Kevin Rudd is a committed Freemarketeer (http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2006/12/13/1165685753120.html?page=2) , Rudd addresses business dinners, the message is that Labor will deliver for the big end of town , yet gullible Australians really believe he will deliver for us all. As for Rudd pulling Australia out of Iraq when Rudd met up with Cheney to profess his undying devotion to the US alliance he backtracked (http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/gregsheridan/index.php/theaustralian/comments/frustration_at_war_without_end) watering down his commitment as Rudd can't insult mass murderers - sorry, our great and powerful friends. For the past 30 years Australians have been gullible participants in an elaborate charade to give the nation the veneer of a working democracy . Every election/Con job they affirm the 2 party dictatorship in one sided elections where the results alternate between Liberal and Labor governments carrying out the same agenda to shore up the profits of the rich. Australians for their gullible stupidity deserve everything they get .

It is compulsory to vote in Australia , not voting entails a fine , I didnt vote , because I refuse to make a fool out of myself , when I explained to the authorities why I didnt vote at the last election I still had to pay the fine , Ill do it again this year .

Everything that happens in the world is bad for you, ain't it, Brian? That must be a terrible existence you have.

Are you happy about anything that happens in the world? If so, why don't you post some of those things sometimes ....instead of the constant downers that you post?

Baron Max

this is outrageous!
jamesr, explain yourself!! forthwith!

Everything that happens in the world is bad for you, ain't it, Brian?
As long as 90% of worlds population lives in poverty things aint good in this World .
Are you happy about anything that happens in the world?
No I cant say that I am happy about this World .
If so, why don't you post some of those things sometimes ....instead of the constant downers that you post?
Id rather post informative downers as on this thread , hopefully others will agree and we can overthrow this oppressive economic system and replace it with socialism .

It is compulsory to vote in Australia , not voting entails a fine , I didnt vote , because I refuse to make a fool out of myself , when I explained to the authorities why I didnt vote at the last election I still had to pay the fine , Ill do it again this year .

So you have voluntarily denied yourself the one voice given to you in the political system of Australia? You had the right to say and you forfeited that right by not voting.

More's the fool who silences his one sole voice and then bitches about the votes of others. You now deserve everything you get.

So you have voluntarily denied yourself the one voice given to you in the political system of Australia?
The right to vote in a sham election , you just have to visit the Australian Electoral Commision site (http://vtr.aec.gov.au/Default.htm) to see evidence of this sham where we have the "House of Representatives National Two Party Preferred Result" , LOL . Tell me with the 7.64% of the vote that the Greens received how many seats are they allocated ?
You had the right to say and you forfeited that right by not voting.
Oh let me guess you voted for either Labour or Liberals , and as for a say , no thanks I gave up beating my head up against a wall years ago .
More's the fool who silences his one sole voice and then bitches about the votes of others. You now deserve everything you get.
The best slaves are the ones who think they are free , enjoy the charade .

Jeez Brian, it's a charade, but at least now Kyoto will be signed and that alone is a atep in the right direction.

I drank Margaritas and howled at the glorious full moon last night.
One happy dingo I was.

Brian, the man has been in office for a day or so and you already think the sky is falling? Wait awhile and see what happens before fussing about it.

Jeez Brian, it's a charade, but at least now Kyoto will be signed and that alone is a atep in the right direction.
Signing Kyoto wont mean much Spud when Australia's vast arid wasteland outback will be used for storing Nuclear waste from the US :
Australia should be world's nuclear dump, says US expert (http://www.nuclearfreeaustralia.com.au/blog/australia-should-be-worlds-nuclear-dump-says-us-expert)
There is no doubt that a very major push is on for Australia to accept the world’s nuclear waste. In early June the Federal Council of the Liberal Party unanimously endorsed setting up an international nuclear waste dump in Australia.
That was the Liberal party and this policy will be carried on under Labour . Thats one of the prices we must pay for the "Freetrade Deal" with America .Brian, the man has been in office for a day or so and you already think the sky is falling? Wait awhile and see what happens before fussing about it.
I am more concerned about his commitment to freemarket capitalism , that invariably means creating a welfare state for the rich 5% . I dont want to wait a while I know what is coming up , New Zealand went through that deregulation phase it wasnt pretty .

Wow, you are spreading the joy today aren't you?

The Outback, a wasteland! You've never seen it.

Wow, you are spreading the joy today aren't you?

The Outback, a wasteland! You've never seen it.
Yes I have , believe me when you tour mountainous countries like New Zealand you see why . I recommend a trip across Americas landscape the interior of America consists of Mountains , plains , vast rivers , Savannah , deserts etc real varied . Compare the desert of Arizona with our flat mulga stretches with no rivers nor streams . I hate to say it , but I am honest , the further into the outback you go the worse it gets , explains why no one lives out there.

We're getting off the thread here Brian but I travelled across the outback of Western australia from the south coast to the north coast. For me, words can't describe the beauty, ruggedness and ancient timelessness I found. I'm sure the other places you have been are brilliant too but calling it a wasteland, man you missed something big.
My god, the Pilbara, the Kimberley, the Murchison, outrageously beautiful.

Australians for their gullible stupidity deserve everything they get .

It is compulsory to vote in Australia , not voting entails a fine , I didnt vote , because I refuse to make a fool out of myself , when I explained to the authorities why I didnt vote at the last election I still had to pay the fine , Ill do it again this year .

