Judge Abbott by policies, not past

I'm sick of this demonisation of Tony Abbott. Don't get me wrong; I'm a strident feminist but I don't label politicians ''misogynists'' and ''woman-haters'' lightly. Abbott ran on a platform of maternity leave last election. Yes, he did attempt to maintain the ban on RU486, but he can't be considered solely responsible for that, considering the influence the Catholic Church has had over him since the day he was born.

There comes a time to stop dredging up the things he allegedly did in his early 20s - many politicians would fail that test - and start examining his current policies.

And remember, mudslingers, a party is not necessarily defined by the face of its leadership.

Lucy Lester Mosman

After reading yesterday's letters, it appears that many of the Herald letter writers have a problem with strong capable men.

Geoff Doherty Balmain

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/letters/peoples-voice-trumps-power-of-the-microphone-20121008-279c4.html#ixzz28kyAHzXK

 

Gus: great proposal!!!!: Abbott's policies!!!... None, zilch, nada, zero... unless we count those that are stupid and negative... And Abbott — a strong capable man?... Hell!!!! he would not run into the petticoat of his wife or mother should he be strong, would he?... Makes me cry...

The dictionary defines misogyny as "hatred of women". It is an ugly word, an ugly accusation and an ugly fact of life. It is now the word that has driven Australian politics to its lowest point in decades. Yesterday, the mask fell away, the curtain dropped, the real driver of the politics of personal abuse was revealed.

After sending out two attack dogs, Gutter and Sewer, to do the dirty work, after hiding behind two political zombies, Insufferable and Unspeakable, to stay in power, after using the Minister for Innuendo and the Compromise-General to play the gender card, the mask has finally dropped away to reveal the driver of the politics of hate in Australia.

The mask fell at exactly 2.42pm in the House of Representatives. Looking on were the member for Gutter, Anthony Albanese, the member for Sewer, Wayne Swan, the Minister for Innuendo, Tanya Plibersek, and the Compromise-General, Nicola Roxon, and the independents who will do anything to avoid facing their electorates, Mr Insufferable, Robert Oakeshott, and his fellow regional zombie, Mr Unspeakable, Tony Windsor.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/gillard-reveals-true-nature-in-playing-gender-card-20121010-27cnq.html#ixzz28s0knZxv
-----------------------------
Gus: Paul Sheehan who wrote the drivel at top is beyond the pale... He forgot to name, Mr Hypocrite, Tony Abbott... Tony Abbott who in his anti-Slipper moment would not mind collecting his vote!!! Tony Abbott who has tried to kill off this legitimate government since he was voted as leader of the opposition... Tony Abbott who has tried to convince people that he would destroy the NBN that we would destroy Australia's efforts to reduce emissions... This is the beauty of Mr Detritus Hypocriticus Abbott.... If he does something wrong and gnarly it's politics... If someone gives him the same, to which I will add, Julia Gillard has been very patient with the sewer rat Abbott, people like Sheehan get their own knickers in a knot... Appalling from Sheehan who is starting to become more and more stupid like Alan Jones...

 

Tony Abbott is a hack. A dog. An aggressive, carping, bitter, mindless, deceptive, dodgy, mendacious, rancid, negative, nasty, muck-raking, untruthful, obstructionist, opportunistic, sexist, political Neanderthal. 
He is unfit for high office. He cannot control his temper. No trick is too low for him. No stunt is too wild. He is a bully. A thug. A snake oil salesman. A poster child for vile bully-boy values. He has repulsive double standards. He hates women. He stands for nothing. He has unhealthy obsessions. He is nuts.

Abbott behaves like Jack the Ripper.

He is Gina Rinehart's butler.

He is Nancy Reagan without the astrology. He is a douchebag.

I'm quoting here, mostly from Hansard. These are not comments from media figures, or feral demonstrators, or dredged up from 10 or even 30 years ago. These are insults delivered this year, by federal Labor MPs, directed at one person, and orchestrated by Julia Gillard. The level of personal insult has been on an industrial scale.

