Should 2 time Loser KIM BEAZLEY be new Labour Leader?? (1 Viewer)

[hiphophorray123]

As i said in other thread...Kim Beazely is the only person for the job.

You have all these people running around saying that we should notgo back to the past.....
They say Labor must experiment with the new generation....Hasnt that happened twice in the last year? The crean and latham experiments have been complete failures. WHats to say Rudd wont just be another victim in a years time?

Bezely is a know quantity both publically and in the party. He also has the experience as deputy PM, and the minister of over 7 differenct government departments. He won the popular vote against howard in 1998, and only lost the 2001 election on Tampa issues. He has what it takes. As a Liberal supporter i hope that labor will elect Rudd. But putting myself in the Labor shoes for a moment, i would say that Kim has the best chance.

shutup your wrong because they say so

 

[phizz]

How many recessions has Labor had in comparison to Liberal?

 

[miaomiao]

Care to expose their lies publically for us? Because obviously you are much more insightful than most people on this forum.

I had assumed that unless youd been living on another planet for the past eight years you would have already been alerted to the numerous lies told by the government about um... i dunno... our reasons for invading Iraq, the children overboard affair and the economy. My apologies for overestimating the level of your political awareness. its boring having to type pages of what people should already know by now dickhead.

 

[miaomiao]

less weed, more reading

less of you, more relevence?

 

[neo o]

I had assumed that unless youd been living on another planet for the past eight years you would have already been alerted to the numerous lies told by the government about um... i dunno... our reasons for invading Iraq, the children overboard affair and the economy. My apologies for overestimating the level of your political awareness. its boring having to type pages of what people should already know by now dickhead.

You're hot, and so with that in mind I'm going to try to be as gentle as possible, dopehead. Now I'm going to ask you three questions.

1) Specifically what LIES has the Howard Government told the public in regards to the economy that have resulted in the re-election of the Liberals. Now here's a little checklist of the major economic policies/results that the Howard government has claimed that they achieved. Please tell me whether they are lying, or telling the truth :

- Record low levels of unemployment (TRUTH/LIE)
- Lower levels of interest rates than under previous Labor governments (TRUTH/LIE)
- Superannuation reforms (TRUTH/LIE)
- Tax reforms (TRUTH/LIE)
- Budget surplus (TRUTH/LIE)

2) In regards to Iraq how can you lie about something you don't know? The Howard government acted upon intelligence that was provided to them, that they believed was accurate. I suppose if they DIDN'T act upon it, you'd claim that they were acting irresponsibly and putting Australian lives at risk? This is of course ignoring Sadaam's (and his officials) continual meetings with Al Queda representatives, the money that Sadaam paid to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers etc etc. Additionally, you seem to be operating on the logic that "If it wasn't found" it's not there at all. WHAT I CAN'T SEE ISN'T REALLY THERE!

3) A misunderstanding, a possible scandal. OMG. Remember Whitlam and Keating's piggery?

 

[ur_inner_child]

I'm a naive, uniformed labor supporter,

but someone tell Kim Beasley to SIT DOWN.

There, I answered the question, nothing more to contribute.

At least I'm honest.

 

[Lorie]

Yeah it is true that the government loses the election. But, the opposition has to hold the government accountable aswell, which in turn leads to the downfall of the government. Crean was hopeless at this which is why he left, and Latham couldn't expose Howards interest rate scares for what they were......crap. Maybe Kym can keep the government in line and expose their lies and mistakes, but he was rather slow on the children overboard which lead to his 2nd loss, so there are doubts there.

But i don't think Kym would be that bad a choice, altough i'd probably rather Rudd as leader. Either way the labor party need to back their leader and put their comments towards the government rather then themselves.

 

[Adrian.]

Really. Kim should just retire to a backbench somewhere never to return.

I think he has an important role to play on the front bench (maybe even the deputy). He is experienced and the (even uninformed) public recognise him. The new leader (hopefully Rudd) needs to state his position firmly from the start and not only attack the government (like Brogden) but come up with good policies to rival the Libs. The rest of Labor's talent pool has to get out and be seen and heard (like Costa was as Police minister).

 

[Lorie]

I think he has an important role to play on the front bench (maybe even the deputy). He is experienced and the (even uninformed) public recognise him. The new leader (hopefully Rudd) needs to state his position firmly from the start and not only attack the government (like Brogden) but come up with good policies to rival the Libs. The rest of Labor's talent pool has to get out and be seen and heard (like Costa was as Police minister).

thats true, which is why i thought it was a good move for Latham to make him defence minister.