Brian, if you're mad that Australia isn't fielding any Nazi candidates, why don't you just put yourself up next time round then?

I'm rather pleased that Labour won. It should be interesting to see whether there will be any change regarding the unions and workers rights.

The right to vote in a sham election , you just have to visit the Australian Electoral Commision site (http://vtr.aec.gov.au/Default.htm) to see evidence of this sham where we have the "House of Representatives National Two Party Preferred Result" , LOL . Tell me with the 7.64% of the vote that the Greens received how many seats are they allocated ?


How many Greens candidates were there? And since when were seats allocated by party lines in Australia? They polled well in Tasmania (where they are strongly supported by the public) and the ACT I believe. If you cared so much about their seats, you should have voted for them Brian.

Oh let me guess you voted for either Labour or Liberals , and as for a say , no thanks I gave up beating my head up against a wall years ago .
Why do you care who I voted for? Is it really any of your business Brian? Just because you threw your vote away by not voting and then having to pay the fines to line the pockets of the AEC, don't think that the majority also threw their votes away.

The best slaves are the ones who think they are free , enjoy the charade .
What charade Brian? People chose the Government of their choice. You decided to throw away that choice.

Signing Kyoto wont mean much Spud when Australia's vast arid wasteland outback will be used for storing Nuclear waste from the US :
Oh good grief.:rolleyes: Can you scream scare mongering any louder? Or is this another conspiracy Brian? Hey I know, you could have just placed yourself as an independent to make sure your vote and voice of discontent at the upcoming nuclear wasteland was heard Brian. But no. Instead you prefer to stay home, not vote and wallow in your misery and conspiracy theories. Hope the fine was worth it Brian.

That was the Liberal party and this policy will be carried on under Labour . Thats one of the prices we must pay for the "Freetrade Deal" with America .
That is something we shall have to wait and see Brian.

I am more concerned about his commitment to freemarket capitalism , that invariably means creating a welfare state for the rich 5% . I dont want to wait a while I know what is coming up , New Zealand went through that deregulation phase it wasnt pretty .
This is Labor we are talking about, isn't it? Seriously Brian, your screams of doom and gloom are a bit pointless, considering they have barely been in power for 24 hours and have not even been sworn in yet. Why don't you wait and see what they will do? Hmmmm?

I recommend a trip across Americas landscape the interior of America consists of Mountains , plains , vast rivers , Savannah , deserts etc real varied . Compare the desert of Arizona with our flat mulga stretches with no rivers nor streams . I hate to say it , but I am honest , the further into the outback you go the worse it gets , explains why no one lives out there.
We're in a drought Brian. And central Australia has always been arid and flat. Comparing Australia to New Zealand is like comparing a grape to a mango.


It should be interesting to see whether there will be any change regarding the unions and workers rights.
Lets hope so. But seeing that Labor does not have a Senate majority, it will be interesting indeed.

Just another dreamer. Go sleep sleep on a sewer grate or live in a cardboard box and then you will be truly free. No one will care about you but you will be free...free to get drunk, piss your pants, free to die - no one knowing no one caring. Free.

Brian is a cool guy, but the glass is always half empty with that fellow!

Kevin Rudd is a committed Freemarketeer (http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2006/12/13/1165685753120.html?page=2) , Rudd addresses business dinners, the message is that Labor will deliver for the big end of town , yet gullible Australians really believe he will deliver for us all. As for Rudd pulling Australia out of Iraq when Rudd met up with Cheney to profess his undying devotion to the US alliance he backtracked (http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/gregsheridan/index.php/theaustralian/comments/frustration_at_war_without_end) watering down his commitment as Rudd can't insult mass murderers - sorry, our great and powerful friends. For the past 30 years Australians have been gullible participants in an elaborate charade to give the nation the veneer of a working democracy . Every election/Con job they affirm the 2 party dictatorship in one sided elections where the results alternate between Liberal and Labor governments carrying out the same agenda to shore up the profits of the rich. Australians for their gullible stupidity deserve everything they get .

It is compulsory to vote in Australia , not voting entails a fine , I didnt vote , because I refuse to make a fool out of myself , when I explained to the authorities why I didnt vote at the last election I still had to pay the fine , Ill do it again this year .

As much as I'm not happy about the alliance, It's still a step forward, besides we're still better off in terms of health and education, than say, The Americans.
You could have voted for the democrats, They wanted to stop the alliance too, but too often , they don't do anything. so either way, you win. Or as Bells has said, The greens. No reason to incur a fine. Or better yet, screw up your vote, so it's an informal vote. that way you avoid the fine.

Jeez Brian, You're starting to even scare me.