The Parliament is not a chamber of innocents. Many members, on both sides, including Abbott, have frequently engaged in invective, over-statement, dissembling and rampant double standards. There is also a more general coarsening of public discourse on the internet, thanks in part to the impact of social media. But it is this government's concentration on Abbott's character that sets it apart. It is the tactic on which the Gillard government has staked its survival, the politics of the personal, of targeting character, of hammering the same message about the same person, by every minister, until it seeps into the public mind.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/abbott-suffering-a-labor-party-stoning-20121014-27krw.html#ixzz29J7QuXsZ
------------------------------

Yes Tony is a bit of everything...  
This piece by Paul Sheehan is designed to expose the double standards of Labor by showing the descriptions used by Labor to define Tony — if he can be defined... But unfortunately Sheehan end up reinforcing what we knew all along... Tony Abbott is Gina's butler..
Yes, Tony is deceptive... and a sexist political Neanderthal... Actually this one is an insult to Neanderthals... But I digress.
This morning I was going to tackle why some women were so eager to defend Tony Abbott and attack Julia Gillard in the light that Tony is Mr Negative par excellence with silly ideas and an inability to crunch figures on simple electricity bills, while Julia is Madame Cando, though sometimes she gets it wrong... but most of the times ends up doing the right thingy...

Well to put it in a nutshell, women can be jealous and vow revenge, while men resent and punch while plotting overthrow... Women have been shaped by years of submission to men, as we can see by the women defending the indefensible veil and burqa... Thus when men are rightly under attack from a sheila, some women, claiming freedom of spirit will shake their shackles not to get rid of them but to show they are free to shake their shackles... I mean psychological shackles here... Thus some women will resent other women's success complicated with subconscious cougar desires, while men simply get their younger bit on the side with no qualms as long as the wife does not hear about it... This of course is a simplistic expression of a complex view on which we could write 10 tomes and not even scratch the surface... And men will ridicule women with insults they would not use for their dogs... 
It's all a question of where you sit on your buttered toast.

And yes, Tony is a snake oil salesperson...

 

Sexist stereotypes, humiliating photographs of women and male bylines dominate the front pages of British newspapers, according to research carried out by the industry body Women in Journalism (WiJ).

Male journalists wrote 78% of all front-page articles and men accounted for 84% of those mentioned or quoted in lead pieces, according to analysis of nine national newspapers, Monday to Saturday, over the course of four weeks.

The only females to be regularly pictured in the period were the Duchess of Cambridge; her sister, Pippa Middleton, and the crime victim Madeleine McCann. The three males most likely to be photographed were Simon Cowell, whose biography was published that month; Nicolas Sarkozy, who was fighting an election, and Prince William.

Women's groups, which complained about sexist stereotypes in the media in a presentation to the Leveson inquiry into media ethics, welcomed the research. Anna van Heeswijk, chief executive of Object, said: "With newspapers so male-dominated, is it any surprise that women are portrayed the way they are? Changing the number of female writers and the ways in which women are portrayed in the media is crucial if we are serious about wanting a socially responsible press."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/14/sexist-stereotypes-front-pages-newspapers

 

From Paul Sheehan....

 

Reality: Australia cannot afford the Gonski spend, plus the NDIS spend, plus the carbon reduction spend, plus the paid parental leave spend, plus the infrastructure surge, plus the promised increase in defence spending, plus the cost of unfunded retiring boomers, plus reducing indigenous disadvantage, plus $1 billion a year for asylum seekers. The revenue is simply not there. It is never going to be there under the present mix of existing tax arrangements, budget commitments, social welfare obligations, low productivity growth, ageing population and the debt-service burden. Yet the critique is all about spin and social equity.

It's not as if the challenge is insurmountable. It's just that the surmounting requires grit and focus from the government and a recognition by the media and the public that either there has to be policy triage, or much higher taxes, or both.

 

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/tony-abbott-must-fight-the-baby-boomers-debt-explosion-20131201-2yjlm.html#ixzz2mFvFiP39

 

WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR WHAT?.... Is Paul Sheehan for real?... Blaming social equity for a financing "problem"?... What does this mean?... Low production growth?... Is Paul living on the same planet?

