Australian PM blasts Obama...

catefrances

soulsinging wrote:

then you could say the same about george bush. he's a shrewd politician yada yada yada. but i think that'd be wrong. they're both idiots. good at what they do maybe, but idiots nonetheless.

you could i guess but you'd be kidding yourself. bush has done nothing that warrants him even remotely being called shrewd. i don't know if bush is an idiot, but he's done some pretty stupid things. the two politicians are not comparable in my opinion.

Jeanie

catefrances wrote:

i suspect something to do with the water crisis. maybe he's getting ready to privatise something. i wouldn't be surprised of anything really.

That'll be it cate!! THE MURRAY DARLING BASIN!!! There's been a huge debate go on here about that!! Bet that's it!! Clever girl!!

Scubascott

soulsinging wrote:

the latter is what i was getting at. though even 5% of america's forces would be more than 1000 troops... american has about 100,000 i think. bottom line is, this guy's an idiot.

Oh, I think he's far from being an idiot. A spineless conservative capitalist prick maybe, but not an idiot.

Just for comparison, in the past, when the Australian public has felt that a war really does warrant our attention, we have sent enormous numbers of troops. About 500,000 Australians served in WWII, and back then our population was half the size it is now.

The government knows how unpopular the Iraq war is in Australia. Its never had support from the public here from the very beginning. I think the feeling at the start was that it was America's problem, not ours, and that by getting involved all we were doing was making ourselves a target for Bush's imaginary terrorists. Johnny knows that sending large numbers of soldiers to Iraq would be political suicide, which is why our contribution is only a small token, and probably why many of the Australians there are working in non-combat roles.

gue_barium

Scubascott wrote:

Oh, I think he's far from being an idiot. A spineless conservative capitalist prick maybe, but not an idiot.

Just for comparison, in the past, when the Australian public has felt that a war really does warrant our attention, we have sent enormous numbers of troops. About 500,000 Australians served in WWII, and back then our population was half the size it is now.

The government knows how unpopular the Iraq war is in Australia. Its never had support from the public here from the very beginning. I think the feeling at the start was that it was America's problem, not ours, and that by getting involved all we were doing was making ourselves a target for Bush's imaginary terrorists. Johnny knows that sending large numbers of soldiers to Iraq would be political suicide, which is why our contribution is only a small token, and probably why many of the Australians there are working in non-combat roles.

Yet he's still/always vocalized (and deeded) support of America in this. I have a problem with Johnny, I think he's ill.

catefrances

gue_barium wrote:

Yet he's still/always vocalized (and deeded) support of America in this. I have a problem with Johnny, I think he's ill.

my problem with johnny is that he doesn't represent the majority of australian voters.

Hinny

Jeanie wrote:

At the risk of being further probed by ASIO, anybody else be voting for Johnny at the next election?

catefrances wrote:

my problem with johnny is that he doesn't represent the majority of australian voters.

Yeah, he just happens to represent my bloody electorate, the only people who actually get to vote for or against him.

catefrances

Hinny wrote:

Yeah, he just happens to represent my bloody electorate, the only people who actually get to vote for or against him.

lucky you hinny.

Jeanie

Hinny wrote:

Yeah, he just happens to represent my bloody electorate, the only people who actually get to vote for or against him.

So we have to court your favor then Hinny? So what's it gonna take?

Name your price!!!

Hinny

catefrances wrote:

lucky you hinny.

Hey now. Last time we turned it from a safe Lib seat to a marginal. There's been some re-distribution around the boundaries, cutting out some richer areas and taking in some poorer bits. It's not expected, but we could conceivably end up with a coalition national win, but without Howard in parliament.

Last Exodus

so hows everyones Kyber today?

catefrances

Last Exodus wrote:

so hows everyones Kyber today?

i'm sorry Ex but that sounds like a loaded question.

Jeanie

Last Exodus wrote:

so hows everyones Kyber today?

Charming!!

Nah! It's all good here Last Exodus! How's the plumbing there?

Jeanie

Hinny wrote:

Hey now. Last time we turned it from a safe Lib seat to a marginal. There's been some re-distribution around the boundaries, cutting out some richer areas and taking in some poorer bits. It's not expected, but we could conceivably end up with a coalition national win, but without Howard in parliament.

YIKES!!! Never thought of that!!! :eek: Suppose that'd be Costello's big chance then?

A Surprise Left

catefrances wrote:

my problem with johnny is that he doesn't represent the majority of australian voters.

i don't see how you can say he doesn't represent the majority if he has won four elections, and won an increased majority last time. he may lose this time, but he speaks of a large proportion of the country. people make jokes about him but he obviously spoke for a larger group of people than either paul keating, kim beazley, simon crean or mark latham.

catefrances

stupid thread erased

A Surprise Left

Scubascott wrote:

Don't get me started on research and education funding. . .

Oh and VSU! Thank you very much Mr Howard for that little gem. All the services, pubs, sporting clubs etc at my uni have gone completely down the crapper since VSU was imposed on us. The slimy bastard said he was giving students the right to choose. If he really wanted to give students the right to choose he would have let the NSU hold a referendum on the matter.

i disagree with howard on many issues but i reckon he was right with this issue. why should i have funded a host of clubs and services at my university days that i never used, to the tune of $500 or so? particulary as a poor student?

Jeanie

A Surprise Left wrote:

i don't see how you can say he doesn't represent the majority if he has won four elections, and won an increased majority last time. he may lose this time, but he speaks of a large proportion of the country. people make jokes about him but he obviously spoke for a larger group of people than either paul keating, kim beazley, simon crean or mark latham.

I disagree ASL. Johnny has managed to get in on preferences, with the help of the National vote and with some very creative counting skills. Don't be thinking that he speaks for me or anybody I know. He is a disgrace, has always been a disgrace and it's going to be good riddance to bad rubbish at the next election as far as I'm concerned. And I think you'll find that during the last labor administration they made changes to the preferential voting system that has enabled his re election. Just because there are young people voting that can't recall any other prime minister doesn't mean that a) he is good at the job or b) that the majority of us voted for him.

Jeanie

A Surprise Left wrote:

i disagree with howard on many issues but i reckon he was right with this issue. why should i have funded a host of clubs and services at my university days that i never used, to the tune of $500 or so? particulary as a poor student?

Because your student union also provides services that you do use ASL.
At least it did before it was shut down.

A Surprise Left

searchlightsoul wrote:

Labour hasn't been in power for over a decade how could they possibly have imporoved thier economic management? Besides it never was bad, the liberals just manged to manipulate very one in to trusting them. If you look at education particularly in Science and technology we are seriously lagging behind the rest of the developed world because there is no investment or governemnt support-departments are run on shoe strings-particularly difficult in innovative areas not currently supported by industry. This is completely myopic economic managment.

the state labor governments have vastly improved their economic management. for instance in victoria john cain and joan kirner were completely hopeless at running the economy. kennett and stockdale came in and got victoria's AAA rating back. now john brumby is doing a good job running the victorian economy, other state labor governments are better at the job as well.

catefrances

A Surprise Left wrote:

i don't see how you can say he doesn't represent the majority if he has won four elections, and won an increased majority last time. he may lose this time, but he speaks of a large proportion of the country. people make jokes about him but he obviously spoke for a larger group of people than either paul keating, kim beazley, simon crean or mark latham.

i stand corrected ASL, howard did win with an increased majority in 2004.