How many Greens candidates were there? And since when were seats allocated by party lines in Australia?
That’s the election/con job exposed right in front of you , and you cannot see it ! 8% of Australia voted for the Greens and the Greens aren’t allocated any seats , that means almost 1 million Australians have no say in government they have been divested of their democratic right to a say in the administration of their nation .
Why do you care who I voted for? Is it really any of your business Brian?
Why does it concern you I didn’t vote , and if you voted either Liberal or Labour then you are unwittingly aiding and abetting the suppression of democacy.
Just because you threw your vote away by not voting and then having to pay the fines to line the pockets of the AEC, don't think that the majority also threw their votes away.
There was no vote to throw away Australia’s electoral system is designed to retain a preferred 2 party system where third party representation is nullified .
What charade Brian? People chose the Government of their choice. You decided to throw away that choice.
That’s the charade people actually believe they are making changes and having a say , when in fact Australia is a plutocracy and it is these entities concerns that policy is designed for .
That is something we shall have to wait and see Brian.
That’s the cost of this “Freetrade Deal” , what good is signing Kyoto when on the other hand Australia will become a vast dump ground for extremely toxic waste that will always pose a massive danger to our fragile environment . And Rudd has affirmed this , so what are you prepared to do ?
This is Labor we are talking about, isn't it? Seriously Brian, your screams of doom and gloom are a bit pointless, considering they have barely been in power for 24 hours and have not even been sworn in yet
Have forgotten what freemarket policies Labourite Bob Hawke introduced in 1983 ? Like handing 80% of our media over to the Murdoch cartel .Rudd has clearly announced he is commited to introducing a freemarket platform and obviously you have not read any of his remarks made to corporate leaders demonstrates that you are indicative of most citizens ignorance in this country .
Why don't you wait and see what they will do? Hmmmm?
Why wait I already know from history that the Liberals carried on the same policies under Hawkes Labour and Labour under Rudd will carry on with the same policies , same shit different arseholes .
We're in a drought Brian. And central Australia has always been arid and flat. Comparing Australia to New Zealand is like comparing a grape to a mango.
Great Barrier Reef , Blue Mountains and Shark Bay all else is a flat dusty wasteland where Kangaroos don’t go .
Just another dreamer. Go sleep sleep on a sewer grate or live in a cardboard box and then you will be truly free. No one will care about you but you will be free...free to get drunk, piss your pants, free to die - no one knowing no one caring. Free.And the policies Rudd introduces I and others will probably end up living in the streets .Brian is a cool guy, but the glass is always half empty with that fellow!Thanks Daniel . It's still a step forward, besides we're still better off in terms of health and education, than say, The Americans. .And when Rudd furthers the privatisation of Heath and education in this country we will be taking one giant leap backwards to 1788 .
You could have voted for the democrats, They wanted to stop the alliance too, but too often , they don't do anything. so either way, you win. Or as Bells has said, The greens. No reason to incur a fine. Or better yet, screw up your vote, so it's an informal vote. that way you avoid the fine. .
There is nothing to vote for as long as the electoral system is designed to extinguish smaller & third party aspirations , we have a system that is designed for the retention of 2 parties that are pro business . We have no say in the administration of Australia as our system of government is simply a manipulative tool of wealthy Industrial corporations and Banks .
Jeez Brian, You're starting to even scare me.
It is simply a case of the abyss staring back into you .

That’s the election/con job exposed right in front of you , and you cannot see it ! 8% of Australia voted for the Greens and the Greens aren’t allocated any seats , that means almost 1 million Australians have no say in government they have been divested of their democratic right to a say in the administration of their nation .


:bugeye:

Brian, just because they got 8% of the votes, does not mean they actually won the seats they were vying for. The 8% is based on the over all votes they received across the board. If they failed to win their own individual seats, it is not for the AEC to then take the seats from some victors and allocate said seats to the Greens. The Greens who did not win their individual seats then gave their preferences to one of the other parties or independents in their own electorate.

Why does it concern you I didn’t vote , and if you voted either Liberal or Labour then you are unwittingly aiding and abetting the suppression of democacy.
No sweets. I don't particularly care if you voted or not. I was merely pointing out your own hypocrisy.

You may assume I was aiding in the suppression of democracy in voting, fair enough. At least I am not about to be fined, nor will I actually be giving money to the 'oppressors'. You are militant Brian... fight for the cause Brian.. then pay them (the oppressors) to allow them to oppress you more. Fight the power dude.:rolleyes:

There was no vote to throw away Australia’s electoral system is designed to retain a preferred 2 party system where third party representation is nullified .
On this, I agree with you. But hey, at least we get a say Brian. Not everyone has that privilege. And if the greater majority wanted to, they could vote for another party and relegate either of the major two to oblivion. Two party preferred systems do not exist solely in Australia, but appears to be a mainstay in all "democratic" countries.

That’s the cost of this “Freetrade Deal” , what good is signing Kyoto when on the other hand Australia will become a vast dump ground for extremely toxic waste that will always pose a massive danger to our fragile environment . And Rudd has affirmed this , so what are you prepared to do ?
Glow green. At least I won't have to put up Christmas lights on the tree next year. We'll all be glowin'.

Have forgotten what freemarket policies Labourite Bob Hawke introduced in 1983 ? Like handing 80% of our media over to the Murdoch cartel .Rudd has clearly announced he is commited to introducing a freemarket platform and obviously you have not read any of his remarks made to corporate leaders demonstrates that you are indicative of most citizens ignorance in this country .
Ermmm I doubt Murdoch would agree with you Brian. There had always been restrictions to media ownership in this country.. had being the operative word of course.

I don't have an issue with freemarket. I do have an issue with flooding this country with cheap imports to the detriment of local producers. It's early days yet, lets wait and see what he actually does do.

Why wait I already know from history that the Liberals carried on the same policies under Hawkes Labour and Labour under Rudd will carry on with the same policies , same shit different arseholes .
Hence the joys and love of politics Brian.