Isn't Joe Bananas' solution of wanting to remove the debt ceiling going against what Paul is advocating? Has Paul drunk too much tea from the Tea Party after he got his full quota of Boomer's champagne? Is digging more holes going to solve the hole we're going to fall into? A hole now of the making of the Liberals (CONservatives)... So many contradictions here... Who are the so-called boomers who have created the "debt"? Are they the boomers with cash in the bank and three houses, those who are cruising the high seas in liners or those who became CEOs of corporate raider enterprises, unless they are the people still playing the currency market via Gen Y and X aggressive traders...  Now that the Aussie dollar has taken a plunge , isn't it time to consolidate value-adding manufacturing and honest enterprising plus honest politics with value adding Gonski and NDIS schemes? 

If one is in the lurch, one needs mechanism to get out of it, not laments about being in the lurch with added kicks in the butt from a dishonest Abbott government... It's about time we spurred Malcolm into a more malleable person or start a fully-fledged revolution before it's too late. The Abbott government is fully dishonest, idiotic, religiously fundamentalistic and full of shit on MAJOR issues like global warming... Are we going to cope with this crap now for a future the idiotic Abbott government does not understand?

We need ingenuity. We cannot have ingenuity unless we provide a balanced social equity. We cannot provide this social equity without a balanced education system. The Gonski reform was designed to provide this equity. The shit government of Abbott HATES social equity... When Pyne started to mutter things about the "good" education under John Howard, he had to quickly go and hide behind a wall of lies... The crappy Abbott government is all about creating the biggest mess ever after having inherited a finely tuned government that was working towards providing a better social equity. Not perfect, but progress was being made. Now the turdy Abbott government is trying all its might to destroy improvement — not even in the name of financial savviness... The nasty Abbott government is doing it only out of spite. Spite is not a good look. The imbecile Abbot government is ugly and full of spite. It's retrograde — though jingoistically lying to hide its MASSIVE failings, of which we've only seen the beginning, unfortunately.

The ABC is a sprawling media empire which defies generalities. It is a beloved institution but it also has an institutional dark side, a self-protective, self-inflated, insular, profligate, tax-subsidised reflex that uses stone-walling and evasion whenever the ABC has been caught out.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/abc-management-finds-sorry-is-the-hardest-word-20140305-347fc.html#ixzz2v8AdjOuD
That is a lot of shit-crap from the bile and acid inkpot of Sheehan... I have not yet seen a critique of the Murdoch press by Sheehan — though possibly I don't read every shit-blob he writes... Sheehan should apologise for telling such blatant lies about the ABC...
Yes Norman Swan might have been out of line. But despite all this, in the news-game one can be given valid information, wrong information from witnesses who seem to know what they are talking about, press releases with inflated misinformation and so forth. Despite checking the information as thoroughly as one can one can still make value judgements that are correct but not backed up sufficiently by evidence. 
The case in point was explored by "Mad as Hell" satire programme when "the ABC apologised for showing a segment of Scott Morrison telling something which obviously was wrong (a porkie) since he told the opposite sometimes later"...
The word "Sorry" was NOT used by the minister then if my brains worked at the time...
One of the sore point here is not so much that the ABC is a "protected" workshop is that new young reporters are not yet up to speed on checking every "news" items coming their way and, with the speed of turning news around, may not do a full on check (which in the case of asylum seekers is impossible to do since the government is not telling anything and does not want to even investigate "allegations" which for my money would prove that the ABC is correct on the issue of the "burned hands"). 
But on the other side of the ledger, the mediocre mass media can tell any old crap and get away with it... 

 

Today, the MMMM (Mediocre Mass Media de Mierda) high priest representative at the SMH (Sydney Morning Herald), Paul Sheehan hits us with two versions of headlines. I know, headlines are often the province of grubby sub-editors or editors in chiefs, but the writer of the piece, Sheehan, is trying to link Julia Gillard with the "grubby" activities of unions up to twenty years ago. It is of course out of line. First, most union activities have been exemplary though annoying to the exploiting class. Unions are dedicated to make sure workers are not used like slaves which would happen quickly in this country without unions. 

