Half Term Tony. Is it a possibility?

[romeoh]

I wonder how many people up in arms about today's comment are the same people who constantly point to Eric Abetz's family history.

Never heard anything about his family history so it can't have happened too often.

 

[romeoh]

I wouldn't mind an answer. After all the media outrage, all the s**t PR over using any analogy to the Nazi regime during garbage.....sorry question time (by any party) why would he choose to use Goebels!!??

It's just plain ******* stupidity and its a massive worry on his judgement. He could have expressed it in so many other ways.

I think its not just about poor judgment-he seriously is living in the 50's and he seems to have some 'Jewish' kind of issues-that is how certain oldies in the 50s' might have spoken. That is how outmoded he is in his thinking. He genuinely doesn't get its offensive.
Promoted above his capabilities and dreadful results as a consequence.

 

[John]

Promoted above his capabilities and dreadful results as a consequence.

This sums it up for me.

 

[kfc1]

As a swinging voter, would you ever vote Greens?

I have in both houses

 

[madmug]

I think its not just about poor judgment-he seriously is living in the 50's and he seems to have some 'Jewish' kind of issues-that is how certain oldies in the 50s' might have spoken. That is how outmoded he is in his thinking. He genuinely doesn't get its offensive.
Promoted above his capabilities and dreadful results as a consequence.

He's a hard right Catholic nutter. Its easy to see where he gets the nazi thing from. He is out of control. I mean being the PM & Parliaments biggest troll as well, is just an embarrassment to our Parliament. The stupid witch has allowed this behavior to continue, she is both a hag & a disgrace to the Parliament.

 

[Bosun]

I think its not just about poor judgment-he seriously is living in the 50's and he seems to have some 'Jewish' kind of issues-that is how certain oldies in the 50s' might have spoken. That is how outmoded he is in his thinking. He genuinely doesn't get its offensive.
Promoted above his capabilities and dreadful results as a consequence.

Ill be honest, I thought he would be so much better than he is, I did think naively behind his negative media profile there was a competetant leader, at least compared to Gillard and and Rudd. The simple fact he keeps throwing up these statements, when he knows (I hope) they are media gold nuggets just beggars belief.

I look at the politcal landscape and think to the old adage, the citizens actually do deserve better, we dont deserve the government that we are presented with (neither the opposition). We need a proper government.

 

[romeoh]

Ill be honest, I thought he would be so much better than he is, I did think naively behind his negative media profile there was a competetant leader, at least compared to Gillard and and Rudd. The simple fact he keeps throwing up these statements, when he knows (I hope) they are media gold nuggets just beggars belief.

I look at the politcal landscape and think to the old adage, the citizens actually do deserve better, we dont deserve the government that we are presented with (neither the opposition). We need a proper government.

Yep agree-its a really ordinary landscape re politics. Its a bit sobering-you'd like pollies you can admire, or at least like and respect. ( am talking about all sides of the spectrum-not picking sides)

 

[Norwegian Blue]

The stupid witch has allowed this behavior to continue, she is both a hag & a disgrace to the Parliament.

Let me guess, you were one of those who used to scream about Tony's misogyny?

 

[madmug]

Ill be honest, I thought he would be so much better than he is, I did think naively behind his negative media profile there was a competetant leader, at least compared to Gillard and and Rudd. The simple fact he keeps throwing up these statements, when he knows (I hope) they are media gold nuggets just beggars belief.

I look at the politcal landscape and think to the old adage, the citizens actually do deserve better, we dont deserve the government that we are presented with (neither the opposition). We need a proper government.

I've said it before, its the pathetic nature of our current selfish party politics that allows the sort of rubbish that passes as political leadership in both parties.

The Abbott & Bronwyn Bishop double will IMO, go down as the worst duo EVER to have run the nations house of representatives. He is a nutcase & she has politicised the speakers chair beyond belief.

 

[madmug]

Let me guess, you were one of those who used to scream about Tony's misogyny?

Then you would be wrong.

