It's really just an afterthought that we have no control anynore...so our comments are inconsequential here or anywhere.

It's proven that even the most right wing posters here are nowhere near as right winged or as authoratarian as our master geek Rudd.
Where is the balance? Do we own or do we not?
I'm not trying to start a revolution, but just a question.
Why are we going backwards?? I hate this s h i t.

We are a smacking democracy....but even my words will be edited.

WHO OWNS YOU?

Quote:


Yes Rudd is a bit of a disappointment Amadd - it could be inexperience, but look at the disaster evolving in the wake of the previous government.  We are on the verge of a recession - some say it will be as bad if not worse than 1929.  This was predicted a couple of years ago and even Turnbull has admitted this is the case.  The US in all their greed has stuffed up the world economy.

We are going backwards and people still have the hangover mentality from the last decade - anything for a quick buck whether it's earned or not.  We are ripped off wherever we turn by tradesmen, retailers and governments.

Yes it's true - our little voices are inconsequential now as a new, different species who couldn't care less takes control over what we were once familiar with.

Hmmm.  Starting a revolution is an inspiring thought, although who's got the energy or the motivation after being suppressed for so long by everyone and everything.

Cheer up Amadd - you are not alone in your frustration - if that's any consolation.

Of course we have control.
We have control over ourselves and what we do.

You had the control to write that, I had control to reply.


Any other thought is weak, selfdefeating and is giving away responsibility for your own life.

if you voted for rudd, that was your decision. That was under your control.

howard did what he thought was in aussie best interests.

oceanz wrote on Sep 18^th, 2008 at 10:32am:


I still believe Australians made the right decision to elect Labor at the last election.
We as Australians have no control over a world economics market that is clearly out of control, things would not be better under a LIberal gov, I suspect thet would be worse becouse we would still be stuck with the rodent and his policys which I think would put us in a worse position.
As for Rudd, I dont like him becouse as Oceanz says he is too socially conservative, but I suspect that was what we had to have to get rid of the rodent.
My thoughts at the moment are that I really believe if Labor go to far to the left to fast that they wont last more than a term.
In a perfect world Gillard would be my choice as Labor PM, but it aint a perfect world.

Apologies for my incoherency.

You are right Mantra, I should cheer up. I do tend to vent my frustrations a lot when I fuel myself with the overemotional liquid.

It's really all been said before that we need better than our two party preferred system. But I suppose if there was a better party available to govern the country then they'd be more prominant. Wouldn't they?

Yes Sprint I used my vote to get Howard out, not neccessarily to get Rudd in. I can't even honestly say that Rudd has been a disappointment, because he has probably delivered more than I expected (but my expectations were pretty low).

We chatted about an impending recession on Cracker for at least a year before Johnny was ousted, we all knew it was coming and change of government was never going to stop it from happening.

What I suppose irks me most of all is the "trickle down effect" mentality, where sacrificing for big business is supposed to make us all better off in the long run.
IMO, as long as they become stinking bloody rich, then and only then, are they are happy to throw the little doggy a boney

It's not the corporation or the banks who have made the advances in society, it's every person's contribution.
Nobody ever needed a bank or a corporation around to invent the light globe, the wheel, the computer, penicillin..etc.  which have made the real advances in society.
If a bank or a corporation goes under, we'll do just dandy without them. Probably even better.

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office.
AESOP

This has always been true

why the hell is everybody whining about how kevin rudd isn't CHANGING EVERYTHING

why on earth did you expect him to do things differently

dumbasses

"Time to take back control"

The question is: when was last time ppl had control?

pt 2

As for the Public Sector, Privatisation and Competition Policy the Democrats said they will oppose privatisation unless it is shown in a public inquiry that there is a clear public benefit.

One Nation has always said this.

The Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) was a policy exposed to the public by Pauline Hanson. The Democrats said that the MAI was unfair and unbalanced because it puts the interests of multinational companies ahead of that of sovereign nations - it threatens Australian Democracy.

Exactly what Pauline and One Nation were saying all along.

Health. The Democrats support the development of an equitable, efficient and high quality health care system that is accessible to all Australians. In Rural Health the Democrats believe that the Government should provide health funding to rural areas in a way which can be used by rural communities to meet their specific needs, rather than the needs of Governments.

This too is common to One Nation, note that services are to be provided on a needs basis. Something else One Nation has always said.

The Democrats believe in an immigration level which will enable the population of Australia to be stabilised at a level which is consistent with a sustainable environment.