 

[miaomiao]

You're hot, and so with that in mind I'm going to try to be as gentle as possible, dopehead. Now I'm going to ask you three questions.

1) Specifically what LIES has the Howard Government told the public in regards to the economy that have resulted in the re-election of the Liberals. Now here's a little checklist of the major economic policies/results that the Howard government has claimed that they achieved. Please tell me whether they are lying, or telling the truth :

- Record low levels of unemployment (TRUTH/LIE)
- Lower levels of interest rates than under previous Labor governments (TRUTH/LIE)
- Superannuation reforms (TRUTH/LIE)
- Tax reforms (TRUTH/LIE)
- Budget surplus (TRUTH/LIE)

2) In regards to Iraq how can you lie about something you don't know? The Howard government acted upon intelligence that was provided to them, that they believed was accurate. I suppose if they DIDN'T act upon it, you'd claim that they were acting irresponsibly and putting Australian lives at risk? This is of course ignoring Sadaam's (and his officials) continual meetings with Al Queda representatives, the money that Sadaam paid to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers etc etc. Additionally, you seem to be operating on the logic that "If it wasn't found" it's not there at all. WHAT I CAN'T SEE ISN'T REALLY THERE!

3) A misunderstanding, a possible scandal. OMG. Remember Whitlam and Keating's piggery?

1. So they claimed that they had kept interest rates down whereas labor had let them rise. This is a lie because the government has no real control over interest rates which fluctuate as a result of spatial pattern and urban dynamics- not which party is in power. If there’s an influx of people moving into the big cities then there’s more housing and interest rates are low. Its because of labors work done over a long period of time in previous governments that this is the case - nothing to do with Johnny, whose views on immigration could never support an economically beneficial spatial pattern.
And wouldn’t you prefer more spending on universities, schools and hospitals than a budget surplus? Ask yourself what a budget surplus really means! Not good economic management but rather LACK OF SPENDING! Tax reforms mean nothing if all our public services are going down the drainpipe.

2. In regards to Iraq I am of the belief that Howard did deceive us and simply hid behind the worn out excuse of “we received advice and we acted on that advice…” (Same excuse he used in Tampa affair) The UN and Hans Blix gave him advice that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction did he act on that?
Additionally you seem to operate on the logic that if it wasn’t found…. it is still out there! What I can't see and have no evidence of is really there, so forget the people, lets bomb the shit out of the place! Face it, America would have found them by now if they were there. The UN would have found them by now too.

3. Keating and Whitlam were angels sent from above compared to the racist, fear inspiring bigot we’ve got for a prime minister today.
.

 

[blackfriday]

im amused that someone says that michael costa, a man who cant manage to get a train to stop at normanhurst station for an hour every few days or so, can be considered to be part of the labor party 'talent pool'.

 

[hiphophorray123]

I'm a naive, uniformed labor supporter,

but someone tell Kim Beasley to SIT DOWN.

There, I answered the question, nothing more to contribute.

At least I'm honest.

all labor supporters are naive, remember, now do what these super-informed liberals do and shutup

 

[Raiks]

3. Keating and Whitlam were angels sent from above

And one of the reasons Labor is where they are now, because they're always looking back the lustre of old victories and past percieved glories instead of finding someone who is actually worth being Prime Minister.

 

[Raiks]

I had assumed that unless youd been living on another planet for the past eight years you would have already been alerted to the numerous lies told by the government about um... i dunno... our reasons for invading Iraq, the children overboard affair and the economy. My apologies for overestimating the level of your political awareness. its boring having to type pages of what people should already know by now dickhead.

I like the fact that people assume a Labor government wouldn't tell lies either and Liberal are just evil lying closet wrong-doers who want the country to crash and burn. No government EVER has been honest, so why would a change in government change that.

 

[Lorie]

And one of the reasons Labor is where they are now, because they're always looking back the lustre of old victories and past percieved glories instead of finding someone who is actually worth being Prime Minister.

hmmmmmmmm, thats ironic considering the campaign from Howard was all about the past record of interest rates under labor governments, so the government scared people about the past to remain in.

 

[Raiks]

hmmmmmmmm, thats ironic considering the campaign from Howard was all about the past record of interest rates under labor governments, so the government scared people about the past to remain in.

Ummm... yes but the difference is that they're looking back on the current party in power. They aren't looking back past Howard saying that because a 1950's liberal government did something, then that assures success in the future. Why look back on someone who isn't in power any more because no matter how many good things they did, it always begs the question 'then why did they lose?'.

