heard folk speaking out ...older than I.. I 've heard somethings far from wisdom  or commonsense from my elders... 

there are no guarantees!! :)

Let me ask all you Leftards a very simple question. If, as he claims, Thomson is innocent, why does he not hold a news conference to air his side of the story in full without anything left out - including any allegations he may want to make as to who is responsible for supposedly framing him? Why will he only name names in parliament under parliamentary priviledge where he cannot be sued for defamation? If he really were so certain of his innocence, he would speak out freely and would dare anyone to sue him for defamation.

Obviously, he is too cowardly and too guilty to even contemplate such honourable action.

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 18^th, 2012 at 3:44pm:

Let me ask all you Leftards a very simple question. If, as he claims, Thomson is innocent, why does he not hold a news conference to air his side of the story in full without anything left out - including any allegations he may want to make as to who is responsible for supposedly framing him? Why will he only name names in parliament under parliamentary priviledge where he cannot be sued for defamation? If he really were so certain of his innocence, he would speak out freely and would dare anyone to sue him for defamation. Obviously, he is too cowardly and too guilty to even contemplate such honourable action.

AP..he has refused to tell the police who they are..

hasnt he by definition been shielding these people all this time??

I mean 4 years of investigation and he hasnt told a soul..!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think he is going to name Williamson and Jackson.. two people he is already offside with.and I am sure both are braced..

mind you he hasnt done it yet.....

hey maybe it will be someone who has passed or is in a Lebanon  Jail...


30 minutes AP...thats a lot to talk about..

cods wrote on May 18^th, 2012 at 6:18pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 18th, 2012 at 3:44pm: Let me ask all you Leftards a very simple question. If, as he claims, Thomson is innocent, why does he not hold a news conference to air his side of the story in full without anything left out - including any allegations he may want to make as to who is responsible for supposedly framing him? Why will he only name names in parliament under parliamentary priviledge where he cannot be sued for defamation? If he really were so certain of his innocence, he would speak out freely and would dare anyone to sue him for defamation. Obviously, he is too cowardly and too guilty to even contemplate such honourable action. AP..he has refused to tell the police who they are.. hasnt he by definition been shielding these people all this time?? I mean 4 years of investigation and he hasnt told a soul..!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I think he is going to name Williamson and Jackson.. two people he is already offside with.and I am sure both are braced.. mind you he hasnt done it yet..... hey maybe it will be someone who has passed or is in a Lebanon  Jail... 30 minutes AP...thats a lot to talk about..

I notice not one of the Leftards who frequent this forum with their idiotic rants have nothing to say in response to my question. Probably because they don't like the answer to it.

Its probably because no one read your question  :D

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 18^th, 2012 at 3:44pm:

Let me ask all you Leftards a very simple question. If, as he claims, Thomson is innocent, why does he not hold a news conference to air his side of the story in full without anything left out - including any allegations he may want to make as to who is responsible for supposedly framing him? Why will he only name names in parliament under parliamentary priviledge where he cannot be sued for defamation? If he really were so certain of his innocence, he would speak out freely and would dare anyone to sue him for defamation. Obviously, he is too cowardly and too guilty to even contemplate such honourable action.

Your assumptions may not be correct ArmPit.! :o :o

'If, as he claims, Thomson is innocent, why does he not hold a news conference to air his side of the story in full without anything left out............blah blah blah.....'

I can think of many reasons why what you suggest is just silly.  And proves your lack of real life experience.  You sound like Matty.  ;D  The media have had enough feeding frenzy..  heehee, but oh yeah you base your assumptions on what you hear on the news.  THATS FUNNY. ;D

'............. even contemplate such honourable action.' and this is hilarious.!!!

Honourable action???????????? 
Sure that is pure BS.!!!

Believe it or not,   these matters need proper hearing in the correct forum. 
Were I he, I wouldn't give any more words to the media. Let the Law speak.

Sorry to shock you ArmPit, but media hype doesn't cut it.  It is not a "COURT of POPULAR OPINION", no matter how much you lust for mob rule.

You sound like a junior abbott clone.  Sadly you are evrywhere these days. 8-)

The neo cons have developed a mob mentality under Abbott so its not even worth responding to those that want to throw the rule of law out the window just coz Abbott wants to grab power before the next election.
Ive never been one to join a lynch mob and Im not gonna start now just because its suits Tony Abbott and Clive Palmer.

It is indicative of the collapse of left wing thinking that progs will do everything to excuse Thompson, enev blame Abbott for Thompson's predicament.

.

We want these corrupt bludgers arrested and we want the business leaders responsible for the economic invasion of my country arrested and dealt with in the customary way traitors are dealt with and would have been dealt with by the ANZACS - no mercy. :-?

my country is invaded,the CEO maggot hos bought invasion to my homeland.

Abbot the Maggot who was not even born in this country says he wants to streamline the invasion of my country for his fellow CEO Maggot traitors. :P :(

Speaking of 'No mercy', here' my favorite tirade of 'Non, merci'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22k4qPiHk_E
It is all in verse.

adelcrow wrote on May 18^th, 2012 at 7:06pm:

The neo cons have developed a mob mentality under Abbott so its not even worth responding to those that want to throw the rule of law out the window just coz Abbott wants to grab power before the next election. Ive never been one to join a lynch mob and Im not gonna start now just because its suits Tony Abbott and Clive Palmer.

Are you trying to say that Abbott is taking political advantage
of a sad situation to win power?

