The Greens

[HairyO]

Censured by her party with an unconditional apology offered, compare and contrast with the behaviour of men in the Libs.

The apology and withdrawal of the comment on Wednesday evening capped a torrid final fortnight of parliament, in which Liberal senator David Van also apologised after he was accused of making animal noises at independent Jacqui Lambie.

Censured by her party? So she loses her seat, has to resign any portfolios she is Shadow Minister of, or more "hey dont be so stupid, next time dont let more than 1 other person hear the insult" ?

 

[HairyO]

Closing down coal mines in Australia in just 10 years which export to Asia would probably see more coal mines in Indonesia opened up, let alone the increase in power prices in those countries. Plus, the impact that would have on the developing world. Brown-outs in India. 10 years simply isn't long enough for Australia and Asian countries who rely on our coal to put necessary actions in place to replace the lost capacity.

It's a typical Greens policy. Big on announcement, found wanting on details and impacts.

As long as we reduce our emissions to zero we will be immune from the effects of climate change. Its not important that China builds 100 times as many coal plants as we shut down.

 

[Saint]

The apology and withdrawal of the comment on Wednesday evening capped a torrid final fortnight of parliament, in which Liberal senator David Van also apologised after he was accused of making animal noises at independent Jacqui Lambie.

Censured by her party? So she loses her seat, has to resign any portfolios she is Shadow Minister of, or more "hey dont be so stupid, next time dont let more than 1 other person hear the insult" ?

What she said was at least as bad, but probably 3x worse than what David Van did.

Sen Hanson-Young had a whole defamation lawsuit about sl*t shaming, then her fellow Greens Senator did exactly that. And what has Sen Hanson-Young said? Has she come out and slammed the comments? Or done exactly what she accuses others of?

 

[Saint]

As long as we reduce our emissions to zero we will be immune from the effects of climate change. Its not important that China builds 100 times as many coal plants as we shut down.

Australia emits 2x as much CO2 per capita than China does. Other than Canada, every other emitter greater per capita than Australia is smaller than Tasmania.

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

Closing down coal mines in Australia in just 10 years which export to Asia would probably see more coal mines in Indonesia opened up, let alone the increase in power prices in those countries. Plus, the impact that would have on the developing world. Brown-outs in India. 10 years simply isn't long enough for Australia and Asian countries who rely on our coal to put necessary actions in place to replace the lost capacity.

It's a typical Greens policy. Big on announcement, found wanting on details and impacts.

Ok , let's put it off for another 30 years like we did 30 years ago.
I really don't think people like yourself understand how bad things are and your excuses for delaying yet agzin are quite pathetic and just mirror the coal lobby.
We need to start offshore wind power asap not this gas/fracking/carbon capture joke.

 

[Kram]

Ironically the Greens actually help the Liberals stay in power and do nothing for the environment.

 

[Saint]

Ok , let's put it off for another 30 years like we did 30 years ago.
I really don't think people like yourself understand how bad things are and your excuses for delaying yet agzin are quite pathetic and just mirror the coal lobby.
We need to start offshore wind power asap not this gas/fracking/carbon capture joke.

If you propose something which is unworkable, then you're going to be ignored.

The Greens are choosing to steal a few votes from the ALP rather than help get action on climate change. If the LNP win again it'll be another 3 years of complete inaction so who's being pathetic and lazy? Can't be much of a rush if the Greens care more about a few first preference votes than any meaningful action.

I agree gas/frack/carbon capture is ridiculous, so why are the Greens helping the LNP to make this ongoing Govt policy?

Working against the ALP is working FOR the LNP, there's not really any other way around that. It's reality. The Greens can continue to believe in fairy-land or accept reality. Seems they've been in fairy land for 30 years.

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

If you propose something which is unworkable, then you're going to be ignored.

The Greens are choosing to steal a few votes from the ALP rather than help get action on climate change. If the LNP win again it'll be another 3 years of complete inaction so who's being pathetic and lazy? Can't be much of a rush if the Greens care more about a few first preference votes than any meaningful action.

I agree gas/frack/carbon capture is ridiculous, so why are the Greens helping the LNP to make this ongoing Govt policy?

Working against the ALP is working FOR the LNP, there's not really any other way around that. It's reality. The Greens can continue to believe in fairy-land or accept reality. Seems they've been in fairy land for 30 years.

Utter rubbish mate.Labor have a pitiful climate record. Stop blaming the Greens for Labor's failure.
Most of the shadow cabinet are aligned with the coal lobby.

 

[bfff]

If you propose something which is unworkable, then you're going to be ignored.

The Greens are choosing to steal a few votes from the ALP rather than help get action on climate change. If the LNP win again it'll be another 3 years of complete inaction so who's being pathetic and lazy? Can't be much of a rush if the Greens care more about a few first preference votes than any meaningful action.

I agree gas/frack/carbon capture is ridiculous, so why are the Greens helping the LNP to make this ongoing Govt policy?

Working against the ALP is working FOR the LNP, there's not really any other way around that. It's reality. The Greens can continue to believe in fairy-land or accept reality. Seems they've been in fairy land for 30 years.

That’s not really how the Australian electoral system works. Why would The Greens taking first preferences from Labor matter when they almost universally get redistributed to Labor on the second preference count?

 

[Saint]

That’s not really how the Australian electoral system works. Why would The Greens taking first preferences from Labor matter when they almost universally get redistributed to Labor on the second preference count?

I dont care about preferences, I care about attacking the Labor Party as if they're just as bad as the LNP on climate change, when they're clearly not.

Lots of voters who might want climate action, but who detest the Greens, if they were to read that the ALP are just as bad as the LNP on climate might just continue to vote LNP for other reasons.