In the printed version of his MMMM-SMH article, the headline of Paul Sheehan is "Gillard in spotlight over shadowy past". Hum... In my opinion, there are far more shadows in Tony Abbott's past but what does this headline mean? So the online version of the same article is "Julia Gillard back in spotlight over links to unions". Somewhere the meaning and the slap has changed. Amongst other deed, the article by Sheehan tries to link by association Julia Gillard with Michael Williamson of the HSU union scandal. Of course what the MMMM-SMH Sheehan forgets conveniently to mention is many of the actors in this scandal are actually linked to the Liberal (CONservative) Party. 

It's fashionable and easy to blast unions, while they have done the hard yards for workers safety and conditions, including saved much of Sydney's history through the imposition of "green" bans (thank you Jack Mundey). Then Sheehan writes:

 

No wonder that Paul Howes, the young, ambitious national secretary of the AWU, the man who replaced Bill Shorten as head of the union in 2007, has announced he will be stepping away from  that job in July. He will have a mixture of personal and professional reasons for doing so, but the starring role the AWU will play in the royal commission  is something he would do well to distance himself from.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/julia-gillard-back-in-spotlight-over-links-to-unions-20140330-zqohi.html#ixzz2xTOpdOcN


Does this mean Paul Howes won't be called into the Abbott inquisition designed to destroy the union movement? Like the Abbott government is also trying to destroy any understanding of global warming, possibly as a pay back for Julia Gillard having had the gall to call for a royal commission into the sex abuses of institutions? Or is Paul Howes an opportunistic captain, like that Italian fellow, who is deserting the ship when the ship needs its captain more than ever to stand against the tide of right-wing crap? Is this the same Paul Howes who crapped on the workers by basically telling them they had it too good, while not referring to the savage influence of currency trading and financial markets on this countries woes (which are microscopic compared to the rest of the world's crap)?

It appears, in his misplaced views, Sheehan writes crap on behalf of the Liberal (COnservative) Party, attacking decent working people, including the former Prime Minister whom he hated for being who she was. Do you love Tony Abbott, Paul? I certainly don't. Everything I though and knew of Tony Abbott ranks of class warfare and of low intellectual understanding of the values of this planet, with an opportunistic divisive feudal short-sighted view of society. Nothing has changed. Today the letter pages in the SMH start with "Abbott a reactionary, or simply reading the public mood?" Of course one knows the public mood can be manipulated by the MMMM, especially the DT and TA of the Murdoch stable. But Tony Abbott is more than a reactionary. He is a political regressive and a religious traditionalist with a zest of crazy opportunism. In short he knows how to tell half-truths-half-porkies, he knows how to re-package old dusty snake-oil to sell with new captivating slogans. And people are gullible. 
Sure Paul Sheehan mitigates his writings about Julia:
Gillard will not be able to step away. She is trapped by history. Although she played only a cameo in the AWU's use of slush funds many years ago, she went on to become prime minister and her boyfriend all those years ago, a former AWU official, Bruce Wilson, has become a high-profile person of interest to the  Victoria Police fraud squad. Gillard is thus stuck with a spotlight disproportionate to any role.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/julia-gillard-back-in-spotlight-over-links-to-unions-20140330-zqohi.html#ixzz2xTgFxWf3


Tony Abbott is far more dangerous to the future sanity of this country than people realise — or than a couple of dubious union leaders who may have had their hand in the till... Note that Craig Thomson is appealing against his sentence as, if my understanding is correct, he was tricked to admit having used his union credit card under the impression the judge was referring to "authorisation", while the police changed the charges behind his back during the proceedings...
Meanwhile many executives and CEOs place their hand in the till daily by voting themselves outrageous bonuses and raises which many shareholders cannot argue against since often the shareholder registry is controlled by institutions where the CEOs do the same. These suited fellows are not going to kill the goose for someone else, since once day, in the game of business musical chair, the said CEOs may head the other company. 