I never liked his nasty political manner, & I certainly said so. It was that & his lies & vindictive nasty nature that I disliked then, & now. Now he has power we can all see his incompetent side as well, plain as day. We can also see how he has split his own side of politics because of his mental instability.

Malcolm Fraser was completely right with his assessment of Abbott. He is dangerous.

 

[Norwegian Blue]

Then you would be wrong.

Oh ok, that excuses your misogynist rant then. Carry on.

 

[Sports Trader]

I still cant figure my the LNP havent cut Abbott and Credlin lose and pressed the reset button. It's only a matter of time.

 

[kfc1]

Your defending it due to that? Most are 'defending it' due to hypocrisy.

Abbott himself immediately withdrew the comment. Everyone thinks it is in poor taste, so the outrage is not 'faux'.

I thought you were trying to argue that Dreyfus' comments were similar. I explained why some would see them as different, especially in light of the fact Goebbels was head of propaganda, and you have said you think Abbott was referring to Shorten as being overly propaganda-ry. You haven't provided any evidence for that, however, nor explained why the context we've explained to you is somehow under-explained.

I was defending it for both, as stated in the post you quoted.

There was not this outrage when Dreyfus made his comment, nor on the previous occasions when other MPs have made the same reference to Goebbels. Hence me classifying it as faux outrage - just an excuse to have a whinge about Abbott. I personally think these sorts of comments are juvenile and dont belong in politics, however it is not right to have a go at Abbott over it when it has been done repeatedly in parliament before. The outrage is especially faux when it comes to poor old Dreyfus who made the same reference to Goebbels in 2011.

How am i supposed to provide evidence about Abbotts comment other than common sense interpretation. Why on earth would Abbott make a remark that is just "lol ur a nazi" which is what you seem to be arguing. Calling Shorten "Goebbels of economic policy" has no meaning unless you are referring to his actions being goebellian, which is exactly what Dreyfus and the others before him were saying.

It is ridiculous to be fine with Dreyfus saying Abbott's actions are Gobellian, and therefore comparing Abbott to Goebbels, yet be outraged when Abbott compares Shorten to Goebbels when he thinks Shortens actions are goebellian, just because hes making a nazi reference. I have no problem if you disagree with Abbotts opinion but to get outraged just because its a nazi reference is nonsense.

Does that make it clear?

 

[kfc1]

I think its not just about poor judgment-he seriously is living in the 50's and he seems to have some 'Jewish' kind of issues-that is how certain oldies in the 50s' might have spoken. That is how outmoded he is in his thinking. He genuinely doesn't get its offensive.
Promoted above his capabilities and dreadful results as a consequence.

'Jewish' kind of issues? What does that even mean?

 

[kfc1]

He's a hard right Catholic nutter. Its easy to see where he gets the nazi thing from. He is out of control. I mean being the PM & Parliaments biggest troll as well, is just an embarrassment to our Parliament. The stupid witch has allowed this behavior to continue, she is both a hag & a disgrace to the Parliament.

Would you suggest ditching the witch?

 

[RUNVS]

I was defending it for both, as stated in the post you quoted.

There was not this outrage when Dreyfus made his comment, nor on the previous occasions when other MPs have made the same reference to Goebbels. Hence me classifying it as faux outrage - just an excuse to have a whinge about Abbott. I personally think these sorts of comments are juvenile and dont belong in politics, however it is not right to have a go at Abbott over it when it has been done repeatedly in parliament before. The outrage is especially faux when it comes to poor old Dreyfus who made the same reference to Goebbels in 2011.

How am i supposed to provide evidence about Abbotts comment other than common sense interpretation. Why on earth would Abbott make a remark that is just "lol ur a nazi" which is what you seem to be arguing. Calling Shorten "Goebbels of economic policy" has no meaning unless you are referring to his actions being goebellian, which is exactly what Dreyfus and the others before him were saying.

It is ridiculous to be fine with Dreyfus saying Abbott's actions are Gobellian, and therefore comparing Abbott to Goebbels, yet be outraged when Abbott compares Shorten to Goebbels when he thinks Shortens actions are goebellian, just because hes making a nazi reference. I have no problem if you disagree with Abbotts opinion but to get outraged just because its a nazi reference is nonsense.