Great Barrier Reef , Blue Mountains and Shark Bay all else is a flat dusty wasteland where Kangaroos don’t go .
Now you are just exaggerating Brian. Blowing everything out of proportion.

And the policies Rudd introduces I and others will probably end up living in the streets
You'd have more money in your wallet if you did not break the electoral laws and have to keep paying fines all the time.:p

And when Rudd furthers the privatisation of Heath and education in this country we will be taking one giant leap backwards to 1788 .
I doubt he will do that Brian.

Great Barrier Reef , Blue Mountains and Shark Bay all else is a flat dusty wasteland where Kangaroos don’t go .

?? Rain forest, north Australia, Tazmania - are you actually in Australia?

Anyway...it pains me a bit to say this, but I actually agree with Brian there should be more representation by popular vote. The Parliamentary system was fine some time ago, but if the ultimate goal was some model of perfect expression then it has failed somewhat.

I now return you to the world in which Brian is still a deluded git as per normal. Do not touch your dial. We control the vertical, the horizontal, and the tinfoil.

Brian Foley:

For the past 30 years Australians have been gullible participants in an elaborate charade to give the nation the veneer of a working democracy. Every election/Con job they affirm the 2 party dictatorship in one sided elections where the results alternate between Liberal and Labor governments carrying out the same agenda to shore up the profits of the rich. Australians for their gullible stupidity deserve everything they get.

Just out of interest, what kind of electoral system would you like to see in an ideal world, Brian?

It is compulsory to vote in Australia , not voting entails a fine , I didnt vote , because I refuse to make a fool out of myself , when I explained to the authorities why I didnt vote at the last election I still had to pay the fine , Ill do it again this year .

So you volunteered not to have any voice in the country's future.

A silly choice for somebody with such strong political views, I would have thought.

The right to vote in a sham election , you just have to visit the Australian Electoral Commision site (http://vtr.aec.gov.au/Default.htm) to see evidence of this sham where we have the "House of Representatives National Two Party Preferred Result" , LOL . Tell me with the 7.64% of the vote that the Greens received how many seats are they allocated ?

A couple of points here. First, if the Liberals get, say 40% of the primary vote, and Labor gets 42% of the primary vote, and the Greens get 8%, which candidate should be elected to the seat, in your opinion?

Next, consider the preferential voting system we have in Australia. Do you consider it to be superior to "first past the post" systems? In that case, it is possible to have a result such as 40% Liberal, 38% Labor, 12% Green, where in the end the Labor candidate wins due to distributed preferences from the Greens. In that sense, the 7.64% Green vote that you complain about did have an impact on this election - it led to the election of some Labor candidates who might otherwise have lost.

That’s the election/con job exposed right in front of you , and you cannot see it ! 8% of Australia voted for the Greens and the Greens aren’t allocated any seats , that means almost 1 million Australians have no say in government they have been divested of their democratic right to a say in the administration of their nation .

You also appear to have overlooked the Senate. You chose also not to have a voice in voting your beloved Greens extra seats in the Senate. Perhaps you'd like to explain why.

Why does it concern you I didn’t vote , and if you voted either Liberal or Labour then you are unwittingly aiding and abetting the suppression of democacy.

You had the opportunity to vote against Labor and Liberal, yet you chose to sit it out. I think you just gave up your right to complain about the government. At least if you'd had the integrity to vote you might be justified in complaining about things if the government you voted for didn't win. As it is, you didn't even try for the change you apparently want.

There was no vote to throw away Australia’s electoral system is designed to retain a preferred 2 party system where third party representation is nullified .

Australia's preferential system is superior to "first past the post". And its proportional representation system for the Senate might have been exactly the kind of thing you're looking for, if you realised it existed and bothered to drag yourself up to a polling place.

That’s the charade people actually believe they are making changes and having a say , when in fact Australia is a plutocracy and it is these entities concerns that policy is designed for .

If Australia was a plutocracy, then the electoral system gives power to the people to vote for an alternative government - a choice you chose to ignore.

That’s the cost of this “Freetrade Deal” , what good is signing Kyoto when on the other hand Australia will become a vast dump ground for extremely toxic waste that will always pose a massive danger to our fragile environment . And Rudd has affirmed this , so what are you prepared to do ?

Rudd has not, to my knowledge, said anything about Australia becoming a dumping ground for anything.

Rudd has clearly announced he is commited to introducing a freemarket platform and obviously you have not read any of his remarks made to corporate leaders demonstrates that you are indicative of most citizens ignorance in this country .

Why weren't you out there dropping leaflets in letterboxes, if this was such an issue for you? Hell, why didn't you run yourself as an Independent?

mountainhare:

I'm rather pleased that Labour won. It should be interesting to see whether there will be any change regarding the unions and workers rights.

Labor pledged to abolish WorkChoices in its current form, so there will definitely be change. If there was a single factor that led to the outing of the Howard government, that was it.

...Tell me with the 7.64% of the vote that the Greens received how many seats are they allocated ?
7.64% of the votes for greens was not enough to get them any seats at all. Hence the preferential voting system. Basically, the voter has some influence on who gets in should his preferred party or candidate fail to win a seat.
1 in 10 of Australians voting green means 9 in 10 don't want them in government. Note the rounding in their favour. Of those 1 in 10, their vote then goes to their "second choice", ensuring they at least have some say in matters.
Shits all over 'first past the post' voting.

