Say Yes Australia campaign shifts to grass roots approach

Gillard’s Con Job – Part 2

you’re flogging a dead horse folks……the hoax of the carbon tax having ANY impact on climate change/global warming/whatever it’s being called now has been exposed and most of us don’t want anything to do with it.

i’d rather see the bunch of usual suspects behind this rubbish spend the money flying one-way (with carbon offsets of course) to some communist country where they can all be happy, and they can take Get Up and Sarah Hanson-Young with them.

no means no

nice to see that you have been taken in by the anti-carbon tax marketing. When will some people realise that there isn’t just one opinion in Australia.

YES TO CARBON TAX!

Hey Dave, i held this opinion well before the whole thing went publicly pear-shaped on the back of Gillard’s lie and the back-firing ad featuring Carbon Cate. Of course you’re welcome to your opinion, it’s just not widely-shared.

How sad you must be that this fumbled policy idea has led the rickety Labor/Greens alliance into electoral oblivion. Bring on the next election/Labor leader, whichever comes first.

It’s true – a carbon tax is not going to stop climate change on it’s own, but it is a piece of the puzzle. While I’m absolutely certain this government will botch it just like everything else it attempts to do, at least we’ll have something put in place that can be refined in the future.

Industries have been pumping pollutants into the air we breathe without costs or limits for generations, so I think it’s only fair that they start paying for the privilege. By imposing a cost on this pollution, industries will finally have incentive to invest in other technologies, which will bring their price down. These technologies will take time to develop and become feasible, so we can’t leave it to the last minute.

We’ve already seen what petrol at $1.80 per litre does to our economy – image it at $3? or $4? what about $5? Who knows what we’ll be paying for petrol in ten years time. Anyone care to guess?

What we do know is that the easy oil is already gone, which is why oil companies are wanting to drill in places like national parks and why the oil rig responsible for the Gulf spill last year was drilling at a depth never attempted before. Oil is becoming increasing more expensive to extract, and yes, just like the carbon tax, these costs will be past onto the consumer – only there won’t be any compensation from governments.

So our choice is this – we either do nothing, continue as normal, and ruin our economy in a decades time because no one can afford to reverse out of the driveway, or we can start making investment in alternative technologies more attractive now so we at least have a hope of getting to work in the future.

Okay Alan Jones listeners – do your worst…

No means no

maybe you could fly all of those people of the communist hellhole that is Europe – they’ve had a carbon tax there for years.

Yep, making the world’s top polluters actually pay for what they do always leads to a totalitarian communist state. It’s not hysterical or inaccurate to say so. Not at all.

The problem with a kit like this which is based on logic is that it assumes that the debate is an intelligent one which can be discussed and possibly lead to a consensus. Why it won’t work very well, and which will become apparent as more negative comments are posted, is that the climate change deniers are too dumb to argue with. They, and the PR companies who haunt these forums are driven by political prejudice, and a lack of judgement . These are the people whose ancestors believed the world was flat. Hopefully they will soon fall of the edge.

good work Adam Paul!

You are right, this is just a first step. I would rather this than doing nothing about a problem that is obviously affecting us. Yes, it’s not going to be popular with voters, but you likes politicians anyway?

no means no – you held this opinion before? we really should give you a prize for being first off the rank. Good job!

yes Dave, I’m a well-educated and worldly individual who reads a lot and understands issues in a lot broader context than the usual suspects led by the thinly-veiled Labor left agitators at Get Up who jump on every socialist bandwagon they can find – and it appears a growing number of voters share my opinion.

and Groucho, I’m not from any self-interested PR company – just a concerned citizen who runs a business and is appalled at the botch-job this house of cards minority government has performed on every major policy area it has got its hands on. I can only cringe at the thought of the mess a carbon credit trading market will be under these jokers.

Oh, and I’m not a climate change denier, I’m a denier of the crappy policy that will have ZERO effect on the climate if implemented here in Australia.

no means no = andrew bolt

or a wannabe

the argument is tired. I’m moving on to something more interesting.

