eaglem (15-09-18)
Please no anti Pickering rants. Comment only on the content.
eaglem (15-09-18)
Look Here -> |
"The real Turnbull is still doing all he can to destroy the LNP"
So ummm, which Turnbull donated $1.75 million to the Liberal Party in 2016? The real one or the other one? If he really wants to destroy the LNP all he has to do is ask for his money back because the Liberal Party is effectively broke.
The real destroyers are the born-to-rule far right of the party - they threatened to destroy ScoMo even before he got the job.
Unfortunately quite true, enf.
A regrettably increasing feature of our political scene these days.
The answer to most of societies problems these days lies neither to the Left nor to the Right, but somewhere down the middle......an area occupied by the majority of Australian citizens, but seemingly devoid, for the most part, of politicians and more recently, commentators.
allover (14-09-18),DB44 (15-09-18),eaglem (15-09-18),enf (14-09-18),Uncle Fester (15-09-18)
Another case of Deposed Politicians showing their displeasure with Turnbull upsetting the applecart now.
It seems than NO one who has been the Leader of the Party can bow out gracefully when voted out by their Fellows and then they and those left behind engage in a slanging match airing all the dirty laundry they can.
I stand unequivicably behind everything I say , I just dont ever remember saying it !!
Actually the article in the OP seemed to be more about the AustralianCommunistLabor Party.
I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message...
that picture of Gillard wearing half a buffalo on her head looks racist and sexist
eaglem (16-09-18)
I cant get the 'Wink Wink', 'Nudge Nudge' inference between the Labor and Communist Parties when both were started by 'Workers' with a view of gaining a Political Voice in Government.
Its obvious both had similar objectives but like any groups, variations in application do occur just as I see happens between the Liberal and National Party who joined together to get the Numbers to form a Government.
The Liberals are supported by the 'Big Business end of Town', The Nationals by the 'Landed Gentry' and Labor by the Unions...............
I stand unequivicably behind everything I say , I just dont ever remember saying it !!
Gordon,
Pickering is clutching at straws..….the article linked by Reschs is nothing more than irrational rambling, and is so full of inconsistencies and contradictions that it is laughable.
It seems that Pickering wouldn’t know the difference between Communism and Socialism if either of them jumped up and bit him on the arse.
His hatchet-job on Gillard is simply a continuation of a years-long irrational and obsessive vendetta.
But here’s the funny part………Pickering rails against socialism and any aspect of the so-called left of politics.
Yet, here is a quote from an article in the The Age in 2012:
“It may just be that Larry Pickering feels he's playing a game he can't lose. He claims to be broke, saying his ex-wife ''took the helicopter, took the car, and took my kid''. He's 70, and a simple pensioner, he insists.”
Well here’s some surprising news…….pensions are provided by our socialist Social Security system.
I notice that he’s also had extensive surgery in respect of lung cancer.
If any of his medical services were provided in a Public Hospital, and/or if any of his medical expenses were covered by Medicare, then he has enjoyed the benefits of a socialist system once again.
If any of his children were educated at a public school, then he has enjoyed the benefits of a socialist system.
Medicare is a socialist system.
Public hospitals are a socialist system.
Public schools are a socialist system.
Public transport is a socialist system.
Our Social Security system is a socialist system.
The NRMA, RACV, RACQ, etc., Credit Unions and Building Societies, and any other such mutual entities are socialist systems.
We live in a society that is replete with elements of socialism.
We’d all be in a much worse place without them.
As for the contention that ex-lawyer, ex-merchant banker, ex-Goldman Sachs Malcolm Turnbull is out to surreptitiously destroy the political party that supports and advances the very crony capitalism from which he has so extensively benefited…………that says it all really, doesn’t it
Left and Right are little more than labels that cover a whole spectrum of views on a whole range of issues. Political parties often get too tied up with ideological positions and forget practicality. When you vote for a party you don't vote for left or right. You vote for a bundle of policies. Some may be identified with the left, some the right and of course some are compromises. Voters tend to focus on slogans and labels, and unfortunately many are still fooled by them.
This is a big problem with representative democracy. With main party voters mostly cancelling each other out, the views of the "middle" are often trumped by whichever minority groups can convince politicians they will bring in enough votes to tip the balance. Thus Labor courted migrants very successfully. The Libs have been drawing ever closer to evangelical Christian groups. Identity politics thrive partly because "there's votes in them thar little groups". Sometimes the "middle" largely agrees on particular issues. Other times it is hopelessly divided. Sometimes the parties heed the centre. Other times they ignore it. After all, we are voting for bundles of policies. Just how many disagreeable ones does it take for most people to change their votes.
So what views are largely held by the "middle", the so-called sensible centre? Most of us tend to think that our views are mainstream, so it's hard to tell with any real certainty. I do think, for instance, that a healthy majority of the middle support tough border controls, including turning back boats. This has been shown at the polls and by Labor's current policy on the issue. A majority of the middle clearly supported same sex marriage and one can infer clearly favour equality for gay and lesbian people. How far this extends I don't know? For instance, how much middle support is there for the theory now being advanced of sexual fluidity regardless of physical gender. I suspect this may be a step to far for most of the middle, but then perhaps I am simply projecting my view on to the majority. On the other hand I suspect the middle is hopelessly divided on the dangers of AGW and the policy response. To me it seems majority support for urgent action at one stage plunged since people realised the extent that it affected their hip pockets. Just ask Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard, Malcolm Turnbull and of course Tony Abbott. Now there seem to be large numbers in the middle for both sides of the debate. Labor has clearly chosen a side, whilst Scott Morrisson and the Liberals are still trying to be all things to all people.
I'd be interested in posts from people on both sides as to which views on which issues categorise the middle. Also, do you think there is anything that can realistically win the next election for the coalition?
Last edited by DB44; 15-09-18 at 06:46 PM.
Bookmarks