I'd like to see Brian's idea for a viable alternative. If he has one.

...at least now Kyoto will be signed and that alone is a step in the right direction.
Is it?
Have a close look at that treaty and how it actually affects Australia, and think again.
I am not saying a treaty to address global warming is a bad thing - I am saying that no one nation should be forced to sign it when the detriment to them is more than that to others, particularly when even achieving it's purpose is by no means a guarantee.
I don't think the Liberals were averse to signing a treaty to address perceived global warming issues. They were averse to signing this one. There is a world of difference.

The Outback, a wasteland! You've never seen it.
Even if he has been in it, Spud, I agree with you - he's never seen it...much less felt it. It is one thing to reject and ridicule any human activity, and it is perhaps with a sense of amusement more than anything else with which I read Brians.... tripe. But this.... this is one thing illustrating almost perfectly how utterly blind some can be. And how much of a hole this man is in. I have been known to be angry, amused, depressed, exasperated... the gamut of human emotion, when considering human nature... but the day I lose sight of the beauty of this world is the day I will declare myself dead.

I'm rather pleased that Labor won. It should be interesting to see whether there will be any change regarding the unions and workers rights.
I'm not so sure. There will be change, yes, but for the better? I do remember the unions having more power than they should have had, and I agree that they had their place and time. I'm not so sure that they are relevant now... and I'm concerned about a possible return to an outmoded workplace dynamic. Scare mongering? Perhaps it was.
I have to admit a certain amount of trepidation over the change. I don't particularly like Howard, but at least he has been a strong leader worthy of respect. The Liberals I've liked even less in government.
But I would be concerned should the change be more a result of a popular perception of it being time for one, rather than any real knowledge of Labor's plans and the result of them being in power after an 11-year drought.
Time will tell.

Oh good grief. Can you scream scare mongering any louder? Or is this another conspiracy Brian? Hey I know, you could have just placed yourself as an independent to make sure your vote and voice of discontent at the upcoming nuclear wasteland was heard Brian. But no. Instead you prefer to stay home, not vote and wallow in your misery and conspiracy theories. Hope the fine was worth it Brian.
I raised an eyebrow when the (unsourced) opinion of one US "expert" suddenly became Liberal party policy. That was quite a leap, even for Brian.

We're in a drought Brian. And central Australia has always been arid and flat. Comparing Australia to New Zealand is like comparing a grape to a mango.
Indeed. Personally, I like both grapes and mangoes. We have something no other nation has. New Zealand has something no other nation has. That is how it is, and we can only hope none of it is lost forever.

But seeing that Labor does not have a Senate majority, it will be interesting indeed.
Very interesting. Reminscent of the Whitlam situation, in some ways.

That’s the election/con job exposed right in front of you , and you cannot see it ! 8% of Australia voted for the Greens and the Greens aren’t allocated any seats , that means almost 1 million Australians have no say in government they have been divested of their democratic right to a say in the administration of their nation .
Your interpretation exposes your lack of understanding, doesn't it? Already covered this. So did Bells.

Great Barrier Reef , Blue Mountains and Shark Bay all else is a flat dusty wasteland where Kangaroos don’t go .Don't be so fucking stupid, and open your eyes.
Against "the rules", I know, but needed to be said.
Oh, and incidentally.. kangaroos do. So do camels, descendants of those lost by Burke and Wills and many other explorers way back when. Dingos. Several thousand species of birds, mammals, reptiles and insects found nowhere else in the world. Take a look at the painted desert and tell me that isn't beauty. Uluru? The Nullarbor. Pilbara, Kimberley, Queensland rainforests, Atherton Tablelands... far too much to bother listing. Open your eyes.

...hopefully others will agree and we can overthrow this oppressive economic system and replace it with socialism .
Right. Let's get rid of this oppressive environment and replace it with something even more unworkable.

Anyway...it pains me a bit to say this, but I actually agree with Brian there should be more representation by popular vote. The Parliamentary system was fine some time ago, but if the ultimate goal was some model of perfect expression then it has failed somewhat.
I've yet to see a more workable voting system than the preferential voting system we have.
As I've already pointed out, it is a system in which even those whose preferred candidate does not gain power, still have influence over who does.

This Brian guy is the same one who, no matter how many times it is pointed out to him, still fails to understand that Australians voted against the Republic when the referendum was called not because they wanted to retain ties to the UK, but because the model presented to them as that on which the Republic would be founded was not to their satisfaction.
Thus far we have yet to be presented with another model on which to vote - something I look forward to seeing, hopefully soon. I know that it is quite possible that the Liberal government (Howard) presented us with that model because they knew it was one which would not gain the support required to make the change viable, but it is equally true that the current commonwealth structure gives the UK only a nominal power over Australia, and one rarely (if ever) exercised. So why rush in and change it when there isn't anything actually wrong other than a perception of power structures?
Sun Tsu would be apoplectic.

(note - a referendum - one of the few forms of direct democracy in existence anywhere in the world. We have those here, when the issue at stake is deemed to be important enough. How many others do?)