You’re a small business owner? Tell me are you the stupid hairdresser from the ad who’s just been paid loads of money to read a script that doesn’t make sense. “oh no if there’s carbon tax, people won’t get haircuts any more.” come on, we’re not that stupid.

I bet the giant 3 metre fish who’s fossil was found in Mt Isa last month wishes their was a carbon tax when the continent dried up 8 thousand years ago. Seriously China has 4,700 coal fired power stations and we have 34. Let’s do the maths.

Didn’t take ’em long did it. Get over it.

Pricing carbon via either a carbon tax or emission trading scheme is the only viable way to get the big polluters to ameliorate their business operations. Anyone who has a scintilla of intelligence can see that we need to do something.

I noticed a question in a recent parliament question time from Abbott … do you think that in this economic climate is a good time to introduce a carbon tax. I say no it isn’t. Around 10 years ago when you sitting on a fat surplus like Smaug sits on his gold was the right time.

Tax the polluters I say so that their prices go up and open the doors to cleaner energy producers … or is that simply too logical?

I know all about the carbon tax ads.

No one appearing on them was paid a cent.

They are all saying their own words.

As small business owners they work bloody hard and know their business – right down to the last hair cut.

how do all you righteous Lefties reconcile the drop in the ocean Australia represents in the big picture of global emissions. I’m all for reducing pollution (no-one would be for increasing it) but there are many ways to skin a cat. The massive bureaucracy needed to administer a tax that is a shallow facade for a wealth redistribution scheme that will not result in any meaningful reduction in emissions (low income people subsidised so maintain energy usage, higher income don’t notice the difference so maintain energy usage).

All i can see out of this is a whole lot of money-shuffling and not a whole lot of reduction in emissions – so why bother??!!

The broader electorate is onto the sham of it all so not to worry, no matter what campaigns they roll out.

Robbie, I don’t know the number but i will accept it as given. And yet per capita they emit one-fifth the green-house gases that we do. And (at least in the top tier cities) at least half the houses have solar hot water heaters, and the growth in solar panels for electricity generation for the grid is staggering.

The difference is that China has some vision. It knows that the path it went down was killing them (and the planet) and has committed to basically halving (well 45%) their emissions intensity by 2020. What have we committed to on the Never-Never plan – 5%.

And if you think green-house gas emissions are a furphy try and see more than 2km in any Chinese city. My lungs have still not recovered from my July trip there. Now if only the people of Australia would accept that $500 a year to start on the path is cheap (and that is about the same as the fine for doing 60kmh in a school zone) then we’d be getting somewhere. No Australia can’t solve the issue all by itself. But we can sure show some initiative and leadership.

Isn’t Mumbrella supposed to be a place to for our industry discuss the effectiveness and originality of advertising campaigns, not pass judgement on the products they sell?

Ah Dave, the old Godwin’s law in reverse. I thought the ‘redistribution of wealth’ argument (how you must have loved the 1920s when FDR basically saved the US economy during the Great Depression) would get trotted out along with ‘socialist comments’. And as for ‘redistribution of wealth’ with 9m households and a $550 p.a. household impact – that’s around the same amount of profit a bank makes each year. Now THAT is redistribution of wealth but obviously one you approve of.

John Grono you are a reasonable and intelligent man.
So you will agree that before the Government decides show initiative and world leadership by making Australia pay the world’s biggest carbon tax – don’t you think they should get a mandate first?

@JMK to be honest I’m not a big fan of the banks, but you know what, I can’t argue with their success – they make no secret of the fact that they are screwing us, we all go along with it (witness our inertia in changing institutions) and we know what we’re in for when we walk in the door. I left the big four but most punters stick around for the screwing then whinge about it.

What I passionately hate is lying politicians who don’t have it in them to tell the truth – and I’m not even referring to the lie on the eve of the election (which was a really bad start to this debate). How about Dullard or one of her crew say “this carbon tax is a symbolic act to get you all comfortable with paying for pollution – it’s not going to change the climate or save the world or the future or the children but we think it’s an important first step, let’s see what happens” rather than all the worthy BS we get served up about what it will do.

