If Julia Gillard rorted travel expenses to the same degree as Tony Abbott.

[donnashuggy]

What would the headlines have been? Abbott has some explaining to do.........

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-09/tony-abbott-says-labor-dirt-campaign-behind-questions-over-exp...

[monman12]

GMAS: "God help us all if Abbott gets in"

As an Atheist I do not ask for outside help, and the political process  depends on the electorate not divine intervention!.

GMAS: "surely she has done something right along the way"  yes she has,  but overall not enough according to  the opinion of the electorate, and they are the ones who count .

nɥºɾ

[freakiness]

---

@icyfroth wrote:

What do you suggest? We can the government altogether because you say they are as bad as each other. 

Where would that leave us?

Start looking around for independent parties.

---

 That's what I liked about this government with it's lack of majority and independent representatives. 

I doubt Gillard as a lawyer who wished to persue a political career would conspire to defraud any union.

There were funds set up by union officials to promote their own causes within the union. They were no big secret. They used to openly ask members to contribute to their campaigns for whatever they were promoting.  She did not conspire with the crooks to defraud the money. She has answered those questions in an hour long interview.

She managed a minority government in which all parties got to negotiate and compromise to reach the best outcome.

The instruction to vote for independents does not answer the question about how will run the joint in the mean time. The indies are not going to gain a majority overnight or at any time soon.  

The greens in majority?

Bob Katter or Clive Palmers party in majority. How would that be an improvement?

At least Labor is changing.  Slowly, slowly changing.  It's good that they are losing old stale blood for people with new fresh ideas.

Abbott has been attacking them for years over their union ties and then cried or pretend cried over one of the biggest union reps quitting parliament.

[freakiness]

It's clear to see you did not analyse the situation at all.
Media analysts have.
Gillard's popularity or not was not a male/female split.
It doesn't take a man to be sexist.
The problem referred to is the biased views espoused on a daily basis by the main stream media. The constant references to the chaos, the constant putting down of the economy, the headlines and first paragraphs of good news stories contradicting what the body of stories said. The shock jocks and shock blogs focus on those headlines and misinform the people which in turn causes the people to believe Gillard was inherently bad and Gillard can't be trusted. The news media is not supposed to be biased when presenting the news. We should get the facts so we can form our own opinions.

[monman12]

FN: "At least Labor is changing.  Slowly, slowly changing"

However, whilst  currently representing 20% of the workforce, they have 50% of the ALP membership votes at the annual ALP conferences.

FN: "They used to openly ask members to contribute to their campaigns for whatever they were promoting."

They used to, but now

"If an ordinary person were to do what the trade unions do they would be guilty of extortion, or attempted extortion."

nɥºɾ

[monman12]

FN: "Gillard's popularity or not was not a male/female split."

It was a perception of  her  ability over time, and resulted in differing support  levels based upon the  gender of those questioned.

"The use of gender politics also appears to have cost Ms Gillard support among men, with a record low level of satisfaction among male voters with the way the Prime Minister is doing her job and a corresponding jump in support for Mr Abbott"

"Mr Rudd's 26-point lead over MsGillard overall"

"Political analysts say polling shows she is significantly losing the support of male voters compared to women."

I do though  agree with this comment of yours FN:  "We should get the facts so we can form our own opinions."

LL shoots the messengers on an individual basis, with some justification, whereas your approach is  use a shotgun.

Gillard was promoted by the Brothers (is that OK?) and  demoted  by them also. It was certainly worth a try, however she was judged not good enough both by her peers and the electorate, and you can not shoot them all.
nɥºɾ

[freakiness]

---

@monman12 wrote:

FN: "At least Labor is changing.  Slowly, slowly changing"

However, whilst  currently representing 20% of the workforce, they have 50% of the ALP membership votes at the annual ALP conferences.

FN: "They used to openly ask members to contribute to their campaigns for whatever they were promoting."

They used to, but now

"If an ordinary person were to do what the trade unions do they would be guilty of extortion, or attempted extortion."

nɥºɾ

---

How is it extortion to ask for donations. The Libs, Nats, greens and indies all do it.

But Oh, if it's Labor it's crook and extortion.

They probably still do ask for donations from members. I said used to because I have not been in a union for a few years. 

You seem to be so stuck in the past on some issues you refuse to see that times and organizations change.

[givemeaspell]

That's what I don't get the biased opinions that we are subjected to on a daily basis, how does Andrew Bolt have his own television program he is so clearly anti labor and Gillard its always his biased opinion. Report the facts and let us decide for ourselves.

[***super_nova***]

---

@freakiness wrote:

---

---

How is it extortion to ask for donations. The Libs, Nats, greens and indies all do it.

But Oh, if it's Labor it's crook and extortion.

They probably still do ask for donations from members. I said used to because I have not been in a union for a few years. 

You seem to be so stuck in the past on some issues you refuse to see that times and organizations change.

---

Anyway, Gillard only set up the fund, she did not operate it.  What ever happened later on, happened some time after she broke up with that man, and in any case it looks as the "irregularities" were done by a 3rd party.

It is like if a solicitor, who organised papers for purchase of a house, would be later held responsible if the new owner used it for some illegal activity.

[freakiness]

Interesting how Thompson has been vilified for stealing hundreds of thousands too

IA have been following the story from the beginning. As they have demonstrated numerous times the facts are far removed fromt he fictions.

In the eyes of the old media, Thomson is just a villain — despite the evidence against him progressively collapsing. The now utterly discredited Fair Work Australia report contained allegations of over $800,000 but resulted in only $26,000 worth of charges by Victorian Police, most relating to expenses that would appear to be entirely within the scope of his Health Services Union responsibilities. Thomson is set to face court again later this month, where he hopes to have the case heard summarily by a magistrate and quashed.

http://www.independentaustralia.net/2013/politics/craig-thomson-speaks-to-ia-part-1-independent-poli...

[donnashuggy]

I think it is interesting that Rudd has not been vilified by the media for posting his cut himself shaving pic on twitter

http://www.news.com.au/national-news/federal-election/kevin-rudd-cuts-himself-shaving-then-shares-it...

Or has he and I missed it?