Beaten by minutes in covering the salient points. Good grief, James, this is perhaps the first time I've ever agreed with you so much regarding anything at all.
Other than in one thing after a cursory examination :
Labor pledged to abolish WorkChoices in its current form, so there will definitely be change. If there was a single factor that led to the outing of the Howard government, that was it.I'd say the catalyst was Australia simply feeling it was time for change.
Policies even half agreeable and a Labor "leader" who might actually become worthy of the description were the convincing factors for a nation already inclined to vote for anyone who might be a worthy leader... as long as it wasn't Howard.

1 in 10 of Australians voting green means 9 in 10 don't want them in government.

Exactly. Complain all you want, Brian, about how the Greens have been hard done by, but the fact remains that over 90% of voters didn't put them as their first preference. Australians apparently don't want a Greens government.

It's worth reiterating, though, that Australians did apparently want more Greens in the Senate.

Another reason for the Liberal loss, in my opinion, was the hubris displayed by the government since it gained control of both houses of Parliament.

...at least now Kyoto will be signed and that alone is a step in the right direction.

Is it?
Have a close look at that treaty and how it actually affects Australia, and think again.
I am not saying a treaty to address global warming is a bad thing - I am saying that no one nation should be forced to sign it when the detriment to them is more than that to others, particularly when even achieving it's purpose is by no means a guarantee.
I don't think the Liberals were averse to signing a treaty to address perceived global warming issues. They were averse to signing this one. There is a world of difference.

Howard has always been a climate change skeptic, despite the thin veneer he tried to develop once he realised that his stance on climate change might cost him some votes.

On Kyoto itself, Australia is on target to meet its Kyoto obligations, so ratifying it is unlikely to adversely affect Australia. But more importantly, ratifying it sends a message to the rest of the international community.

I'm not so sure. There will be change, yes, but for the better? I do remember the unions having more power than they should have had, and I agree that they had their place and time. I'm not so sure that they are relevant now... and I'm concerned about a possible return to an outmoded workplace dynamic. Scare mongering? Perhaps it was.

We'll have to wait and see how much Labor is still influenced by the unions.

But seeing that Labor does not have a Senate majority, it will be interesting indeed.

It's also worth noting that the Coalition still has control of the Senate until next July.

Thus far we have yet to be presented with another model on which to vote - something I look forward to seeing, hopefully soon. I know that it is quite possible that the Liberal government (Howard) presented us with that model because they knew it was one which would not gain the support required to make the change viable, but it is equally true that the current commonwealth structure gives the UK only a nominal power over Australia, and one rarely (if ever) exercised.

The UK has no power over Australia. That ended with the passage of the Australia Acts in 1986. The Queen as nominal Head of State is a figurehead only, with no actual power.

Exactly. Complain all you want, Brian, about how the Greens have been hard done by, but the fact remains that over 90% of voters didn't put them as their first preference. Australians apparently don't want a Greens government.


That's what I do not understand. He considers them to be hard done by, but did not bother to vote for them or anyone else for that matter.:bugeye:

As I said before, Bells, if you don't vote you effectively forfeit your right to complain about getting a government you don't like.

On this, I agree with you. But hey, at least we get a say Brian. Not everyone has that privilege. And if the greater majority wanted to, they could vote for another party and relegate either of the major two to oblivion. It is quite failsafe when you remember the Corporate media drums out constant propaganda concerning who we vote for . Amazingly the people actually believe our press is free from political manipulation when in fact the media are the manipulators of politics on behalf of the Corporate system . Two party preferred systems do not exist solely in Australia, but appears to be a mainstay in all "democratic" countries. Precisely these election systems are carefully designed to limit third party interference whereby populist and leftwing parties are kept in check . That is function of these restrictive election systems keeping power to influence in check. Just out of interest, what kind of electoral system would you like to see in an ideal world, Brian? I'd like to see Brian's idea for a viable alternative. If he has one.Each voter has one single transferable vote in a multi-party popular determinated election , where each political party is accorded representation proportional with the percentage of the vote received. Entrance qualification to Parliament for political parties entails no vote percentage thresholds designed to keep out smaller parties. Exactly. Complain all you want, Brian, about how the Greens have been hard done by, but the fact remains that over 90% of voters didn't put them as their first preference. Australians apparently don't want a Greens government.The cold reality is that 7.64% of Australians who voted Greens have been divested of representation in Government . How does your preferred system equate into a fair election ?This Brian guy is the same one who, no matter how many times it is pointed out to him, still fails to understand that Australians voted against the Republic when the referendum was called not because they wanted to retain ties to the UK, but because the model presented to them as that on which the Republic would be founded was not to their satisfaction. What a load of Bullshit , it was the Anglo Saxon/British majority in Australia which killed the Republic move , you only had to witness the Anti Irish tinge to the campaign , to see that . Or the head of Australia’s RSL’s claiming there was a Sinn Fein lobby at work with Keaton Fucking ridiculous , tomorrow if we had the vote again with the model we want it would still be hammered .

Each voter has one single transferable vote in a multi-party popular determinated election , where each political party is accorded representation proportional with the percentage of the vote received. Entrance qualification to Parliament for political parties entails no vote percentage thresholds designed to keep out smaller parties.

Then we end up with a Parliament containing nutters from parties like the Citizens' Electoral Council.

What a load of Bullshit , it was the Anglo Saxon/British majority in Australia which killed the Republic move...

Er, yes. The majority voted against it, so it died. That's how referenda work.

tomorrow if we had the vote again with the model we want it would still be hammered .

