Yes, an uninspiring debate.

True Tony did not um ar as much as I think he is aware of doing that and spoke more slowly so as to avoid the ums and arrrs.

I think Julie made a mistake on the climate change with a focus group which seems to be just putting it in the too hard basket for the time being.

Also she didn't do too well on the issue of Kevin Rudd.



Immigration numbers - well I think she embarrassed Abbott on that one.



I nearly fell out of my chair when Abbott said his pledge was "to stop the new taxes" when he proposes to tax the business community to pay for parental leave for people who earn up to 150 thousand dollars, costs which business will pass on to pensioners.



Do people who earn $150,000 really need taxpayers money to stay home ?



I bet you did fall out of your chair - one you have sat in too long on the age pension and lost touch with the wages and salaries of the working families who are the favourites of New Labor - they use the $150,000 as a cut off for low paid families and at the same time think age pensioners do not deserve more.



That makes me very annoyed at the double standards of Labor who once were for the working man, the battler, and the age pensioner and most of us have been all 3 at one time and thought to be looked after when we reached 65 with a decent pension.



And now that it has been leaked that the very left wing Miss Julia Gillard didn't think we deserved a rise at all and maybe that is why the marrieds ended up with a bone of $5 extra on the supplement and the singles only got $30 after waiting so long for a catch up which meant it was eaten up before it arrived but Julia seemingly thinks we don't vote Labor so -



[b]Let us not vote Labor (or Green)



but for the Coalition



where we got at least the $100 a year Utilities Allowance, the GST Allowance, The Internet Allowance and the upping of the Utilities to $500 a year from $100



- and were lucky because it was rumoured and Jenny Macklin denied it so true that Labor wanted to knock the $500 on the head but Rudd said no - - now I blamed him secretly but we know know it was Julia Gillard - makes a kind of sense that as she hasn't had a family so never had to manage the bills kids add to - makes a difference and she looks forward to $2008 a week to live on when 65 -nice [/b]



Blimey call someone Fwed has just fallen off his chair again ...........at the thought of not voting for his footy - oops - polly team.

They both seem to be running in circles--Tony carrying on like he thinks he is some super star running around and waving his arms he really sickens me and he has NO policies as yet--or how he is going to find the money to do what he has stated



Here is a link to the page where you can download 12 signed written policies by Tony Abbott is you are game to actually do so.



[url=http://www.liberal.org.au/?utm_medium=email&utm;_source=SwordEmailer&utm;_content=440261119&utm;_campaign=OurActionContract&utm;_term=ContractforrealactionforAustralia]Contract-for-real-action-for-Australia-instead-of-all-talk-and-signed-off-12-policies-included[/url]



Abbott was challenged to sign them as you all well know as he sometimes ran off at the mouth - but clarified it on becoming Leader of the Opposition that if he signed a written promise of a policy we could take it to the Bank.



I just wish we had had same from Rudd in 2007 and then could have had a better 3 years and would not be so many disillusioned with the broken promises.



Mind you Labor voters can be forgiven as no one could know just how badly the Rudd/Gillard team would muck up this time around - beat Gough Whitlam's government which ended up being sacked for its incompetence.



Bet Fwed won't though - might upset his one eyed view of life under Labor and think maybe better change his mind and vote for a change for the better instead of 3 more years of broken promise lies and myths and of course prices hikes but very little rise in the pension because Miss Julia Gillard thinks age pensioners dont vote Labor.



Maybe because Howard treated us really well and even Ken Henry said so in his report.The vision for a simpler, fairer, and more productive tax system is best understood by the trade-offs.

I couldn't give a scoop of donkey droppings what any of them did in the past , I wan't to know what they plan to do in the future why in hell you are all digging up dirt amazes me why aren;t you more worried about the here and now and whats to come ???????????



I am worried and that is why I am not voting Labor ever as cant trust them at all these days - was not always like that but they changed back in the 80's Under Hawke and got in bed with big business and loved those big donations for holding back workers wages under The Accord whilst boosting productivity and profits for businesses. Who later kicked them in the teeth - and Unions too - by going off shore for even bigger profits using cheap labour in third world countries and then bringing back the products for us to buy at very close to the prices if still made right here - bigger profits for them that way and less choice for us of a inferior made product and the loss of manufacturing jobs.



