Kevin Rudds Lies
1 view
Skip to first unread message
AussieSeek Radio DJ Content Subscription service http://lookabout.stormpages.com/
Jan 3, 2008, 6:56:38 PM1/3/08
to australia.politics.moderated
Kevin Rudds Lies
<< Thread Started on Today at 9:52am >> [Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
I voted to keep a man who picks his ear wax and eats it and frequents
strip clubs but doesn't remember because he was too smashed from being
prime minister. Unfortunately a majority of Australians didn't agree
with me.
Hopefully he will only last one term and we can get rid of this
disgusting hypocrite.
Lets go through Rudds lies and deceptions:
1) Destroyed documents in the Heiner affair.
2) Sacking workers on the spot in the Queensland Government and then
saying he will bring back unfair dismissal laws.
3) Trying to change the timing of a dawn service to match prime time
television.
4) Saying that he can control the price of petrol and groceries (this
will guarantee that he is a one term prime minister).
5) Telling students that they would all get a computer, now its access
to a computer which is already the case.
6) Saying sorry to Indigenous Australians.
7) Going to a strip club and then saying he couldn't remember going
there because he was too smashed.
8) Closing 1200 hospital beds in Queensland as part of the Queensland
Government.
9) Making millions of dollars out of commonwealth contracts and a
Liberal policy which was not backed
by the Labor party
10. We will keep interest rates low like the Liberal. We will take our
Troops out of IRAQ
11. We will track Japanese Whaling Ships
12. Kyoto
As I had pointed out in my story about Australia ratifying the Kyoto
agreement, one of Kevin Rudd's election promises to the nation; well
he has already done exactly what I knew he would have too, being he
lied to Australia and never disclosed the full consequences to the
public. He could never have met the targets he promised in his
election announcements because Australia is over 95% coal powered. You
don't just change that in a decade, in fact you would be hard pressed
to make a significant impact on that over two decades.
The facts are that Kevin Rudds decision to sign the Kyoto agreement
was nothing short of stupidity at this present time, in that there are
no alternatives in the making to significantly change the impact on
climate change, that is other than to now charge higher prices due to
carbon tickets being applied to electricity, fuel, etc. That means
food increases around 15%, electricity the same and so forth across
the board all due to where carbon tickets will be required by any
manufacturer / supplier that requires to pollute the environment along
the way. Basically, that is nearly every single thing you buy today.
If you walk into a store that uses electricity, then the price
increase of that electricity will be shared onto the price of the
good. Transport to get the goods to the store will typically require
fuel, which also has a carbon tax upon it. You get the picture
obviously.
13. The Brian Burke Affair
First Little Kevvy said he had just been invited by his buddy to pop
out and have a bite to eat. How could Brian Burke have known to invite
gentlefolk along to meet Kevvy if Kevvy had just tagged along with his
buddy? How could Brian Burke possibly have known in advance of Little
Kevvy's attendance? Is he psychic? Why was it that Burke apparently
picked up the tab for those at the restaurant? Has he got too much
money?
14, The Australian Government has announced that they will be joining
China as one of the few countries globally that broadly censor the
internet.
The Labor Party's policy was announced prior to the Australian
Election in November (release here) and was justified on the basis
that the previous Government's policy of providing free copies of
NetNanny to all Australian households who wanted it didn't adequately
protect children.
As recently as the week prior to the election, Labor Party candidates
were telling those concerned about the proposed law that the
censorship wouldn't be compulsory, and that the "clean feed" would be
opt-in, not opt-out. Today's announcement by Telecommunications
Minister Stephen Conroy states that the censorship regime will be
mandatory, although people will be able to opt-out of it. The problem
of course then becomes if you opt-out questions will be asked as to
why you want out, which in itself may lead to Government monitoring.