This is also common ground between the parties, even if they differ in areas such as multiculturalism. A policy which One Nation believes allows cultural migration at the expense of Australian culture. Some parties don’t believe there is an Australian culture.

Australia has been well ahead of its trading partners in the speed and depth of cuts to its tariffs, quotas and bounties. This systematic cutting of protection has been instigated and supported by Labor and the Coalition. As a result, Australia has been flooded by cheap imports, which have decimated Australian industries and cost many thousands of jobs. Australian manufacturers and workers have been placed at a disadvantage to overseas competitors who receive assistance from their governments, and who operate under much lower labour, environmental and occupational health and safety standards.

Why has Australia so drastically cut its Tariffs?
- Strong reductions in tariffs have been a key theme of economic rationalism.
- There is a belief amongst the major parties and senior bureaucrats in the myth of the "level playing field".
- The myth is that industries in all countries can compete with each other on an equal footing without any Government assistance.
- This is fine in theory, but the reality is that most countries support their industries to varying degrees. It is poor social and economic policy for Australia to expose its industries to unfair competition.

Trade liberalisation should be reciprocal not unilateral. We should only reduce our levels of protection at the same rate as our trading partners and competitors.

Sound a lot like One Nation right? Yes, it does. But it was also what the Democrats believed at the time.

What did the Democrats say they would do?
- Tariff cuts must cease immediately and any further reductions must only occur when our trading partners agree to cut their real level of protection to the same as ours;
- Australia's tariff and non-tariff regime must be reviewed to ensure maximum Australian advantage in international trade. That advantage must be measured in social as well as economic terms - in jobs as well as costs and prices.

Sounds an awful lot like One Nation policy and rhetoric. There is no doubt that bipartisan support would be forthcoming on the issues brought up here. Imagine... bipartisan support from One Nation.

More from the Democrats on Rural Affairs and Primary Industries. They said; Regional Australia is in crisis; economically, socially and environmentally. Much of the damage done to Regional Australia can be sheeted home to 'flat earth' economists mindlessly pursuing the mantra of the 'level playing field', which has seen industries such as pork and citrus sacrificed, textile, clothing, footwear and metal fabrication industries shut down - all in the face of a flood of imports from countries who either subsidise their exports or produce goods using wage rates and labour standards considered unacceptable in Australia.

Again typically One Nation rhetoric, again strong grounds for bipartisan support.

On Foreign Investment the Democrats said they were not opposed to foreign investment, and welcome investment which has the effect of opening up export opportunities or introduces new technologies. Foreign investment must be judged against two criteria: will it bring a net economic benefit to Australia, and is there a comparable Australian investor available? These tests must be conducted by a strong statutory authority using vigorous, public and accountable processes.

Again almost identical to One Nation rhetoric. Again One Nation would without a doubt support this direction.

As for the magic public Mandate. No party, unless it receives more than 50% of the vote, can claim that it comes to government with a majority of public support for its policies.

Also a One Nation sentiment.

Interesting isn’t it, when you get the facts. It would seem the Democrats are an extreme-right-wing party just like One Nation. Or is it just, that’s the myth other not-so-honest parties wanted you to believe?

Instead of a politically correct party like the Democrats, you should have consider giving your vote to One nation... unfortunately they are dead now.

pt 2

The 7:30 Report, 30/06/2003. Opinions differ on Northbridge curfew. “The WA Government has introduced a curfew to get young people off the streets of Perth's entertainment district. The curfew came into effect on Saturday night, giving police the power to remove anyone under the age of 16 from the streets of Northbridge, whether they're breaking the law or simply
hanging out with friends.”

The Associated Press September 4, 2003. Brogden calls for u-14 curfew. “A curfew to keep children under 14 off the streets after 10pm should be tried in NSW, Opposition leader John Brogden said today.”

“Mr Brogden used his opening statement to the Summit on Alcohol Abuse in state parliament to repeat a call he made during a trip to rural NSW last month. "I don't think there is anything wrong in saying parents of 11-, 12-, and 14-year-olds should know where their children are. And, if they're out on the streets late at night, they should be taken to a community facility where their parent, parents or guardian should be called to collect them," he said.”

"How can any parent or any organisation justify children under 14 on the streets late at night." So other people can call for curfews. State Labor (W.A.) can actually bring one in and a State Liberal Leader (N.S.W.) can call for it. Just as long as it isn't Pauline Hanson or One Nation. You can smell the hypocrisy.

Liberals Adopt One Nation Family Law Policy.