Does that make it clear?

What is also clear is that Dreyfus is a nobody that almost no one has heard of while Abbott is the leader of his party. It is the difference between a person serving the counter at a McDonalds store saying something racist and the CEO of Burger King saying something racist. Burger King cannot claim that McDonalds have the same problem because one of their low level employees did the same thing.

 

[madmug]

Would you suggest ditching the witch?

Did u mean the hag?

 

[kfc1]

Did u mean the hag?

Same person?

 

[madmug]

Same person?

The one in office, keep up if you can.

As an aside, isnt it great that the work of the senate to oppose & limit the worst aspects of the hard, & nasty side of the unfair & vindictive, class warfare based Abbot/Hockey budget, has aided in the improvement of the nations finances. The glass is 1/2 full according to the PM.

I think his glass is 1/2 fool. What a fake!

 

[NSWCROW]

I still cant figure my the LNP havent cut Abbott and Credlin lose and pressed the reset button. It's only a matter of time.

It's because the fascist wing of the lnp is dug in like " an Alabama tick "

They won't just vanish , they'll have to be dug out with a bowie-knife ( next election )

 

[NSWCROW]

Would you suggest ditching the witch?

" Bone the Crone "

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

How am i supposed to provide evidence about Abbotts comment other than common sense interpretation. Why on earth would Abbott make a remark that is just "lol ur a nazi" which is what you seem to be arguing. Calling Shorten "Goebbels of economic policy" has no meaning unless you are referring to his actions being goebellian, which is exactly what Dreyfus and the others before him were saying.

I agree with the bolded bit, and that is exactly what I am arguing.

What is the evidence for Shorten using high-propaganda in his question to Abbott or in the past? The question itself was making the point that Abbott is now claiming debt-to-GDP of 50-60% is relatively okay, while the 'propaganda' from Labor in Govt was also in making relative comparisons, and back then the debt-to-GDP was far less. If Abbott wasn't claiming our debt-to-GDP was relatively okay he might have been able to say that Labor was trying to 'spin' their economic management of the GFC beyond what's reasonable. But Shorten's question directly pointed out the hypocrisy and Abbott responded by calling him Goebells. I was asking what evidence there was to say Shorten has been 'Goebellian'. Dreyfus' point was very clear - calling the Carbon Tax campaign a 'truth campaign' is pure political rhetoric. There was no 'truth'. Gillard didn't bicker over the carbon price being called a 'tax' - so what was the truth they were trying to get out? It was a scare campaign.

I know people will think that analysis is just bias, but I think there is a clear difference. Given everything else we know about Abbott's style of 'communications', the Coalition may even think it is a smart tactic to call your opponent exactly what you think you will be accused of. Therefore it all looks like the same bickering noise from both sides and the reaction is "they're all the same", rather than any analysis of the facts behind the accusations.

Do you now see I'm not just arguing he said "lol ur a nazi"?

Did u mean the hag?

Why are you calling Bishop a witch or a hag when you know it's seen as sexist? Anti-PC pride?

 

[nineteen eighty]

You two won't agree with each other but to suggest that alcoholism and substance abuse is embedded in Aboriginal "culture" - as in, over a span of 50,000 years - is moronic.

worth a re-quote

 

[nineteen eighty]

not quite as embarrassing as using Nazi terms twice in the space of a month or so..how stupid is this PM?

Stupid enough to also eat a raw onion...skin an all...on live TV.

For a Rhodes Scholar he sure is one dumb cookie.

 

[nineteen eighty]

My interpretation was that Abbott called Shorten "the Goebbels of economic policy" because he's accusing Shorten of spreading high-level indoctrinational propaganda etc. as Goebbells did.

Propaganda...really??? He got asked a question re high levels of GDP.

The fool didn't know how to respond so he throws in a line that is guaranteed to shift attention from his own stupidity.