To be censored by the Australian Government is "pornography and
inappropriate material." X rated pornography is illegal online in
Australia, as are casino style internet gambling, certain forms of
"hate" speech and R rated computer games. BitTorrent would be a
possibility, even if certain downloads for personal use may be legal
under Australian law, sharing those downloads would not be. How far
"inappropriate material" may extend was not made clear, for example
questioning Government policy where it comes to Aboriginal people
could be deemed to be discrimination under Australian law and hence
blocked by the censorship regime. Worst still, bloggers or those (such
as forum owners) who allow users to comment or post could find
themselves blocked under this proposal should someone say or post the
wrong thing. If there is one certainty in any country that implements
broadscale censorship, once they start blocking content it doesn't
stop, and certainly every do-gooder group and special interest
lobbyist will be wanting the Government to add to the list.
There is also a potential cost involved to Australian Internet users.
The previous Government regularly cited feedback from ISP's stating
that the cost of implementing a "clean feed" would be passed onto
internet users, who already pay some of the highest internet access
costs in the Western world for on average slow services.
Notably Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd was a former Australian
Diplomat in China, and speaks fluent Mandarin; given Australia's boom
is fueled by mineral exports to China, it would seem that Australian
Government policies are now by China in return. This video from before
the election may have foretold some of the future.
Any More :"?????????????????????
Visit
http://groups.google.com/group/australiapoliticsmoderated
<< Thread Started on Today at 9:52am >> [Quote] [Modify] [Delete]
I voted to keep a man who picks his ear wax and eats it and frequents
strip clubs but doesn't remember because he was too smashed from being
prime minister. Unfortunately a majority of Australians didn't agree
with me.
Hopefully he will only last one term and we can get rid of this
disgusting hypocrite.
Lets go through Rudds lies and deceptions:
1) Destroyed documents in the Heiner affair.
2) Sacking workers on the spot in the Queensland Government and then
saying he will bring back unfair dismissal laws.
3) Trying to change the timing of a dawn service to match prime time
television.
4) Saying that he can control the price of petrol and groceries (this
will guarantee that he is a one term prime minister).
5) Telling students that they would all get a computer, now its access
to a computer which is already the case.
6) Saying sorry to Indigenous Australians.
7) Going to a strip club and then saying he couldn't remember going
there because he was too smashed.
8) Closing 1200 hospital beds in Queensland as part of the Queensland
Government.
9) Making millions of dollars out of commonwealth contracts and a
Liberal policy which was not backed
by the Labor party
10. We will keep interest rates low like the Liberal. We will take our
Troops out of IRAQ
11. We will track Japanese Whaling Ships
12. Kyoto
As I had pointed out in my story about Australia ratifying the Kyoto
agreement, one of Kevin Rudd's election promises to the nation; well
he has already done exactly what I knew he would have too, being he
lied to Australia and never disclosed the full consequences to the
public. He could never have met the targets he promised in his
election announcements because Australia is over 95% coal powered. You
don't just change that in a decade, in fact you would be hard pressed
to make a significant impact on that over two decades.
The facts are that Kevin Rudds decision to sign the Kyoto agreement
was nothing short of stupidity at this present time, in that there are
no alternatives in the making to significantly change the impact on
climate change, that is other than to now charge higher prices due to
carbon tickets being applied to electricity, fuel, etc. That means
food increases around 15%, electricity the same and so forth across
the board all due to where carbon tickets will be required by any
manufacturer / supplier that requires to pollute the environment along
the way. Basically, that is nearly every single thing you buy today.
If you walk into a store that uses electricity, then the price
increase of that electricity will be shared onto the price of the
good. Transport to get the goods to the store will typically require
fuel, which also has a carbon tax upon it. You get the picture
obviously.
13. The Brian Burke Affair
First Little Kevvy said he had just been invited by his buddy to pop
out and have a bite to eat. How could Brian Burke have known to invite
gentlefolk along to meet Kevvy if Kevvy had just tagged along with his
buddy? How could Brian Burke possibly have known in advance of Little
Kevvy's attendance? Is he psychic? Why was it that Burke apparently
picked up the tab for those at the restaurant? Has he got too much
money?
14, The Australian Government has announced that they will be joining
China as one of the few countries globally that broadly censor the
internet.