That’s where the debate has been lost – we don’t believe in the policy or the outcomes that have been fed to us.

KWHEDISS … well you aren’t here for an argument on your opening comments … hehehe.

First, I DISTINCTLY remember voting FOR an ETS at the last election. Legislation will go before parliament that will see an ETS in 2015 and prior to that a transitionary carbon tax on the Top 500 polluters will be levied in the interim. The end result is the same – the ETS I voted FOR. I agree that the path to the ETS has changed but it is hardly a catclysmic change!

Given that Labor won a narrow majority of the two-party preferred vote (50.25% from memory), but was level on seats with the Coalition, but were able to form a government with the backing of the Greens and the independents (something the Coalition leader was unable to achieve), that is a mandate – albeit an extremely narrow one. The Australian Constitution does not distinguish between narrow and large mandates, so a mandate it is. Just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean that every time you get the grumps we should have another election (the last one cost $161m).

Let the parliament run its course, let the ETS mandate reach fruition in 2015 … and vote them out in 2013 (that’s what I will be doing).

Juila Gillard ran on a Campaign of no carbon tax.

You can waffle on all you like John but she has no mandate to turn around and introduce one.

It really is that simple.

John Grono these guys had a mandate with Kevin 07 and fumbled the opportunity. At the election in ’10 they promised no carbon tax quite specifically (and I don’t recall much talk of an ETS either). The newly resurrected carbon tax is a poisoned chalice handed to them by the Greens that was the beginning of the end for the current “government”.

Even if any of this clean energy future stuff is a good idea they’ve made it into a stinking turd and now no amount of glitter is gonna fix it.

Totally an own goal, and the whole thing is a pleasure to watch from the sidelines.

Sorry, but the ALP policy was for an ETS and when asked would it mean a carbon tax (the alternate under discussion) if Labor won the election, she replied no.

And yes, it really IS that simple..

For something so simple they’ve made a right meal of it then haven’t they John? And no comms campaign is going to fix it, which brings us back to the whole point of this discussion in the first place.

I’m with John G and yes, Adam P and Groucho on this. Who would have thought.

It is absolutely crystal clear that a fiscal control on carbon emissions is desirable and was promised. Hell, The Monk even said as much, as noted by himself.

The minority government / no mandate / JuLiar / ad hominem bollocks is specifically designed to appeal to those who:
a) Have no clue about government
b) Have no clue about the crux Carbon Tax / ETS proposal
c) Abdicate their intellectual capacity to talk-back radio and tabloid news

And now the “greens under the bed” hubris has started.

And right there, we see why democracy is the least worst option… and the Monk the worst part of that option.

So this is a marketing website, yes?

Totally agree they’ve stuffed it up, which is the pity.

It’s a sad state of affairs that genuine debate gets clouded with the “all these guys have no clue about this, that, the other”…….why is it that critics of the left-leaning view are all stupid, shock jock listening imbeciles?

Why can’t I be intelligent and object to a policy platform?

This shaky excuse for a Government is the root cause of all this grief, yet critics are the stupid and clueless ones.

Check the polls fellas – are you that arrogant that you think you’re smarter than everyone else? Get out of your ivory tower and join the real world.

Ah, I see you’re a troll, with a penchant for poor strawman arguments.

Otherwise you might have brought forward an actual alternative policy, viewpoint or support to your objection.

Your rhetorical language and ludicrous pointing at polls seems to give away your agenda a little too much, my lobbying friend.

No AdGrunt I’m not lobbying on behalf of anyone but myself. My position on this is that whatever the mood of the electorate in 2007 towards “fixing climate change” it has changed (along with the rest of the world). And the Government has failed to notice this to their detriment.

I only point out the polls because they suggest the mood of the public has soured on this issue, and ultimately many don’t have faith in this lot being able to implement complex schemes such as this.