 

As the headlines in the printed SMH today was quite "nasty"("Gillard in spotlight over shadowy past"), it seems that the SMH is trying to steer the feelings slightly away from this earlier nastiness while still being narky... Now as the day evolves from minutes to hours, just about 30 minutes later since my rant above is posted, the online link to Paul Sheehan's SMH diatribe is as below:

 

 

Between you and me, I don't think that Julia Gillard would be one bit worried about the truth. She might even worry a tad about the lies, innuendoes and the porkies from the MMMM though... But in general, she is serene for good reason. Meanwhile pay attention to the two links above that regarding Julia:

Yes, it's about global warming... Basically, the month of March in Sydney has been running hot, possibly about 2 degrees C above the NEW average. March would be approaching the 400 month in a row that has been ABOVE AVERAGE temperature in this country. Not only this, I have noted that NOT ONE SINGLE DAY in March was below average — considering the minimum and maximum averages — even if there were not any "super-hot" days unlike February 2, 1959. 

 

He did not accept criticisms that the commission of audit – and by implication the likely federal budget – place too much responsibility on the poor to cut costs. “We certainly tried to protect the lowest 20 per cent. We’ve tried to look after them. Many of our recommendations hit high-income earners and business.”  

Whether Abbott is the mad monk his critics portray, or the man who became Prime Minister because he had guts, will be borne out by the big bet he has made. Like all prime ministers who introduce an austerity budget he is betting that a majority of the electorate will see that hard decisions on the economy, with its ageing population, need to be made, and made now, and to act otherwise is the greater hypocrisy.

 

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/has-tony-abbott-gone-mad-20140511-zr9io.html#ixzz31v9uy9AT

 

----------------------------------------

Paul, One cannot believe that Tony Abbott said "We certainly tried to protect the lowest 20 per cent. We’ve tried to look after them. Many of our recommendations hit high-income earners and business."

This is fudge-speak. This is dishonest. This is a pack of lies. But Tony Abbott says it with aplomb as if he was standing on a three-mile high pedestal. He is not. He is swimming in a crap-pool... The only guts Tony has is to tell lies. Full stop. Any stupid dork could cut the budget the way he has (Joe has done under instructions). There are no "hard decisions" on the economy that necessarily involve destroying the social fabric of this country. But Tony the saviour places himself in charge of destroying the social fabric. "We certainly tried to protect the lower 20 per cent" he says here without laughing (as he did laugh on budget night when Joe announced very funny savage cuts to higher education). If you believe Tony has succeeded in being reasonable, then you believe the moon is a carrot cake with wings. If you believe he meant all the promises he made, then you believe that the earth is a pancake. 

The greatest hypocrisy of the mad monk is to have given us certified assurances on all fronts — IN ORDER TO BE ELECTED. He duped the electorate. That is the biggest hypocrisy of all, especially when he adds "Many of our recommendations hit high-income earners and business"... Proportionally, and on an absolute level, this is bollocks. Complete and utter bullshit. And if you cannot see that, Paul, you are a far worse opinionator than I ever thought. This is not a commendation.

Yes, Tony Abbott is mad, deceitful and dishonest. And because, I think I have observed, you have supported him, you try to fudge your own support by hypocritically making some idiotic remarks about the "ageing population" that places us into taking hard decisions and not doing so would be hypocritical. This is crap. The proper decisions were made a long time ago in this area and do not need to be harden. 

The Abbott regime with his dancing prunce as an education minister does not see past the next term of school bench polishing. With his new "medical research unit" larger than the Queen Mary II by 2023, one can smell the deceit from a thousand fathoms below. And while this rabid regime destroys education and health, it invests into ridiculous war planes and as Bruce Petty wrote once:

 

"The Defence Department has, however, developed a highly

organised and efficient modern armaments sytem but is

rather short of a highly organised efficient modern enemy.

The department of External Affairs is working on this problem."

 

One could laugh. The "new" planes are duds...

Mr Sheehan stop trying to make us believe that Tony Abbott could be a mad genius who knows what's best for us. No... Tony is a mad dishonest dork whom we got as PM because people like you kept propping him up. 

Sad indeed. 

 

 

 

 

 

Only one official libertarian sits in the federal Parliament, though there are many closet libertarians hidden inside the tax-and-spend big government of Tony Abbott. This week that libertarian, Senator David Leyonhjelm of the Liberal Democratic Party, had a lesson in the treacheries of politics delivered to him personally by The Australian newspaper.