When do you ever see the Nats attack the LNP? And that's why they get everything their coal donors want. If the Greens actually want climate action, they know they need the ALP. Instead they attack the ALP.

Saying you want climate action while attacking the only major party who might act on the climate just shows how little the Greens understand politics.

 

[bfff]

I dont care about preferences, I care about attacking the Labor Party as if they're just as bad as the LNP on climate change, when they're clearly not.

Lots of voters who might want climate action, but who detest the Greens, if they were to read that the ALP are just as bad as the LNP on climate might just continue to vote LNP for other reasons.

When do you ever see the Nats attack the LNP? And that's why they get everything their coal donors want. If the Greens actually want climate action, they know they need the ALP. Instead they attack the ALP.

Saying you want climate action while attacking the only major party who might act on the climate just shows how little the Greens understand politics.

The Labor Party doesn’t get a free hit just because the Libs are so bad. That’s just silly. If that were the case then why would The Greens even bother to contest the election?

I find it very hard to imagine that there is a significant number of voters swinging between Labor and Liberal that would make their decision based on what The Greens said about Labor’s climate policy.

 

[CM86]

Ironically the Greens actually help the Liberals stay in power and do nothing for the environment.

So you like The Greens?

 

[Kram]

So you like The Greens?

Nup they go last on the ballot paper and Labor go first

 

[Saint]

The Labor Party doesn’t get a free hit just because the Libs are so bad. That’s just silly. If that were the case then why would The Greens even bother to contest the election?

I find it very hard to imagine that there is a significant number of voters swinging between Labor and Liberal that would make their decision based on what The Greens said about Labor’s climate policy.

Gives the media more ammunition. Ever noticed how the Media promotes Greens attacks on the ALP more than they do Greens attacks on the LNP?

I just think it would be better for the climate if the Greens stopped adopting a holier-than-thou attitude and tried to actually get something done.

They don't seem to want to. I'm not sure if it's naivety or they just want the votes more than they want climate action.

 

[CM86]

I think it's about time politicians were held to account for what they say. Even if with parliamentary privilege.


Either she literally saw up her skirt, and called it out.
Or she was saying that she was a ****.
Either way, disgusting and embarrassing in general, let alone from an elected representative.


Now. Some cynical people might point out that The Greens mistake was admitting fault, and apologising. Instead of lying, attacking, and dismissing.

Not I, or the others in this thread. We all will be calling out this kind of thing from everyone. Because we have standards!
And we believe in what we're saying in this thread!

Brittany Higgwho?

 

[CM86]

Nup they go last on the ballot paper and Labor go first

Why on Earth would you want Labor to win an election?
Don't you know they're connected to Unions, and are WOKE, and are in bed with The Greens?

(I don't actually know if you've made these statements before, but I feel like you'd nod along with it).

 

[CM86]

Gives the media more ammunition. Ever noticed how the Media promotes Greens attacks on the ALP more than they do Greens attacks on the LNP?

I just think it would be better for the climate if the Greens stopped adopting a holier-than-thou attitude and tried to actually get something done.

They don't seem to want to. I'm not sure if it's naivety or they just want the votes more than they want climate action.

Doesn't the media promote attacks on the ALP more than the Coalition, in general?

And The Greens just get attacked in general?


The Greens "hollier-than-thou" attitude is very similar to the "How do you know someone's a vegan? Cos they never stop telling you".

It's a well known view. But doesn't seem to really stem from much.

When pressed, most people admit that they didn't know their friend was vegan or vegitarian for a long time. Same as they wouldn't know they were a Greens supporter etc.


People don't like vegans, because it inherrently makes people think someone is saying they're better than them.
'I don't eat meat, I'm better than you'.

I think The Greens should be looked at in the same way as any party. Rather than the prism we've been taught.

I'm gonna go eat a lean tofu fullgrain recycled Latte Burger now. CIAO.

 

[Taylor]

Australia emits 2x as much CO2 per capita than China does. Other than Canada, every other emitter greater per capita than Australia is smaller than Tasmania.

You'll notice that both Canada and Australia have vast areas of barely to not capable of being inhabited areas.

Also per capita is the measurement used by activists seeking to make irrelevant nations matter in the calculations. Australia is a nothing nation in climate change. We could be minus 500% current emissions and it won't make a difference.

Total emissions, real numbers, that's what matters.

 

[Goroyals22]

You'll notice that both Canada and Australia have vast areas of barely to not capable of being inhabited areas.

Also per capita is the measurement used by activists seeking to make irrelevant nations matter in the calculations. Australia is a nothing nation in climate change. We could be minus 500% current emissions and it won't make a difference.

Total emissions, real numbers, that's what matters.

Dont forget the answer to the often asked question on which no one can answer how much will the temperature drop if Australia stopped all our omissions now….

Even the usa admit if they did that the effect would be didley squat.

 

[Millky95]

But don't we export a bunch of coal to the countries who have really high emissions?

 

[CM86]

Dont forget the answer to the often asked question on which no one can answer how much will the temperature drop if Australia stopped all our omissions now….

Even the usa admit if they did that the effect would be didley squat.

I'll answer it.
It will drop a bit.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

But don't we export a bunch of coal to the countries who have really high emissions?

They’ll be even higher if they are forced to obtain inferior quality coal from elsewhere.

 

[hamohawk1]

Ironically the Greens actually help the Liberals stay in power and do nothing for the environment.

They must know deep down that every attack on labor, particularly climate change is a self serving prophecy to gain whatever small margin they can while also knowing it wont assist in helping actually make change at a federal level by keeping the libs in.

 

[Goroyals22]

I'll answer it.
It will drop a bit.

Thats a better answer than adam bandts ever said

 

[CM86]

Thats a better answer than adam bandts ever said

Glad I could help.

When did you talk to Adam Bandt??

Or did you send him a letter?