 

[Generator]

The Coalition is looking back (or looking forward) to what we both fear and want, yet Latham's Labor was arguably looking back to a past that has now been 'discredited' as societal values have shifted. Slightly different.

 

[neo o]

1. So they claimed that they had kept interest rates down whereas labor had let them rise. This is a lie because the government has no real control over interest rates which fluctuate as a result of spatial pattern and urban dynamics- not which party is in power. If there’s an influx of people moving into the big cities then there’s more housing and interest rates are low. Its because of labors work done over a long period of time in previous governments that this is the case - nothing to do with Johnny, whose views on immigration could never support an economically beneficial spatial pattern.{/QUOTE]

I'm going to assume that you conceed that you were wrong when you said that Howard lied economically, since you havent said anything to the contrary.

Spatial patterns? wewt? lol?

Interest rates are determined by inflation, which is partially influenced by government spending. Even though the RBA sets interest rates they can raise interest rates in response to large amounts of spending by governments which will cause inflation (you suggest excess spending in the next quote incidentally). Labor's labour market reforms and crazy policies would have resulted in an increase in spending and thus inflation and thus interest rates. But this is all academic since all the Liberal advertisements did was compare the interest rates under past Labor governments to the interest rates under the Liberal government.

And wouldn’t you prefer more spending on universities, schools and hospitals than a budget surplus? Ask yourself what a budget surplus really means! Not good economic management but rather LACK OF SPENDING! Tax reforms mean nothing if all our public services are going down the drainpipe.

20%+ inflation (Whitlam era) is not my bag, baby.

In regards to Iraq I am of the belief that Howard did deceive us and simply hid behind the worn out excuse of “we received advice and we acted on that advice…” (Same excuse he used in Tampa affair) The UN and Hans Blix gave him advice that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction did he act on that?

The UN? No, two security council members chose to act in their own financial interest however. Hans Blix believed Sadaam destroyed them, in this case we have a choice. People make choices all the time. And as I pointed out before, if they were WMD in Iraq i'm sure you'd happily sledge Howard for acting irresponsibly by not taking action.

Additionally you seem to operate on the logic that if it wasn’t found…. it is still out there!

I never said it was there, I never said it wasn't there though.

Face it, America would have found them by now if they were there. The UN would have found them by now too.

Firstly, since you haven't said anything about paid suicide bombers, acts of violence and racial hatred against Kurds, continual support of terrorist groups etc I assume that you conceed those points.

Actually heaps of missile shells were found being sent out of Iraq as scrap, some sarin was found as well.

3. Keating and Whitlam were angels sent from above compared to the racist, fear inspiring bigot we’ve got for a prime minister today.

Under the Whitlam government we had improper appointments (Junie Morosi etc), the Loans Scandal, horribly high inflation, closures of Australian businesses since he revoked protection suddenly and without notice and Keating gave us the piggery scandal. Oh and Keating thought Australia was, and i quote, the "arse end of the world", unlike Howard, who loves our country, has a deep seated sense of patriotism and isn't an arrogant prat who thinks he's superior to the people who gave him power in the first place.

Please feel free to explain to me how you've come to the conclusion that Howard is a "racist, fear inspiring bigot".

 

[Lhyviathan]

Mr Beazley is a road scholar

Its RHODES Scholar... it's a scholarship awarded to the academically and athletically gifted (though I've no idea what sport Mr Beasley gained his scholarship for...)

Anyway, out of the 3 potential/real/likely candidates...

Gillard won't make it, because politics is harsh on women (the 'glass ceiling' is still very much in place here), irrespective of their credentials.

I reckon Rudd would be a good leader... but I think he should bide his time a little more.

That leaves Beasley... who is at least quite competent, and should (barring a trademark Labor collapses) be able to steady the ship... at least for a little while.

 

[Xayma]

I never said it was there, I never said it wasn't there though.



Firstly, since you haven't said anything about paid suicide bombers, acts of violence and racial hatred against Kurds, continual support of terrorist groups etc I assume that you conceed those points.

Actually heaps of missile shells were found being sent out of Iraq as scrap, some sarin was found as well.

Don't forget that trying to find things in a sandy desert, is extremly difficult, and things can be buried in ever shifting dunes to hide things, some examples of these are Migs alot bigger then most WMD's or other things might be. http://www.snopes.com/photos/military/sandplanes.asp

Although it isn't proof of WMD's and the search is off, that doesn't mean they don't exist as well.