No. What caused that referendum to fail (barely) was that the majority of the Great Unwashed apparently wanted a directly-elected President, just like in the US.

Signing Kyoto wont mean much Spud when Australia's vast arid wasteland outback will be used for storing Nuclear waste from the US :

That was the Liberal party and this policy will be carried on under Labour . Thats one of the prices we must pay for the "Freetrade Deal" with America .
I am more concerned about his commitment to freemarket capitalism , that invariably means creating a welfare state for the rich 5% . I dont want to wait a while I know what is coming up , New Zealand went through that deregulation phase it wasnt pretty .

Nuclear waste from the US in Australia?:rolleyes:

As for the rest of your concerns they seem to be well founded. A small group of rich men hold positions on many boards of companies which control the money of public elections all around the world. Do you really think for a moment legislators who don't agree with them will have a chance of getting elected? Companies will keep tightening the bolts until they break. Then all hell will break loose.

It is quite failsafe when you remember the Corporate media drums out constant propaganda concerning who we vote for . Amazingly the people actually believe our press is free from political manipulation when in fact the media are the manipulators of politics on behalf of the Corporate system .

I doubt it. Voters do not always rely on the media to make up their minds for them. This recent election showed the level of displeasure in the populace at the Work Choices, the lack of Government cooperation in regards to the environment, amongst other things. Australians were angry their rights in the workplace were stripped from them. The media had nothing to do with that. Voters were experiencing it first hand. That was a determining factor in this election.

Precisely these election systems are carefully designed to limit third party interference whereby populist and leftwing parties are kept in check . That is function of these restrictive election systems keeping power to influence in check.
Third party's are often vital, if not crucial in the political arena in this country Brian. Sometimes to the detriment of the population (shall I remind you of the handshake between John Howard and Meg Lees?). They are often in a place to hold the balance of power in the Upper House. If more people went out and voted for them, they would have even more power.

The cold reality is that 7.64% of Australians who voted Greens have been divested of representation in Government . How does your preferred system equate into a fair election ?
The Greens are represented in Parliament. They would have more chances if more people voted for them. Alas, many chose not to, including yourself.

The Greens who received that 7.64% of the votes then gave those preferential votes to other parties or independents. In that, those votes are represented in Government. Have you looked at some of the 'how to vote cards' given by Greens candidates? The one in my electorate gave their preferential votes to the Labor Party.

As James said, if we were to do it your way, we'd have Pauline Hanson and the likes of Family First and the Citizens' Electoral Council making themselves at home in Parliament. They too received a percentage of the over all votes Brian.

.
No. What caused that referendum to fail (barely) was that the majority of the Great Unwashed apparently wanted a directly-elected President, just like in the US.

No James the President isn't elected directly by the peole we have a Electoral College,


The United States Electoral College is a term used to describe the 538 President Electors who meet every 4 years to cast the electoral votes for President and Vice President of the United States; their votes represent the most important component of the presidential election. The Presidential Electors are elected by the popular vote on the day traditionally called election day. Presidential Electors meet in their respective state capitol buildings (or in the District of Columbia) on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December (per 3 U.S.C. 7), never as a national body. At the 51 meetings, held on the same day, the Electors cast the electoral votes. The electoral college, like the national convention, is an indirect element in the process of electing the president.

Provisions for the mechanics of presidential elections were established by Article Two, Section One, of the United States Constitution. The 12th Amendment provided that each Elector vote separately for president and vice president. Today, the mechanics of the presidential election are administered by the National Archives and Records Administration via its Office of the Federal Register.

Electors are chosen in a series of state elections held on the same day (election day). The number of electoral votes of each state is the sum of its number of U.S. Senators (always two) and its U.S. Representatives; the District of Columbia has three electoral votes. In each state, voters vote for a slate of pre-selected candidates for Presidential Elector, representing the various candidates for President. State ballots, however, are designed to suggest that the voters are voting for actual candidates for President. Most states use what is termed the short ballot, in which a vote for one party (such as Democratic or Republican) is interpreted as a vote for the entire slate of Presidential Electors. In these states, with rare exceptions, one party wins the entire electoral vote of the state (by either plurality or majority). Maine and Nebraska choose Presidential Electors using what is termed the Maine Method, which makes it possible for the voters to choose Electors of different political parties and split the electoral vote of these two states.

The Presidential Electors of each state (and DC) meet 41 days following the popular vote to cast the electoral votes. The Electors ballot first for President, then for Vice President. On rare occasions, an Elector does not cast the electoral vote for the party's national ticket, usually as a political statement; these people are called faithless Electors. Each Elector signs a document entitled the Certificate of Vote which sets forth the electoral vote of the state (or DC). One original Certificate of Vote is sent by certified mail to the Office of the Vice President.

One month following the casting of the electoral votes, the U.S. Congress meets in joint session to declare the winner of the election. If a candidate for President receives the vote of 270 (as of 2007) or more Presidential Electors, the presiding officer (usually the sitting Vice President) declares that candidate to be the president-elect, and a candidate for vice president receiving 270 (as of 2007) or more electoral votes is similarly declared to be the vice president-elect.

Buffalo Roam:

The formality of having Electors in the Presidential vote dates back to the days when horsemen had to cross the country to deliver the verdict of the people. The only problem today (apart from "faithless electors") is that ALL the votes of a single state can go to one party or the other in most states. But it remains true that the US populace generally believes, with good reason, that it is voting directly for one candidate or another as President, and not for a party or for an electing body who will then choose the President.

