Broken promises

Remove this Banner Ad

Lester Burnham said:
How are the comments similar? A comment - that Abbotts's quote was cut off - is true. People saying - the 2nd half of Gillard's Sunrise comment was 'but I am determined to put a price on Carbon' - is false.
Click to expand...
Here we go again... And why is that Lester? Because you think that the Channel 10 program she was on is Sunrise? And so the gap between her saying she wanted a price on carbon was a lot further than the next sentence and her phrasing in that instance was that she intended to "tackle the challenge of climate change" and lead "our national debate to reach a consensus about putting a cap on carbon pollution".

Thanks for bringing the partisanship back. I look forward to your response.
 
telsor said:
I don't actually count that as a lie, because after changing his view/policy, he went to an election stating what the new policy was before implementing it.
Click to expand...
This is true. And Beazley received more than 50% of the vote, Howard less than 50%, effectively meaning he didn't have a mandate and more people voted AGAINST the GST than for it, yet he ignored the people's wishes.
 
Ratts of Tobruk said:
Here we go again... And why is that Lester? Because you think that the Channel 10 program she was on is Sunrise? And so the gap between her saying she wanted a price on carbon was a lot further than the next sentence and her phrasing in that instance was that she intended to "tackle the challenge of climate change" and lead "our national debate to reach a consensus about putting a cap on carbon pollution".

Thanks for bringing the partisanship back. I look forward to your response.
Click to expand...

Gillard's words were "There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead". She was very emphatic. But as soon as she got into government she did introduce a carbon tax.

Nowhere in that Sunrise interview did she say "but I am determined to put a price on Carbon".

So your point about bias is false. You are the one showing your usual bias by ignoring the plain facts.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

telsor said:
John Curtin (ALP), 1939...
"This country shall remain forever the home of the descendants of those people who came here in peace in order to establish in the South Seas an outpost of the British race."

Has the ALP changed that policy? Did they lie to do so? After all, he said 'forever'.
Click to expand...
It still is the home of the descendants of those people who came here in peace. That policy has never changed.

Curtin never used the word "exclusively", even though you're clearly trying to put that word in to his mouth
 
telsor said:
Can a politican never change their mind, or a party it's policies?

I say, once they've gone to an election with the new policy, previous contradictory promises are invalid.


Or do you think both Libs and ALP are still guilty of any promises they made with respect to the white Australia Policy, because back in the day, they both undoubtedly made comments in support?
Click to expand...

I agree with this but that does not alter the fact that Howard told a great big fat lie same as our first female PM & our current PM although Abbott has taken lying to another level.
 
The weird thing is that Abbott said that the night before the election. He was always going to win that election and he did not even need to say it. In fact given how the polls went Abbott could have afforded being a lot more honest than he was. There was no need to lie through his teeth.
 
For those of you playing along at home. Submarines construction in SA will be no doubt soon be added to the ever growing list.
B23WOyXCEAAYar7.jpg
 
Gough said:
For those of you playing along at home. Submarines construction in SA will be no doubt soon be added to the ever growing list.
Click to expand...

Not so sure about that...

The new boss of the ASC came out the other day and said they could built the subs for $20Billion, to which Corman responded that the government hadn't even worked out the specs yet, so how could ASC provide a price? (working from memory here, but there was an article in the age about this a few days back)

If the Government hasn't got the specs yet, then they have to do that, and provide any prospective tenders a reasonable time to design such a boat (in rough terms at least), enter a bid (going overseas without giving ASC a chance to bid would be an even bigger PR issue after all) and have that assessed. They'd be pushing it to do all that within the the term of this government.


Having said that, the Japanese Soryu class subs do look pretty good, and do suit our needs (size, range), and as an 'off the shelf' buy on an existing production line, would be hard to beat for price (R&D, construction facilities already done/paid for).

That said, I would be willing to pay *some* premium to have the capacity to build/maintain/refit available locally, especially as with 10-12 boats, you'd probably be looking to put the first in for a refit/upgrade as soon as the last was finished (perhaps build Soryu's under licence?)

I do wonder about the wisdom of having that many though considering we apparently have a massive problem finding crews for the 6 we have right now.
 
Gough said:
For those of you playing along at home.
Click to expand...
It's very telling that the table-thumpers who screamed "Ju-Liar!!!!" the loudest seem to be very silent on Tones' list of untruths.

Even more amusing when they try and justify it.
 
Xsess said:
“No carbon tax in a government I lead”
“No cuts to the ABC or SBS” - both broken promises and lies.
Click to expand...
Abbott also said "there will be no carbon price/tax under the government he leads"

He admitted to obama, that the fuel excise is a carbon price/tax

Another broken promise and lie by Abbott
 
Mofra said:
It's very telling that the table-thumpers who screamed "Ju-Liar!!!!" the loudest seem to be very silent on Tones' list of untruths.