Heh ---the Corporate Maggot should be banished from the homeland,these politicians need to wake up to themselves.  Who do they think they are?  We have got two radical ratbags at the top of the pile whose roots in this country are non existent making massive transformations and summary population engineering with no right to do so.  This land is occupied - it has traditional owners and occupiers, it is not for sale.   8-)

adelcrow wrote on May 18^th, 2012 at 7:06pm:

The neo cons have developed a mob mentality under Abbott so its not even worth responding to those that want to throw the rule of law out the window just coz Abbott wants to grab power before the next election. Ive never been one to join a lynch mob and Im not gonna start now just because its suits Tony Abbott and Clive Palmer.

If you tried an intelligent response at times, it would do well for increasing your credibility.

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 19^th, 2012 at 7:15am:

adelcrow wrote on May 18th, 2012 at 7:06pm: The neo cons have developed a mob mentality under Abbott so its not even worth responding to those that want to throw the rule of law out the window just coz Abbott wants to grab power before the next election. Ive never been one to join a lynch mob and Im not gonna start now just because its suits Tony Abbott and Clive Palmer. If you tried an intelligent response at times, it would do well for increasing your credibility.

hahaha.. I think adel has taken over from nem when it comes to using the adjectives


neocons.
lynch mob.
nazies.
infidels.
zionists
bigots
racists
murders.


hilarious... its meant to be scary I think.. doesnt it work with you either AP?

cods wrote on May 19^th, 2012 at 8:12am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 19th, 2012 at 7:15am: adelcrow wrote on May 18th, 2012 at 7:06pm: The neo cons have developed a mob mentality under Abbott so its not even worth responding to those that want to throw the rule of law out the window just coz Abbott wants to grab power before the next election. Ive never been one to join a lynch mob and Im not gonna start now just because its suits Tony Abbott and Clive Palmer. If you tried an intelligent response at times, it would do well for increasing your credibility. hahaha.. I think adel has taken over from nem when it comes to using the adjectives neocons. lynch mob. nazies. infidels. zionists bigots racists murders. hilarious... its meant to be scary I think.. doesnt it work with you either AP?

I never use the word zionists and rarely if never use the word Nazi's as for the other words when used in a sentence they describe Abbott and Palmer almost perfectly  :P

adelcrow wrote on May 19^th, 2012 at 9:06am:

cods wrote on May 19th, 2012 at 8:12am: Armchair_Politician wrote on May 19th, 2012 at 7:15am: adelcrow wrote on May 18th, 2012 at 7:06pm: The neo cons have developed a mob mentality under Abbott so its not even worth responding to those that want to throw the rule of law out the window just coz Abbott wants to grab power before the next election. Ive never been one to join a lynch mob and Im not gonna start now just because its suits Tony Abbott and Clive Palmer. If you tried an intelligent response at times, it would do well for increasing your credibility. hahaha.. I think adel has taken over from nem when it comes to using the adjectives neocons. lynch mob. nazies. infidels. zionists bigots racists murders. hilarious... its meant to be scary I think.. doesnt it work with you either AP? I never use the word zionists and rarely if never use the word Nazi's as for the other words when used in a sentence they describe Abbott and Palmer almost perfectly  :P

see what I mean..

I take it you havent left school yet... you see most people leave all that childish name calling behind along with school uniforms and hopefully pimples..


give you a D there for admitting it though..

gillard and brown could go down in history as TRAITORS THEN...

for leading us down the

"THERE WILL BE NO CARBON TAX UNDER A GOVT I LEAD"

and then dumping it on us.. against our will.
m now theres a thought.

Soren wrote on May 18^th, 2012 at 11:31pm:

Speaking of 'No mercy', here' my favorite tirade of 'Non, merci'. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22k4qPiHk_E It is all in verse.

Is that long nose real?

I refuse to abuse others on here but as for public figures that seek to manipulate and lie to the masses for nothing else but their own personal grab for power and fame..well everything is on the table.

yeah not to worry adelcrow,
we know what sorts post such garbage.  Don't we.?  :) ;)
bigtime whingers  :D

"......the other words when used in a sentence .... describe Abbott and Palmer almost perfectly .." -  Adelcrow

Truth !!!  Palmer for PM???  ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

Why is this disgusting maggot Thompson still in the Parliament again? 8-)

doh..!! 
What??

cods wrote on May 19^th, 2012 at 8:12am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 19th, 2012 at 7:15am: adelcrow wrote on May 18th, 2012 at 7:06pm: The neo cons have developed a mob mentality under Abbott so its not even worth responding to those that want to throw the rule of law out the window just coz Abbott wants to grab power before the next election. Ive never been one to join a lynch mob and Im not gonna start now just because its suits Tony Abbott and Clive Palmer. If you tried an intelligent response at times, it would do well for increasing your credibility. hahaha.. I think adel has taken over from nem when it comes to using the adjectives neocons. lynch mob. nazies. infidels. zionists bigots racists murders. hilarious... its meant to be scary I think.. doesnt it work with you either AP?

I think adel is starting to sound like a character from a Sascha Baron-Cohen movie, like The Dictator or something.

corporate_whitey wrote on May 19^th, 2012 at 7:45pm:

Why is this disgusting maggot Thompson still in the Parliament again? 8-)

because the Australian voter put him their , and still wants him to serve the electrate and his union mates.

warrigal wrote on May 20^th, 2012 at 6:34am:

corporate_whitey wrote on May 19th, 2012 at 7:45pm: Why is this disgusting maggot Thompson still in the Parliament again? 8-) because the Australian voter put him their , and still wants him to serve the electrate and his union mates.

I guess you voted for him then.. to know what everyone in Dobell wants.

maybe the media isnt allowed to go into Dobell and ask the too hard questions.. seems odd we have nothing on what they want!!!!

so why arn't the media asking the electote of dobell then

lets get a public opinion