I support the Government encouraging and investing in viable alternative energy sources, an acceptance that fossil fuels are the best current source of cheap energy and discontinuing the rhetoric about saving the world for our children via a tax……we’re a pimple on the ass of the world and we could disappear into the ocean and the rest of the world wouldn’t notice.

What I don’t support is a facade of a policy that will result in no major change in behaviour due to pass-on costs from the so-called big polluters being offset by consumer subsidies, and also money flowing offshore to purchase carbon credits from dodgy traders as we have seen in the case of solar credits recently.

I appreciate the sentiment of those who advocate action on climate change as it clearly comes from a good place, but to blindly follow Gillard and her merry band down what’s shaping up to be yet another policy black hole just doesn’t make sense.

Any contrarian idiot can rubbish a plan with fallacies.

This is also a big clue said person also has little grasp of a situation.

So what are you suggesting?

What is your alternative policy, viewpoint or support to your objection?

This should be fun.

Hey “not a troll” you have a point regarding the mood of the electorate in 2007.

That is why (as required under the Constitution of Australia) on August 21, 2010 a Federal election was held. The result was a narrow two-party preferred majority to the ALP, but a hung parliament. After much negotiation with the independents and Greens, the incumbent government was able to form a coalition government and guarantee the passage of supply.

Now back in the mid 1890s some VERY wise men and women drafted our Constitution. During 1989-1900 various referenda were held and the Australian people approved the draft. in 1990 the UK Parliament enacted the approved draft and Royal Ascent was given on July 9, 1900 by Queen Victoria.

That document is, and remains, the basis of our consitutional democracy. Being wise people they ensured that parliaments were allowed to ‘run their time’ up to a maxium of three years. This was to prevent ‘changes of mood’ being tested from time to time. The prescience of these wise people has over the past 111 years been proven to be invaluable.

They also knew that they needed to add conditions under which a parliament could be prorogued and mandated such conditions (primarily the passage of supply). None of these conditions are met at this point in time. Until they are the parliament should be let run its term.

Basically this means that throwing your toys out of the toy box is not a reason for calling a new election. Like the rest of us you will have to wait and vent your rage at the ballot box at the next election.

Oops, bloody fat fingers. Typo in para 3 – that should be 1898-1900 in line 2 and 1900 in line 4. Apologies.

i agree John Grono and AdGrunt, I am actually an obnoxious troll with badly formulated arguments. My only unique thought is that ‘i hate carbon tax’ at that is not even a unique thought, it is one that was given to me by the media.

i’ve realised that I am stupid and I will now shoot myself

Not sure who asked for the smug lesson in constitutional history, but it’s telling in the way the left can’t jump down from the high horse long enough to realise there’s a rapidly shrinking group of people maintaining support for the “constitutionally valid” but shoddily constructed Federal Government we have, now being accurately described as the worst since Federation. And given all the promises to competing interests we are in for a quite a ride when Wilkie pushes for the pokie reform or Gillard gets rolled when the Labor Party blinks again.

I couldn’t give a stuff when the next election is, but of course the sooner it is the less damage this lot will be able to do. in the meantime, while we wait for the inevitable, politics has become way more entertaining than it has been in years.

John Grono, well and wisely put. All of the polls, all of the mad monk’s demanding an election, are for naught. A solid constitution ensures that we live in a stable society and hopefully one where the idiots vent their spleen mid term so the election is fought with reason rather than shit slinging.

ahhhhh, Groucho comes to the party, what a surprise. You guys are very quick to use the term “deniers” when it comes to those who think a carbon tax is a waste of time, maybe a trip to Luna Park and the room of mirrors is in order for all those throwing that at others while blindly supporting this inept ship of fools led by Gillard.

must go now, need to turn up the air con and switch all the lights on……

I just want to put it out there.

I hate these big ideas. I hate any government that has vision whatsoever. And the fact that this government is trying to implement some reforms that stretch beyond a 3 year term is just stupid.