The Labor Party's policy was announced prior to the Australian
Election in November (release here) and was justified on the basis
that the previous Government's policy of providing free copies of
NetNanny to all Australian households who wanted it didn't adequately
protect children.
As recently as the week prior to the election, Labor Party candidates
were telling those concerned about the proposed law that the
censorship wouldn't be compulsory, and that the "clean feed" would be
opt-in, not opt-out. Today's announcement by Telecommunications
Minister Stephen Conroy states that the censorship regime will be
mandatory, although people will be able to opt-out of it. The problem
of course then becomes if you opt-out questions will be asked as to
why you want out, which in itself may lead to Government monitoring.
To be censored by the Australian Government is "pornography and
inappropriate material." X rated pornography is illegal online in
Australia, as are casino style internet gambling, certain forms of
"hate" speech and R rated computer games. BitTorrent would be a
possibility, even if certain downloads for personal use may be legal
under Australian law, sharing those downloads would not be. How far
"inappropriate material" may extend was not made clear, for example
questioning Government policy where it comes to Aboriginal people
could be deemed to be discrimination under Australian law and hence
blocked by the censorship regime. Worst still, bloggers or those (such
as forum owners) who allow users to comment or post could find
themselves blocked under this proposal should someone say or post the
wrong thing. If there is one certainty in any country that implements
broadscale censorship, once they start blocking content it doesn't
stop, and certainly every do-gooder group and special interest
lobbyist will be wanting the Government to add to the list.
There is also a potential cost involved to Australian Internet users.
The previous Government regularly cited feedback from ISP's stating
that the cost of implementing a "clean feed" would be passed onto
internet users, who already pay some of the highest internet access
costs in the Western world for on average slow services.
Notably Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd was a former Australian
Diplomat in China, and speaks fluent Mandarin; given Australia's boom
is fueled by mineral exports to China, it would seem that Australian
Government policies are now by China in return. This video from before
the election may have foretold some of the future.
Any More :"?????????????????????
Visit
http://groups.google.com/group/australiapoliticsmoderated
dan the realist
Jan 4, 2008, 5:48:51 AM1/4/08
to australia.politics.moderated
that is A fantastic and brilliant assesment of what we now have as
government.
one correction it was just over half of australia voted for them so
this information must be manditory reading for everyone .
thank you
On Jan 4, 10:56 am, "AussieSeek Radio DJ Content Subscription service
government.
one correction it was just over half of australia voted for them so
this information must be manditory reading for everyone .
thank you
On Jan 4, 10:56 am, "AussieSeek Radio DJ Content Subscription service
AussieSeek Radio DJ Content Subscription service http://lookabout.stormpages.com/
Jan 5, 2008, 12:12:06 PM1/5/08
to australia.politics.moderated
Saturday, January 05, 2008
Howard only 1.5% from being PM again
It felt like a Labor landslide. Yet John Howard and his Coalition
government came within 1.5% of holding on to power at the recent
federal election, final figures show. The Australian Electoral
Commission says the Coalition ended up with 47.44% of the two-party
vote after strongly outpolling Labor in the record 2.5 million postal,
pre-poll and absentee votes counted after election night. The final
count shows the election was closer than it appeared on election
night. Not only did the Coalition haul back Labor's lead in overall
votes, but the election outcome was decided in an extraordinary number
of close seats that could have gone either way.
In the end, Labor won 83 of the 150 seats in the House of
Representatives, the Coalition 65 and independents two. But nine of
Labor's 83 seats were won by margins of less than 1.5%. Had the
Coalition won them, the seats would have been split 74-all, with two
conservative independents holding the balance of power - and most
likely using it to give John Howard a fifth term in office.
Labor's narrow wins included Maxine McKew's victory over Mr Howard in
Bennelong (by 1.4%), the Victorian seats of Corangamite (0.85%) and
Deakin (1.41%), and three seats won by tiny margins: Robertson (NSW,
0.11%), Flynn (Qld, 0.16%) and the Darwin seat of Solomon (0.19%).