Leyonhjelm had intended to announce on Thursday that he had appointed Helen Dale, born Helen Darville, also known by the literary pseudonym Helen Demidenko, to his staff as a senior adviser.

But a reporter at The Australian, David Crowe, got what the paper called an "exclusive" by simply ignoring the senator's embargo, much to the senator's chagrin, then delivering a cartoon about "a hoaxer" being appointed to the senator's staff. As the headline in The Australian put it: "Literary hoaxer signed up by LDP."

The woman portrayed as "a hoaxer" is a 42-year-old policy scholar who has left behind a legal career in Edinburgh because she believes in what Leyonhjelm is doing. And what Leyonhjelm is doing, as a cross-bencher in a deadlocked Senate, is trying to slow what he sees as the decline of individual freedom and economic health under the growing weight of government.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/david-leyonhjelm-calls-on-helen-dale-to-help-fight-for-libertarianism-20140910-10f132.html#ixzz3CxDseN67
---------------------------------

Yes Paul... No Paul... David is living in the wrong era. He'd be more fitting in the days of "Mad Dog" Morgan... David is in favour of letting everything go. No rules. He wants EVERYONE to have guns as to stop crime! Can I say it's lunacy?... The ratio of undetected petty low thieves and high up criminals in our societies is quite high: most of us. The amount of aggro could multiply at a rate of knots. Disputes would be solved — not at high noon — but on the spot with a couple of slugs. Tribunals would be very busy. the demand for lawyers and judges would quintuple. Welcome to the wild west of the USA...

As an agriculturalist David is also in favour of letting the ghastly Genetically Modified crops onto the landscape, without restriction. he is a grand poopooer of organic food. If he was a true libertarian, he would not be, as any "libertarian" would have to accept others views, not just promote his own. 

And the list of David's views should lead you, Paul, to find out that under David's "libertarian" coat, seems to lurk an ultra right-wing anarchist — which is a contradiction in terms but a fitting description. 

I could be wrong, but .... anyway see toon an articles from top...

See also: of guns, GM crops, fertilisers and "idiots" buying organic foods...

 

 

From Paul Sheehan

Shorten's response to last year's defeat has been scorched earth rejectionism to the point of even rejecting budget savings proposed by Labor when it was in government. Voters might also remember that Shorten was a key figure in the internal party coup which removed Rudd during his first term as PM.

When that did not work out with voters, and certain election defeat loomed, he switched his support from Gillard back to Rudd. And Shorten's willingness to throw people overboard is not restricted to his leaders.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/labor-shows-a-weakness-for-ratbaggery-20140914-10gsnx.html#ixzz3DLeVvuoh

This is below the belt, Paul... I have not read your entire article, but I bet that not once you mention Tony Abbott being a full blown MISTER NEGATIVE, whose party instigated attacks on Peter Slipper and Craig Thomson to derail proper government that did save the arse of this country during the GFC and beyond. 
But then when you claim that Shorten's Labor party is rejecting its own budget saving when rehashed by the Abbott regime, it's very very dis-genuine. The savings were earmarked for a specific purpose which of course Tony and his monkeys placed in a sewer drain amongst all their broken promises... Broken promises and going to war without proper understanding of the big picture is typical of an insane government. Insane is the middle name of all the Liberals (CONservatives) who support this evil regime of Abbott the Turd. 
Yes the Abbott regime is evil... and I don't believe in evil... I only believe some people are idiots — dngerous idiots...

 

Journalist Paul Sheehan has been suspended from The Sydney Morning Herald following an unsubstantiated rape story he wrote about a woman named "Louise".

The story, published on February 22 and titled "The horrifying untold story of Louise", covered claims by 'Louise' that she had been raped and beaten by Middle Eastern men.

Today SMH editor in chief Darren Goodsir announced Sheehan would be stood aside from his duties until further notice.

read more: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-04/journalist-paul-sheehan-suspended-from-smh-over-rape-article/7221800

 

Read from top.