We don’t need any infrastructure projects in Australia. And our taxes are way too high as it is. The private sector will fix EVERYTHING in the course of time. And if we do stupid things like taxing big polluters or mining companies and their profits we really are just one step away from communism.

Get the private sector to do everything. That way we can have a kick ass education and health care system. Like America.

And infrastructure like roads, rail, ports and National broadband. Get an expert to do that. Like Macquarie bank.

That way we wont end up being like totally communist. Macquarie Bank and America can show us the way.

So NAT, this is your plan for Australia’s political future – every time your team looses an election, throw yourself to the floor and kick and scream and hope to force everyone back to the polls?

No thanks.

I think there is a very important point here everyone.

That is politicians – any politician – must not be allowed to get away with campaigning on a particular issue to win votes and then go back on their promise once they’ve won office.

I have worked for some of the faceless labor men and I can assure you they only care about winning power and will try anything they think they can get away with.

Personally I support a carbon tax but can’t support politicians acting dishonestly.

wish you guys could read as well as you throw shit around at other people – who’s calling for an election? I’m just saying the carbon tax policy is a crock, just like those peddling it….that’s all.

comment 39 puts the case forward for an election on this issue, not me.

So do the following words and phrases ring a bell?

* nothing remotely resembling it.
* The fact is the last election was a referendum on the GST. There is no way we can have it as part of our policy for the next election.
* Suggestions I have left open the possibility of a GST are completely wrong. A GST or anything resembling it is no longer Coalition policy. Nor will it be policy at any time in the future. It is completely off the political agenda in Australia.
* No. There’s no way a GST will ever be part of our policy.
* Never ever. It’s dead. It was killed by voters at the last election.

I wonder what the common link is between these comments. Looks like some sort of serial offender. If you are outraged now you must have been apopleptic then!

^^^ Quote of the month ^^^

“Personally I support a carbon tax but can’t support politicians acting dishonestly.”

Bad example John Grono because Howard did take the GST to the 98 election and despite a swing against him was re-elected on that policy platform, so in a nutshell he had the guts to put it to the people when he changed his mind.

What more is there to say given Gillard’s statement 6 days out from last year’s election and her backflip afterwards? Lack of political kahunas all round on that side of politics.

Yes Ad Grunt it’s called having principles.
No politician should be allowed to get away with gaining power dishonestly.
Why to you find the notion of being principled so amusing?
No…let me guess.

And John go back to your books. John Howard did say those things but after that he openly took a GST policy to the election and got a legitimate mandate for it.

Conversely he sprung Workchoices on everyone without a mandate and was soundly defeated at the next election.

True. Yes, bad example. Apologies. Me bad.

I was confusing the ’96 election and the ’98 election when the Coalition got 49.02% of the vote and got 80 of the 148 seats. So yes, a clear mandate.

@ NAT

Politicians lie – every single one of them, regardless of party. They will look you fair in the eye and lie right to your face. That’s what they do. They run the whole spectrum of lying – from little white ones, to great big whopping ones. Their lies change depending on which way the wind blows – as demonstrated by Julia Gillard when she saw a chance to form government, and by Tony Abbott recently when he backed farmer’s rights one day then miners the next.

Yes, Julia Gillard is a liar.

But so is Tony Abbott.

So who are you going to vote for now?

This faux-rage being whipped up by supporters of the party that lost the last election because the one that won are “liars” is nothing short of laughable, as is the fact that carbon tax ‘deniers’ rage at one lie, but are more than happy to swallow a whole heap more.

Heh.

For one so principled, you still remain remarkably quiet on your own alternative policy, viewpoint or support to your objection.

Currently you’re the online equivalent of a wailing child running around smearing shit over everything they see, because they got a blue car instead of a red one.

If you could clarify your policy, viewpoint or in fact anything before you shoot yourself, that would be great.

Not a troll: you are.

Ad Grunt just bothered to read some of your other comments.

You are an angry ant aren’t you.

