Diary of our stinking Govt.

[boris1gary]

As it's more than 100 days now, it has been suggested that a new thread was needed.  The current govt has been breaking promises and telling lies at a rate so fast it's hard to keep up.

This below is worrying, "independent" pffft, as if your own doctor is somehow what? biased, it's ridiculous. So far there is talk of only including people under a certain age 30-35, for now. Remember that if your injured in a car, injured at work or get ill, you too might need to go on the DSP. They have done a similar think in the UK with devastating consequences.

and this is the 2nd time recently where the Govt has referred to work as welfare???? So when you go to work tomorrow (or tuesday), just remember that's welfare.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-20/disability-pensioners-may-be-reassessed-kevin-andrews/5400598

Independent doctors could be called in to reassess disability pensioners, Federal Government says

The Federal Government is considering using independent doctors to examine disability pensioners and assess whether they should continue to receive payments.

Currently family doctors provide reports supporting claims for the Disability Support Pension (DSP).

But Social Services Minister Kevin Andrews is considering a measure that would see independent doctors reassess eligibility.

"We are concerned that where people can work, the best form of welfare is work," Mr Andrews said at a press conference.

[cherry*135]

---

@gleee58 wrote:

They're hardly original when used multiple times a day for months.

---

I doubt the actual drawing was done by the poster who put the siggy together either.

hohum someone is living in the past.

[cherry*135]

Stupidity of Abbott and Hockey indicates they have not learnt from mistakes of last year's budget

You would have thought Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey had learnt their lesson – after all, it had very nearly cost them their political lives.

But no.

The paid parental leave debacle now consuming an otherwise soft and friction-free budget, is testament to the stubbornness of ageing white men and to the durability of their ideas, even really bad ones.

When the all-male Expenditure Review Committee members huffed their scornful reproach and conspired to nail greedy mothers involved in welfare "fraud", as Hockey readily agreed it was, it eluded their lofty wisdom that

(a) this was egregious nonsense

(b) their policy shift contradicted a core value to which the Prime Minister - no less - was thoroughly welded, and

(c) some of their own wives had taken maternity leave from their employers, and the basic federal government scheme of $11,500 over 18 weeks. Oops.

The stupidity of Abbott and Hockey now paring back entitlements are too numerous to list, but include that right up until months ago, they had wanted to pay $75,000 for six months to wealthier mothers – non means-tested. It was Abbott's "signature" policy

remember – specifically confected to fix his "women problem". How's that looking now? Hockey had been its next most enthusiastic proponent. Both had argued it was an employment entitlement akin to annual leave and thus an inalienable right. Once a bitter opponent of paid parental leave (over my dead body) Abbott became unstoppable - a born-again zealot intent on staring down colleagues after foisting it on them without consultation.  

Now he's changed again. New mothers seeking way less than his extravagant scheme would have paid out, are morally, if not legally crook, and their employers, scammers if they offer back-to-work incentive bonuses for their valued employees.

Bill Shorten nailed the hypocrisy when he said Labor had legislated a minimum entitlement, and the Coalition had now made it the new maximum.

Surely the abiding lesson for the Abbott government from the 2014 cascade, is that if you are going to back down from harsh or ill-conceived ideas, do it quickly. 

Why mess about for a year defending the indefensible if in the end you're going to retreat anyway? Why weather sustained public opprobrium as well as the embarrassment of the backdown?

Privately, Liberal MPs mostly know where this is headed. And they know the compound damage of 2014 came from their leaders' refusal to dump the

GP-copayment

the pension cuts,

the defence pay cut,

the higher education research grant cut,

changes to section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act,

and others, long after they had become politically untenable.

That's the lesson of 2014. Bad arguments don't become more convincing through repetition. Quite the opposite.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/stupidity-of-abbott-and-hockey-indicates-th...

[monman12]

"They're hardly original when used multiple times a day for months."

We definitely use different lexicons!

However 

Original: Adjective

created personally by a particular artist, writer, musician, etc.; not a copy.

Original:   Noun

An original work, writing, or the like, as opposed to any copy or imitation:

However to lessen the visual hurt I will produce some more CW originals from posters with a sense of humour.

    original but boring. How about this

           from                                         

Another from Kylie for myself,   original also.  Interesting story which I will dig up.

[cherry*135]

---

@monman12 wrote:

I will conclude with another "original" siggy  produced by a poster from CW days, David.

 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Original my foot. A painting by a Russian (artist - fantasy art?)  with the word John slapped on it. Original head altered.

Artist: Boris Vallejo - Icarus

[cherry*135]

Keep the off topic images in your image folder.

No,we don't need to hear the story of the chicken nailed to the fence AGAIN. Subjective if it was actually ever interesting.

CW closed about 5 years ago!

[gleee58]

not to mention they are not the over used oft repeated images referred to.

[monman12]

I will conclude with another "original" siggy  produced by a poster from CW days, David.

Perhaps A3 you might have noticed the  carefully added term : "original" in the description  apropos the somewhat well known picture of Icarus.

Allow me:

How to Use Quotation Marks

"There seems to be some confusion over how to use quotation marks correctly. Let us take a moment to clear things up. There are two reasons to use quotation marks in English writing.

• You are quoting someone; that is to say you are using someone else’s exact words, and you are giving that person credit for having said them.
• You are being sarcastic."

Now for an original   (not "original")  siggy, evil stick figure perhaps!

[cherry*135]

Doesn't matter it is still a lame siggy (nothing 'original' about it) from the past which has no relevance at all to this thread.

Want me to start a thread ' Siggies of the past'? 

Back to the CURRENT Govt.....................

[gleee58]

"Hasn't Slipper been cleared?"   NO!

Yes, he has...... and 2 pages of argument over silly over used images won't hide it.

[cherry*135]

---

@gleee58 wrote:

"Hasn't Slipper been cleared?"   NO!

Yes, he has.

---

Indeed, yes, he has.

That's what happens when you don't read the informative articles posted in this thread and instead spend to much time in the past.