You want "sheeple" Brian? Here are the real "sheeples" (http://catchthefire.com.au/blog/2007/11/20/another-prophetic-word-regarding-the-federal-election/).

Hilarious to read. In a scary kind of way. It would seem the Christian right in this country have failed in their God given mission to have John Howard re-elected. Either that or they made a booboo in their tea leaf readings.:)

Then we end up with a Parliament containing nutters from parties like the Citizens' Electoral Council.
Or more accurately we would end up with a popularly elected and determined Parliament that is a true reflection of Australians opinions such as Green , Socialists , Christains etc
Nuclear waste from the US in Australia?:rolleyes:
Thats is what is being touted , disposal of Atomic and toxic waste is on the books , Bob Hawke first brought it up in 1998 .
As for the rest of your concerns they seem to be well founded. A small group of rich men hold positions on many boards of companies which control the money of public elections all around the world. Do you really think for a moment legislators who don't agree with them will have a chance of getting elected? Companies will keep tightening the bolts until they break. Then all hell will break loose.I see you also understand a plutocracy as with the rest of the World .As James said, if we were to do it your way, we'd have Pauline Hanson and the likes of Family First and the Citizens' Electoral Council making themselves at home in Parliament. They too received a percentage of the over all votes Brian.
Thats Democracy in action all opinions are allowed , that would be how the nation voted .
You want "sheeple" Brian? Here are the real "sheeples" (http://catchthefire.com.au/blog/2007/11/20/another-prophetic-word-regarding-the-federal-election/).

Hilarious to read. In a scary kind of way. It would seem the Christian right in this country have failed in their God given mission to have John Howard re-elected. Either that or they made a booboo in their tea leaf readings.:)
Save me from Gods Fan club .

You want "sheeple" Brian? Here are the real "sheeples" (http://catchthefire.com.au/blog/2007/11/20/another-prophetic-word-regarding-the-federal-election/).

Hilarious to read. In a scary kind of way. It would seem the Christian right in this country have failed in their God given mission to have John Howard re-elected. Either that or they made a booboo in their tea leaf readings.:)

Bells, You just gave me nightmares.:eek: I was hoping to hell that these did not exist in beautiful multicultural Australia. Really.
Now I'm wishing i was in singapore, So that political censorship, wouldn't let me see that.

Bells, You just gave me nightmares.:eek: I was hoping to hell that these did not exist in beautiful multicultural Australia. Really.
Now I'm wishing i was in singapore, So that political censorship, wouldn't let me see that.

Of course it exists. Sadly, that one was not the worst of it.

I have a cousin who is a religious nutbag. She took to calling us at 6am on election day.. the day my children chose to sleep in:mad:.. to tell me that I "simply must vote for Howard" because she received a "message that Rudd is a messenger from Satan". She chooses to forget that I am an atheist. I hung up on her. I wonder if the "messages" come via sms.

You can't be surprised though. Howard has been courting the Christian extreme right religions and groups for a long long time now. She (my demented relative) was merely parroting the religious lines she had been fed.

Ugh...almost agreeing with Brian Foley.

*sobs*

Right, I'm going to pretend he hasn't said anything now. Wouldn't a proper democracy with proportional representation be better? Why the need for electoral colleges and Parliament seats? Calling the present systems representative of electoral will is like saying a square approximates the shape of a circle because they're the same size.

Of course it exists. Sadly, that one was not the worst of it.

I have a cousin who is a religious nutbag. She took to calling us at 6am on election day.. the day my children chose to sleep in:mad:.. to tell me that I "simply must vote for Howard" because she received a "message that Rudd is a messenger from Satan". She chooses to forget that I am an atheist. I hung up on her. I wonder if the "messages" come via sms.

You can't be surprised though. Howard has been courting the Christian extreme right religions and groups for a long long time now. She (my demented relative) was merely parroting the religious lines she had been fed.

And here I sat peacefully, thinking that the worst it could get, was that Pauline Hansen would get a seat.
I suppose he had to court the extremes, when the centrist voters are so disenchanted.

I prefer Rudd only because of the tax fraud that liberal achieved in.
The tricks he pulled when a person would be forced to work was shocking.
They would be hired ,work ,clean and go home this went on for ages.
When they finaly got paid the tax was so high the pay was less.
this was noticed when companies would give cash to the workers to carry them on till their payday was here
because of the cash the pay was delayed and tax was higher cause of the lump sums
this went on all over the state prolly all over australia

its not onlyb cause of the tax its over families and
other things that needed TLC and imediately

Did you know the old labour as in hawk
has a file with all the strangest people like an x file type a thing
and they told me its called exstinct and im in the file with all these wierd people in it
hahaha i wouldnt want it any other way hahaha
ohh well i wonder if Rudd will be aloud access to these files
he is labour

ok forget i mentioned anything bout the files
i know nothing nothing

i hate conspiracies

theres a list in the file of peoples names that are well very rare and unusual
and of course im very opened with stuff but some stuff dont know

we all have sumthing different some are not to have their names mentioned for safety reasons
they told me this years ago back in the eighties
kinda cool for a govtment to have a secret
im wondering if Rudd is aloud to have access to these files or not
and what would he do with the information and why's it so bloody secret