This lot make previous Labor government look like a lot better than they were in comparison but no governments since and in this respect - I disliked John Howard too - for not sticking up for Australia and its people over big profits for business but at least he did try to limit the donation reliance of both parties by making the taxpayer fund the elections. Beaten by the faceless men of both major parties Labor and Liberal behind the scenes who want these donations for their war chests to win governments and waste on ads that bore us to death after one week.



Also Hawke and Keating were free traders cooperating in lowering tariffs which I always thought was a huge mistake as it gave us a disadvantage for bigger populated countries like China, lost us manufacturing jobs and superior Aussie made goods whilst the other countries actually didn't have the level playing field at all and subsidize their agricultural industry and ours struggles.



Over the last years also Dairy is in a parlous state where big companies are sending the Dairy farmer to the wall paying him 30c a litre when it costs him 38c a litre to produce and it is then being sold to us at what $2.30 a litre. Where is any intervention to help them?



Over the last 3 years whilst Labor has twittered on about how they saved us from the GFC and Global warming whilst also ignoring our dairy and other farms being sold off to overseas governments and our food security is at risk - and who is the only party who has raised this issue? Liberals that is who. Bill Heffenon.



Unless we get them back into government - cant see any one of Gillard's lot paying attention to this as she seemingly sent her body guard to the National Security Committee and he is not elected!



Same as Rudd - both think their politics and their career more important than our security. This is serious stuff and as an ex soldier myself I worry about anything that will affect Australia's ability to feed itself - as grew up with the blockade of England as a child and we would have starved without the convoys from the Americans where many lost their lives to get them through and the women working on the land to try and feed the population whilst being stocks being lost to bombing etc. And yet more and more cheap chinese food is coming in putting our farms at risk and shortage of water doest help and Rudd has had 3 years to do as promised with the Murray/Darling - nothing to date another missing in action promise.



So yes I am worried and worried because Labor ignored the married pensioner when being so bloody contemptuous with a $30 rise for only singles and now seem to think it was enough when it didn't even catch up with the rises in electricity and food.



Now having heard that Gillard thought we should not have any rise - as it could not be afforded - I suspect if she does win government she will do as Henry said and take all of us down to one level the Dole.



After all remember Labor thought the intervention in the NT was "awful" of Howard but then went on with it anyway and went farther by quarantining 50% of problem families welfare with store vouchers and have extended this to white problem welfare families too.



So no worries from them about self esteem or dignity when it comes to those who they think of as unproductive and we are unfortunately lumped in with this group who are young enough to work, and whom many never have, whilst all of us worked hard and paid our income taxes and built the country up and now getting kicked in the teeth for being too old to work?



No noblesse oblige from lefties.

Yesterday Miranda Devine wrote in the Sydney Morning Herald an interesting article about what it would be like under the Greens. If Labor wins, the Greens want:



[i]mandated zero net greenhouse gas emissions, the effective end of coal-fired power generation, phasing out of coal exports, a ban on new coalmines or power stations, removal of Genetically modified crops, and active discouragement of cars. They want a ban on the exploration, mining and export of uranium, and closure of the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor, which produces medical isotopes used for cancer treatment. They want to restrict funding of private schools. They want to abolish mandatory detention of asylum seekers, and to expand the definition of refugee to include ''environmental'' or ''sexuality'' refugees. They want to legislate for same-sex marriage, tinker with age of consent laws, establish ''intersex'' as a legal gender, fund gender reassignment, require government to consult lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or intersex people on policy, and provide easier access to abortion. On drugs, they are harm minimisation all the way, with more needle exchange programs and injecting rooms. And be prepared for a barrage of nanny-statism, starting with a ban on junk food advertising.



The Greens' published policies are carefully couched in escape clauses, to avoid the scare campaigns of past elections, when their extreme social agenda cost them votes. But the effect will be the same. And of course, their big-ticket policy, the one with the most nation-changing consequences, is an ETS or carbon tax, with householders paying the price in soaring energy costs. [/i]



I can't understand why the Opposition isn't warning the electorate that this is a likely scenario if the Greens gain more power in the upcoming election. They are not worried about energy costs and they want asylum seekers processed on the mainland with direct access to Centrelink. I hope Tony Abbott will talk more about this in the coming weeks.