With just 320 more votes in the right places, the Coalition could have
cut Labor's majority to just 10 seats, a less than commanding tally.
With fewer than 6000 more votes in the right seats, it could have held
onto government.
But there was even more luck on the Coalition's side. It won 13 of its
65 seats by less than 2%, five of them by less than 0.22%. They
included the Melbourne fringe seat of McEwen, which former tourism
minister Fran Bailey held by just 12 votes (0.01%), the Brisbane seat
of Bowman, held by 64 votes (0.04%), the former Labor seat of Swan,
won by 164 votes (0.11%), and the Queensland seats of Dickson (0.13%)
and Herbert (0.21%). All told, the Coalition won half its seats - 32
out of 65 - by majorities of less than 6%. Labor won 25 of its 83 by
the same margin, including the seat of Melbourne, where Finance
Minister Lindsay Tanner beat the Greens' Adam Bandt by just 4.71%.
Most of the 57 MPs in marginal seats now face new uncertainties, with
federal redistributions likely in every state except South Australia
before the next federal election. The electoral commission has begun
the process of redistributing the 15 electorates in Western Australia,
and will begin redistributions in Tasmania and the Northern Territory
later this year. Population shifts will also require it to once again
carry out redistributions in Queensland and NSW in 2009, with
Queensland gaining a seat and NSW losing one. By January 2010, it will
be Victoria's turn.
Howard only 1.5% from being PM again
It felt like a Labor landslide. Yet John Howard and his Coalition
government came within 1.5% of holding on to power at the recent
federal election, final figures show. The Australian Electoral
Commission says the Coalition ended up with 47.44% of the two-party
vote after strongly outpolling Labor in the record 2.5 million postal,
pre-poll and absentee votes counted after election night. The final
count shows the election was closer than it appeared on election
night. Not only did the Coalition haul back Labor's lead in overall
votes, but the election outcome was decided in an extraordinary number
of close seats that could have gone either way.
In the end, Labor won 83 of the 150 seats in the House of
Representatives, the Coalition 65 and independents two. But nine of
Labor's 83 seats were won by margins of less than 1.5%. Had the
Coalition won them, the seats would have been split 74-all, with two
conservative independents holding the balance of power - and most
likely using it to give John Howard a fifth term in office.
Labor's narrow wins included Maxine McKew's victory over Mr Howard in
Bennelong (by 1.4%), the Victorian seats of Corangamite (0.85%) and
Deakin (1.41%), and three seats won by tiny margins: Robertson (NSW,
0.11%), Flynn (Qld, 0.16%) and the Darwin seat of Solomon (0.19%).
With just 320 more votes in the right places, the Coalition could have
cut Labor's majority to just 10 seats, a less than commanding tally.
With fewer than 6000 more votes in the right seats, it could have held
onto government.
But there was even more luck on the Coalition's side. It won 13 of its
65 seats by less than 2%, five of them by less than 0.22%. They
included the Melbourne fringe seat of McEwen, which former tourism
minister Fran Bailey held by just 12 votes (0.01%), the Brisbane seat
of Bowman, held by 64 votes (0.04%), the former Labor seat of Swan,
won by 164 votes (0.11%), and the Queensland seats of Dickson (0.13%)
and Herbert (0.21%). All told, the Coalition won half its seats - 32
out of 65 - by majorities of less than 6%. Labor won 25 of its 83 by
the same margin, including the seat of Melbourne, where Finance
Minister Lindsay Tanner beat the Greens' Adam Bandt by just 4.71%.
Most of the 57 MPs in marginal seats now face new uncertainties, with
federal redistributions likely in every state except South Australia
before the next federal election. The electoral commission has begun
the process of redistributing the 15 electorates in Western Australia,
and will begin redistributions in Tasmania and the Northern Territory
later this year. Population shifts will also require it to once again
carry out redistributions in Queensland and NSW in 2009, with
Queensland gaining a seat and NSW losing one. By January 2010, it will
be Victoria's turn.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages