2007 Federal Election - Coalition or Labor/Howard or Rudd? (11 Viewers)

[Generator]

Under Howard, we're more inclined to keep a larger involvement there for longer.

I'm inclined to agree.

Necessary evil? Go on.. What's the justification for it then?

Poorly phrased - what I should have said was 'taking our current and continued involvement in Iraq as a given and necessay evil.' I wasn't trying to justify the war, rather I was trying to say that given the circumstances (right or wrong, and I'm inclined to say wrong), I believe that the Australian Government still has a responsibility to take a reasonably active role in strengthening the Iraqi government and its armed forces. Much of this can be done without the use of combat troops and there's a need for greater interaction with other states within the region (no matter how antagonistic they may be), but given our involvement in the invasion I think that the Australian Government should maintain an active assistance presence in Iraq so long as it is requested by the Iraqis.

 

[89chris]

Ultimately, all of you students will have to make a choice at the next election.

You can vote for:

• Low unemployment providing students with jobs V high unemployment due to union domination of the the workforce

• High wages V lower wages

• Lower taxes V higher taxes

• Stability and prosperity V inexperience

• A strong leadership team V 70% of front bench- union officials

If you can see Howards proven record and the prosperity that is still to come, than vote for the coalition.

 

[bazookajoe]

If you can see Howards proven record

I liked this part the best

 

[Triangulum]

Do you mean the long pause and 'you know you want me' look before he started?

No, it was right in the middle of the debate. His face went crazy for a couple of seconds. I'll see if I can find the video on the ABC site.

 

[volition]

rather I was trying to say that given the circumstances (right or wrong, and I'm inclined to say wrong), I believe that the Australian Government still has a responsibility to take a reasonably active role in strengthening the Iraqi government and its armed forces.

If it was the wrong decision to go into Iraq in the first place, then what's changed that makes it ok to stay there?

I think that the Australian Government should maintain an active assistance presence in Iraq so long as it is requested by the Iraqis.

There's no problem with individuals voluntarily funding an 'active assistance' where the Iraqis desire it. There is a problem when the will of the majority is imposed on the minority.

 

[Triangulum]

And I can't find the video, so instead a poll from the marginal Liberal-held electorate of Kingston in SA: according to the Advertiser, it's 56-44 Labor's way from a 45-34 primary. That's a really nasty primary for the Liberals, and I'd be interested to know if there are any local factors causing it.

 

[iEdd]

I liked this part the best

If you can see Howards proven record

Haha yeah. The rest of the post was reasonably funny, but that last part really topped it off.

 

[Rafy]

Newspoll 58/42 TPP in Labor's favour.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22631396-601,00.html

 

[eppingMCE]

Gooo Johny, the Best PM ever.... the IR reforms is a good thing, it improves the economy, whats the point of getting a few extra bucks a week when our economy slumps thus our currency goes down... most of our products are from overseas and if our dollar goes down, prices goes up thus those extra bucks means nothing.... howard is the one thats thinking about the future.... his the only primeminister with the guts to say whats benifical to the economy instead of rudd, only doing what ever to please us, despite the consequences.

 

[Triangulum]

Newspoll 58/42 TPP in Labor's favour.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22631396-601,00.html

So much for the narrowing. (Not to jump to conclusions based on one poll, but that's a pretty appalling figure whatever way you look at it.)

ALP has a new ad on climate change, showing Rudd getting his Al Gore on. Standing in front of a screen and everything! Not on YouTube for some reason, but it's on the front page of Kevin07 if anyone's interested.

 

[Silver Persian]

Newspoll 58/42 TPP in Labor's favour.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22631396-601,00.html

I wonder if the polls being erratic is the result of swinging voters, unrepresentative samples, poor methodology...?

 

[Josie]

Ultimately, all of you students will have to make a choice at the next election.

You can vote for:

• Low unemployment providing students with jobs V high unemployment due to union domination of the the workforce

• High wages V lower wages

• Lower taxes V higher taxes

• Stability and prosperity V inexperience

• A strong leadership team V 70% of front bench- union officials

If you can see Howards proven record and the prosperity that is still to come, than vote for the coalition.

Good to see you doing your extensive policy research based on Liberal party advertisements

 

[LCollins]

Gooo Johny, the Best PM ever.... the IR reforms is a good thing

What's so good about doing work training without getting paid for it, despite it being illegal? Whats so good about being sacked for as little reason as your boss didn't like you? What's so good about being deprived of the UN recognised right to have a union represent you?

WE HAD A GOOD ECONOMY BEFORE THE IR LAWS CAME IN. What happens when we have the INEVITABLE economic downturn. Then we'll certainly see the most unfair of unfair dismissals, and we'd have given our rights away for the not-so-good economy.

Why are people making the big fuss about unions? Its nothing but one another of John Howards scare campaigns. This might be news to some people - but its in the union's BEST INTEREST to have business up and running (more business = more employees). Sure there was the occasional stupid strike back of ages ago, but thanks to the unions we have a 2 day weekend and all the other award conditions. Note that once WorkChoices came in, it is these that were first to go, and far from being under fair conditions.