Tony Abbott has been pushing for another debate with Julia and now that she's finally agreed, he says he has another commitment - the Liberal Party's campaign lunch.



''If he's prepared to debate on the economy … then it's on,'' Ms Gillard said in an interview on Today Tonight. ''I would be happy to be in it. I want it to be about the economy. That is in the centre of this campaign.''



Should Tony change his plans?

Tony and Julia are both politicians...... need we say more? They each want a debate ONLY IF IT SUITS THEM. Julia kept refusing Tony's request for further debates so why should he agree to one now, just because it suits her?. In addition, she will only debate him on the economy - obviously she thinks this the best subject to score some points.

Most seem to agree that further debates would better allow us to see their true colours, but any debate must be "fair dinkum"...... no rules, exclusions or limitations. I would like to see them both in a "free-for-all" with gloves off and see who really is the better leader. My guess is that BOTH would excel at disappointing us.

Are you forgetting Tony and Rudd decided on three debates,when Gillard kicked Rudd out she only wanted one debate,that is when she was up in the polls,now she has slipped down she has decided to want another one to suit her. this is a set up

Gillard will now say that Tony is scared to have another debate ,and you lot of you will say how terrible, Tony won't give Gillard another debate





jessej

Outgoing federal Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner says he doesn't care that he's been fingered as the source of leaks against Prime Minister Julia Gillard. But he has refused to confirm or deny if the suggestion is true.

In the company of his daughter Tony Abbott couldn't resist a 'one of the boys' stupid comment about women.



''Are you suggesting to me that when it comes from Julia, no doesn't mean no?'' he replied when asked about her stance on another TV debate.



Female reporters blinked but he kept going.



''She's surely not trying to say to us that 'no doesn't mean no'.''

In the company of his daughter Tony Abbott couldn't resist a 'one of the boys' stupid comment about women.



''Are you suggesting to me that when it comes from Julia, no doesn't mean no?'' he replied when asked about her stance on another TV debate.



Female reporters blinked but he kept going.



''She's surely not trying to say to us that 'no doesn't mean no'.''

It merely proves to me what I've been saying for a long time....

Many of our so called journalists are vacuous, puerile and shallow...and have no idea of real reporting or investigative journalism.

The trash they peddle is becoming worse by the day.

I wonder if any of our [i]intelligent elite[/i] can explain to me how a phrase of the English language can be the property of a particular group.



Truly pathetic, and for the media to be running with this as a story at any time, let alone in the midst of an election campaign is moronic to say the least.

God forbid ANY of us should use the words or expression that rape crisis organisations adopt as their catch-cry.



NO means NO -- there now I can be labelled insensitive to women who have been or are about to be raped -- What a crock of bullshit!.



As an aside, have you ever noticed how the women spokes-persons from such organisations are the most unfeminine unattractive people that would have to pay money in any attempt to be noticed by the opposite sex?

I can just imagine the cries of indignation from the conservatives

if it had been a laborite who said what Tony said.

So Tony had the sex change and lost his manhood when his bluff

was called to debate the economy.

If that idiot wins the election with votes from unthinking people

you can look forward to,"If he isn't lying" the dismantling of projects

that are vital to Australia's future. eg. broadband. seth.

It's the sort of comment I'd expect from one of the boys on 'The Footy Show', not from a future Prime Minister. He should know better.

But also what we have come to expect from Tony "foot in mouth" again...:)

The Liberal Party has to be throwing their hands in the air surely.

.

I honestly do not think Julia or Tony appear to give a fig

about Senior people though to be honest. To whom do I give my vote?

I have no idea at the moment.....but not Tony.

.

I worked for both the City of Springvale and City of Berwick and

crossed off enough names on voting days and watched the Scrutineers faces

at all the Donkey Votes and thought "what idiots to waste their vote"

but I might be one of those this time.

All the best

Phyl.