For the record I have worked on the inside of many political marketing campaigns in Australia and Amercia on both sides of the spectrum

Angry, partisan people like you are generally ignored unless it is decided to manipulate you. (which isn’t hard).

Political marketing does not have to comply with the same standards as normal advertising and political parties take full advantage of that.

The problem is the current Labor mob have taken it to a new low that only the most partisan and rusted on people accept.

Thankfully according to every major poll most fair minded people are now rejecting the cynical and dishonest behaviour of Gillard and her faceless men.

Ahhh John… So you’ve worked for both sides of the political spectrum but you “can’t can’t support politicians acting dishonestly.”

The lack of sleep must have nearly killed you.

You’ve worked for the ‘faceless Labor men’ you now refer to as “that mob”. You’re obviously a political journeyman – working both sides of the fence, selling your principals to whomever pays the bills. Labor one minute, Liberal the next. One week Washington, the next Canberra. Wherever there’s a buck, eh?

So who’s paying for your views today?

For someone so principled as yourself, I think you’re in the wrong business.

Strawman fallacies + Ad hominem fallacies + No salient point = Troll…

Flattered you’ve taken to cyber-stalking me. Shows you care.

Shall I buy you a red car now? And some sweeties to show you mummy really loves her little soldier.

Well actually Adam Paul it’s the other way around.

I only work for those whose policies I agree with. I have turned down work and good money because I don’t agree with policy.

There’s no blind allegiance to any party or policy and that’s why I have worked for both
sides of the spectrum.

It’s that thing you seem to have trouble understanding – the principle thing.

Reads Ahhh… John’s CV …
1. “can’t support politicians acting dishonestly”
2. “only work for those whose policies I agree with”
… musn’t be getting much work then … chuckle chuckle

Anyway , back to the Republic of Anyone’s work. Going by the tirade it just sparked, It’s obviously perceived as a threat by the people who are anti the Carbon Tax on Polluting Businesses (CTPB), as it should have been called. Well done guys. When you’re up against the protests backed by the rot jocks on Singo’s 2GB (or 2GBS as it’s now known) clever ideas like this can be very effective.

Ahhh……….John I don’t know how we have managed without you for so long. And we thought perfection was a myth.

Do you do courses?

sorry Peter Rush I don’t think the accolades should be flowing for this campaign – it started with the massive backfire TVC featuring “Carbon Cate” and this phase has been created to put the debate back on track. Let’s see how successful it is – anyone want a wager?

Groucho, to paraphrase another Groucho, any course that Ahhh… John does I don’t want to be a member of.

It’s not that big a deal.
Everyone working in marketing has choices.
I doubt most of you would work on something you didn’t believe in.
I doubt most agencies would make you.
Chill.

Peter Rush ..

Here’s the flaw in TROE’s campaign. It seeks to mobilise those who support the carbon tax.
The problem is only a minority of people actually support it.

What they need to do is produce something clever and convincing that actually changes people’s minds – not preach to the converted.

I’m with ‘Not the sharpest tool in the shed’ I think it’s a waste of good people’s money.

Australia stepping up and leading the charge is a great thing. Aussies have always been pioneering. Adopting early will see this great southern land blossom in years to come.

Oil is drying up and if the large polluters are forced to clean up, over time we will begin to see true changes for the best. Clean energy will run a mock and fingers crossed Santos and the rest of the petrol heads will not have polluted our prescious underground water table…

Bullard is certainly not the best, Abbott neither. I can’t see either getting in at the next election.

You watch Turnball go!!

Arrggh:

Bullard; “Gillard”

Turnball; “Turnbull”

p.s. Spell check Gillard and you get ‘violate’…

Having met both Gillard & Abbot all I can say is both of them are total and utter nongs.
The bset thing we could do is drag the lot of them out of parliament then hang the bloody lot of them from lamp posts then start again. These people care not one iota about us the people, the environment, employment this country they only care about themselves & lining their pockets.

When the gas frackers poison the artesian basin we will lose over half of the food producing land in this country. But you won’t care until we start running out of food. or Bananas go to $40 a kilo or more.