 

[Generator]

If it was the wrong decision to go into Iraq in the first place, then what's changed that makes it ok to stay there?

To me it's a case of dealing with the situation in Iraq as it exists given that we are partly at fault for said situation. It's also a case of dealing with the past and its consequences with the benefit of hindsight - though I'm now inclined to say that the invasion was wrong (the original, public basis for the invasion was shown to be false and has since been ignored), at the time I was on the fence given that I couldn't decide between a) the possible carnage (physical and political) of an invasion in a senstive area and b) the continuation of a corrupt and murderous regime that thumbed its nose at the world and did all that it could to subvert the sanctions system that was designed to help those Iraqis living in poverty.

Long sentence. My apologies.

My basic and easily deconstructed point is that given the Government's actions it is now incumbent upon the Government to deal with the consequences and to ensure that in dealing with the consequences the Government selects a path that a) is in Australia's best interests and b) does all that it can to address the situation at hand in a manner that is deemed appropriate by the relevant stakeholders.

There's no problem with individuals voluntarily funding an 'active assistance' where the Iraqis desire it. There is a problem when the will of the majority is imposed on the minority.

Though its clear that you're keen to renew the debate about the nature and extent of a government's 'authority', I'd make a poor sparring partner.

 

[volition]

My basic and easily deconstructed point is that given the Government's actions it is now incumbent upon the Government to deal with the consequences and to ensure that in dealing with the consequences the Government selects a path that a) is in Australia's best interests and b) does all that it can to address the situation at hand in a manner that is deemed appropriate by the relevant stakeholders.

Ok well if I understand correctly, this is essentially saying: "We should stay there because its our fault and now we have to fix it".

When we make statements like this I really wonder whether our influence is even positive there. Having an overt military presence pushes the resistance underground into their guerilla tactics of just randomly blowing stuff up. I doubt you can bring democracy to a country by pointing guns at people's heads. Oh yeah, and violence begets violence, always has and always will it seems.

As for humanitarian efforts, I really question why it needs to be a military force there in that case. Why not just have aid/charity workers? If its safety thats the concern, then they shouldn't be there anyway! Why does this need a govt solution?

I think the best thing for Iraq would be to just split into different areas, rather than try to create some sort of forced association between the different factions and pretending that "democracy will fix all". If this means splitting Iraq into many different countries, then so be it. The important thing is that nobody lords it over other people.

Though its clear that you're keen to renew the debate about the nature and extent of a government's 'authority', I'd make a poor sparring partner.

It's hard for me to really attack our military occupation of Iraq without going to the 'root of the problem' so to speak.

To put it as simply as I can, if its ok for the govt to go and invade another country, then its equally as ok for individual people to go over to Iraq with their guns and tanks and claim to be "peacekeepers"/whatever. When they start working for the govt what magical transformation does a person undergo that somehow changes their moral nature?

 

[volition]

war in iraq is like so old.

move on guyz.

We're still in Iraq though aren't we?

 

[LCollins]

To put it as simply as I can, if its ok for the govt to go and invade another country, then its equally as ok for individual people to go over to Iraq with their guns and tanks and claim to be "peacekeepers"/whatever. When they start working for the govt what magical transformation does a person undergo that somehow changes their moral nature?

Now I'm not entirely sure whether your talking about private contractors working in Iraq, or a privatised army invading another country, but both present greater problems to a country than a government doing the dirty work. The thing about privatised armies is that they do not have their own justice system (as do government armies) which holds the army themselves accountable for their actions, which is vital due to the nature of armies (as armies typically operate in regions without law and order). This allows mercenaries to basically get away with anything without being held accountable, eg. Blackwater, as the Iraq is far from being under the control of law and order.

 

[Iron]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/10/23/2067711.htm

Explosive $4bn Pensioner, carers plan.
Shoring up the conservative grey vote
Havent heard Labor say much about the elderly - the focus has been the future. Could be a good wedge/chink he's found?

Surely the parties cant keep up these lavish promises

 

[doofyduck01]

Well no matter who gets into parliment they will most likely back flip on their promises as usual. And anyways, it seems like voting becomes a bit useless when they don't listen to the majority of the public, unless perhaps there's a threat of coup.... *hmmmm*....but yes, it seems we're not as extreme as the Americans killing off presidents that appear to be bringing in reforms beneficial to the people, and major public figures that bring about major changes. In comparison, we just dismiss them.

Touche mister salesman.

 

[Calculon]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/10/23/2067711.htm

Explosive $4bn Pensioner, carers plan.
Shoring up the conservative grey vote
Havent heard Labor say much about the elderly - the focus has been the future. Could be a good wedge/chink he's found?

Surely the parties cant keep up these lavish promises

I love how the SMH reports Rudd's $77m for childcare above Howard's $4b for pensioners.