(In a media release, on the 19/6 2003, by Qld One Nation Federal Senator, Len Harris.) You may ask why you have never heard this before. Could it be that One Nation media Releases go unpublished by the mainstream media?

One Nation Senator Len Harris has congratulated the government for adopting his party’s policy on family law reform, which would give divorced parents joint custody of their children.

Senator Harris introduced legislation to amend the Family Law Act on 20 June last year. His Family Law Amendment (Joint Residency) Bill 2002 would negate the need for parents to fight for the right to equal parenting. “It’s good to see that the government is actively listening to One Nation, the voice of the people,” Senator Harris said from Canberra today. The government’s announcement yesterday on family law reform strongly reflects Senator Harris’ initiative.

HOWARD GOVERNMENT ADOPTS ANOTHER ONE NATION POLICY.

From the Daily Telegraph of June 2, 2003. "ATSIC will virtually cease to exist under changes recommended by a Government ordered review. Most of the power of the 18 member board will be transferred to "local communities".

ATSIC had a budget previously of $1,200,000,000 (1.2 billion dollars). Last month the Government took away from ATSIC control over its budget."

On June 18 the ATSIC Review Panel released a discussion paper on this organisation.

Pauline Hanson's Maiden Speech, Sept 10, 1996. Over 7 years ago... "This is why I am calling for ATSIC to be abolished. It is a failed, hypocritical and discriminatory
organisation that has failed dismally the people it was meant to serve".

From One Nation's Federal site...

The Labor Opposition has said they will save Medicare from the Government. How do they say they will do this? Their current stance is a leaf straight out of One Nation Policy. Our Policy has always been to pursue the best interests of the Australian public as a whole. It makes very clear that funding will be redirected from Private Health Care support. It will be spent in supporting Bulk Billing GPs so that all Australian families can see a Doctor when they need to. One Nation will always preserve the high standards of health care all Australians expect. We will never let it be a case of more money buys better care.

Seems that other Party's do believe in One Nation Policies after all.

Why is it that One Nation policies are adopted by the other parties? Why is it always after One Nation? Seems it’s the other parties that are often behind when it
comes to policy.

Seems that in every level of politics that solution is not to fix the problem. Short sightedness limits them to the next election. There is no real infrastructure planning. There is only government for the here and now. Yet they say One Nation is "backward looking". What does that make them then? Blind?

They live in the moment. There is no past and no future. You learn from the past and plan for the future.

One Nation...
Backward looking?

Don’t you believe it!

Unfortunately all too late now...

I support One Nation and even have met Pauline Hanson. I'm not right wing or a skinhead.

Lovely writing Grendel. Did you write it yourself? If not, source it and use quotes. If you did, well done, you seem very passionate about what you believe in.

What drugs were you on at the time squippy...  no skinheads allowed in the party.  However you cannot stop people from coming to public meetings if they behave themselves we live in a democracy.

I did notice that the only people ever bashed were older members of the party by disgruntled Labor thugs though and I also noticed the staged media events and protests from Uni students and Resistance...

Of course you actually had to be there or know something to actually be right squippy...  back to the gutter with you now.

Quote:


I didn't vote at the last election. I make a point of not being on the electoral roll. If it wasn't compulsory to vote then I definitely would. Also, I don't want to do jury duty. However, a few months ago the AEC tracked me down (God knows how. Tax forms maybe?) and sent me enrollment forms. I used them for lining the budgie cage.

I admire One Nation mainly because they feel passionately about what they believe in and are prepared to cop flak for their beliefs.

Also, they think everyone should have guns, you can't trust the government, they are against multiculturalism, and believe in equal rights for all regardless of colour.

It's plenty democratic to disallow membership to neo-Nazis. The political ideology of the two do not mesh.

Would, I don't know, the Atheist political party (if such a thing exists) allow membership of and endorse the candidacy of say a parish priest?

hey squippy do labor allow racist nazis to join?

No...  keep eating that 'umble pie doofus.


Oh but they do allow Union thugs in don't they...  no need for bovver boys with those gentlemen around eh?

Grendel wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2008 at 12:57pm:


No, Labor leave the nazis to the Libs.

she easel...  don't try logic with squippy...  it confuses him in a deeper state of denial...  (if that's possible).

Amadd wrote on Sep 18^th, 2008 at 12:12am:


I hope for revolution it seems to be the only way we'll stop going backwards and overthrow the criminal fatcat ruled country we live in.
I hate this s h i t more than you mate. I'm even contemplating moving to antartica

freediver wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2008 at 2:54pm:


Not to mention her senior advisor went by the nick name KOJAC.