You can’t make profits on a dead planet. Food riots have been happening for a couple of years now in Mexico, South America, India & Africa. Just google it.

Somalia was our first war over water.

Iraq, Libya Oil

The writing is on the wall. The Carbon tax is not so much a tax as a behaviour change tool much like water restrictions. Each and every one of us making small changes to how we intereact with the world can have a positive effect.
It really is as simple as turning off a light switch.

Shock jocks and dunderhead politicans are as much a part of the problem as a pollution belching behemoth. Lets start by getting rid of the shock jocks and politicans.

Mick we rarely agree on anything but on this we do: One of the unfortunate things about democracy and political correctness is that we can’t just choke the living shit out of people like you. We remember you well, particularly the vacant stare, the dribbling and the hands dragging on the ground. We value your opinion like herpes, and that of Macolm, and Paul both of whom look like a genius alongside you. And, we are pleased you have met us and feel that it somehow makes you special.

PS: can you please hang the rolls with paper facing out.

Ahhh…John

The point of the new Say Yes Australia work has whizzed right over your head, and then some. It’s not “preaching to the converted” – it’s giving the converted the tools to preach to the rest. When you consider that word of mouth is the most effective form of persuasion, way ahead of formal advertising, that’s a clever strategy. That minority you tossed away is over 40% of Australians. That’s a lot of brand ambassadors.

Yes I understand the strategy -it’s not exactly ground breaking.

However that strategy only really works when there is a larger number of people who are predisposed to changing their view.

The problem is the hold hands and sing kum – bye- ya execution is not going to budge the significant majority who feel ripped off and lied to and with a tax that was promised wouldn’t happen.

I am sure there is a way to do – I’m equally sure that isn’t it.

ahhh…John

Do let us all know if you think of a better way to do it. This I would seriously like to hear.

Abbott is a joke, as is Gillard.

Even larger swings to the Greens and Independents would occur if there were to be an election now.

Abbott knows this, thus he is blaming all economic issues on the carbon tax… (Admittedly and amazingly, Abbott would be our Prime Minister if there were an election today. How poor is that?! It just shows how weak the competition really is…

Our Prime Minister and shadow leader are utter disgraces to the intelligent people of Australia and their parties are equally both in dire straits. We need some real leaders to step up, be honest and start winning our support.

As for shock jocks; I truly cannot believe that the likes of Alan Jone’s is allowed on air, that is also a disgrace and he is a disgrace with his rants and utter belligerence.

It truly is time for change (regarding the big polluters and our actions as responsible citizens to run the world in a sustainable way.) It is also time for change at the political top in Oz. I hope that some real leaders step up, for the greater good and start leading.

We need honesty and transparency from our leaders. It is a big ask, however in this ultra analytical world we now live in, where pretty much every cough, splurge and word, is recorded, shared, filed and audited; it is truly time for change. Throw out the old and stop kidding yourselves: in 2011 it is very hard to kid the people(.)

Oh Jules & Tone,

It’s so refreshing to get a slightly spirited retort these days. At least with democracy allowing us the pleasure of freedom of expression (well make the most of it while we have it) The other readers on here will hopefully gleam some amusement from your missive.
I would dearly love to meet you for a mutual chocking the living excrement out of each other but alas we haver laws to protect us from each other apparently.
So please refrain from looking in the mirror or watching certain TVC’s for material.
But do keep the fun flowing as we live in a world sadly lacking in humour.
Well unless Bob Katter is on the TV.

I also hope you hang your rolls with the recycled paper hanging out. 😉

Can we please keep some of the incoming boats with people on them, then fill them up with these boring leftist luvvies, then ship them over to….wherever – Malaysia, Iran – who cares? “No” means no. And what is most offensive about the Cate Blanchetts of this world is that they refuse to accept the will of the people. It’s a democracy, stupid. The people have spoken, and it’s NO to a carbon tax. There endeth the lesson.