Even more amusing when they try and justify it.
Click to expand...
The most common defense of this government usually begins with "But Labor", and that's getting pretty tired.
 
Lester Burnham said:
Gillard's words were "There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead". She was very emphatic. But as soon as she got into government she did introduce a carbon tax.

Nowhere in that Sunrise interview did she say "but I am determined to put a price on Carbon".

So your point about bias is false. You are the one showing your usual bias by ignoring the plain facts.
Click to expand...
You're incorrect. You even get the quote wrong from the Channel 10 interview. If what you say is a "plain fact" it should be easy to prove. As I stated clearly, even in the Channel 10 interview she said she wanted to cap carbon. You think you can claim it otherwise just because Channel 7 pulled the footage offline? I dare say making up facts to support your position may be a sign of bias.
RUNVS said:
The weird thing is that Abbott said that the night before the election. He was always going to win that election and he did not even need to say it. In fact given how the polls went Abbott could have afforded being a lot more honest than he was. There was no need to lie through his teeth.
Click to expand...
No one can be sure the night before an election. A lot of swing voters didn't like Labor but hadn't warmed to Abbott. Going on SBS where a lot of viewers only get their news from that source, and saying that SBS and health and education wouldn't be cut would have persuaded a lot of people that the risk of voting our Labor was much lower than they thought.
telsor said:
That said, I would be willing to pay *some* premium to have the capacity to build/maintain/refit available locally, especially as with 10-12 boats, you'd probably be looking to put the first in for a refit/upgrade as soon as the last was finished (perhaps build Soryu's under licence?)
Click to expand...
This is a dumb question I could probably look up, but y'know Friday night 'n that: When they compare costings, presumably they consider that the wages they pay Australian workers will come back to them at about 25%, right? (I've read research saying even the richest Australians only pay on average 20-25% income tax, and with GST maybe 25% is about right)
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

sherb said:
If Howard wasn't lying in 95, the GST would not have become part of Coalition policy.

All you are doing is fudging the criteria so that in your mind Howard didn't lie and Gillard did.

Thought you were better than that.
Click to expand...
Howard didn't lie about a GST. He changed his mind and had the balls to take it to an election. If anyone is telling a lie, it is those who don't mention this fact when they mention Howard and no GST.
 
Lebbo73 said:
Howard didn't lie about a GST. He changed his mind and had the balls to take it to an election. If anyone is telling a lie, it is those who don't mention this fact when they mention Howard and no GST.
Click to expand...
He said it would never be part of Coalition policy.

How did he take it to an election if it wasn't part of Coalition policy?
 
Lebbo73 said:
Howard didn't lie about a GST. He changed his mind and had the balls to take it to an election. If anyone is telling a lie, it is those who don't mention this fact when they mention Howard and no GST.
Click to expand...
Fair comment except for the 'if anyone is telling a lie' bit (you'd have to have come down in the last shower to think Abbott didn't lie to SBS News - Turnbull admitted Abbott's comments contradicted both him and Hockey).

Howard also introduced the idea of core and non-core promises, but Keating also didn't introduce his electoral commitments. They all do it to an extent, as tough decisions have to be made or delayed, but Abbott lied about multiple key areas of policy while also holding back any explanation for how he was going to pay for the promises he made. His deceit is incomparable.
 
Lebbo73 said:
Howard didn't lie about a GST. He changed his mind and had the balls to take it to an election. If anyone is telling a lie, it is those who don't mention this fact when they mention Howard and no GST.
Click to expand...
Howard did lie
First one - The GST will never ever be a part of the liberal party policy

so if he changed his mind on the GST, means it was always in the liberal party policy


2nd Lie

Howard said he would accept the public vote he didn't , after losing the 2pp vote , Howard negotiate the GST with the democrats
 
Lebbo73 said:
He changed his mind and took it to an election to give the public a chance to say no. Get over it!
Click to expand...
Howard said the GST would never be part of Coalition policy.

Subsequently Howard made the GST part of Coalition policy.

Is it too difficult for you to understand?
 
poller said:
Howard did lie
First one - The GST will never ever be a part of the liberal party policy

so if he changed his mind on the GST, means it was always in the liberal party policy


2nd Lie

Howard said he would accept the public vote he didn't , after losing the 2pp vote , Howard negotiate the GST with the democrats
Click to expand...
How many seats did The Liberal Party win at the 1998 election? More than 75. They won the election and had a mandate. Labor wanted a GST. Does it really matter then?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top