by topsywaldron » Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:16 pm
by Leaping Lindner » Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:42 pm
by Rik E Boy » Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:47 pm
by Leaping Lindner » Fri Nov 09, 2007 2:00 pm
Rik E Boy wrote:John Howard is a genius. He gets elected last time on the basis of 'who do you trust' to keep interest rates down and then when he fails he can then successfully say 'well, you're better off than ever and under Labor interest rates would be even higher'. Pretty handy thing to be able to say when Labor hasn't been in office for eleven years.
So when interest rates are low it is due to Liberals 'sound economic management' and when they go up it is an economic factor that is outside of the government's control and they can point the finger on s***t that happened 15 years ago to dupe the faithful.
The end is near. Vote one Costello? Pffft. He'd be lucky to be elected ahead of Keating.
regards,
REB
by topsywaldron » Fri Nov 09, 2007 2:01 pm
Rik E Boy wrote: Vote one Costello? Pffft. He'd be lucky to be elected ahead of Keating.
by Psyber » Fri Nov 09, 2007 6:44 pm
by FlyingHigh » Fri Nov 09, 2007 6:48 pm
Psyber wrote:"I am sorry.." can simply mean "I regret this has happened.." It does not necessarily mean "Oops it is my/our fault and I apologise... ", which seems to be what some want to pretend.
The reluctance to say "sorry" about the handling of aboriginal children in the past was driven by the fact that the media and greedy lawyers would try to turn it into an admission of guilt as the are doing now with this case, and in that case the compo claims would have then poured in and been huge, with the lawyers whipping it up for their big cut.
Also, JH only promised to keep rates lower than they would be under "Labor" not as low as they already were, and there is no evidence that he has not done so. We'll find out if there is a change of Federal government as seems likely.
There is no inconsistency in his position on either matter. It is all propaganda and media beat up.
by Dogwatcher » Fri Nov 09, 2007 9:21 pm
Psyber wrote: The reluctance to say "sorry" about the handling of aboriginal children in the past was driven by the fact that the media and greedy lawyers would try to turn it into an admission of guilt as the are doing now with this case, and in that case the compo claims would have then poured in and been huge, with the lawyers whipping it up for their big cut.
by blueandwhite » Fri Nov 09, 2007 10:37 pm
by redandblack » Sat Nov 10, 2007 8:32 am
by Psyber » Sat Nov 10, 2007 9:42 am
Dogwatcher wrote:Psyber wrote: The reluctance to say "sorry" about the handling of aboriginal children in the past was driven by the fact that the media and greedy lawyers would try to turn it into an admission of guilt as the are doing now with this case, and in that case the compo claims would have then poured in and been huge, with the lawyers whipping it up for their big cut.
Are they? Don't see anyone trying to sue 'cos their interest rates have gone back up....even though he's 'apologised'.
BTW - the interest rates are currently somewhere near they were when Howard came into power aren't they?
redandblack wrote:Psyber, this is a perfect illustration of the way John Howard has (mis)used the language over the years. He's caught in a trap of his own making after all the core and non-core promises over the years and people aren'y listening to him anymore.
He promised to keep rates at 'record lows', but denies this in favour of an impossible to prove statement about always being lower than Labor.
No longer trusted.
by Dogwatcher » Sat Nov 10, 2007 10:15 am
Psyber wrote: a socialist leaning judge
Psyber wrote: "BTW" - I don't remember precisely - but see my answer to R&B below. I do know housing rates topped 17% under two past federal "Labor" governments.
by redandblack » Sat Nov 10, 2007 11:41 am
by Psyber » Sat Nov 10, 2007 4:30 pm
Dogwatcher wrote:Psyber wrote: a socialist leaning judge
Rather than an unbiased one????
Dogwatcher wrote:Psyber wrote: "BTW" - I don't remember precisely - but see my answer to R&B below. I do know housing rates topped 17% under two past federal "Labor" governments.
That's a very John Howard type answer
redandblack wrote:Correct, DW.
Psyber, John Howard uses precise language so that he tells the truth, but not the whole truth.
People have now woken up to that after being bitten once too often.
by topsywaldron » Sat Nov 10, 2007 6:48 pm
Psyber wrote:I do know housing rates topped 17% under two past federal "Labor" governments.
Psyber wrote:He was very careful not to promise they would stay at the "record lows".
by Hondo » Sat Nov 10, 2007 10:06 pm
by Psyber » Sat Nov 10, 2007 11:27 pm
topsywaldron wrote:Psyber wrote:I do know housing rates topped 17% under two past federal "Labor" governments.
They only didn't reach those numbers when Howard was treasurer as they were artificially capped, otherwise they would have topped the 20% mark.
topsywaldron wrote:Psyber wrote:He was very careful not to promise they would stay at the "record lows".
Not only did he personally say that, for the record in a radio interview, but he authorised Liberal Party advertising that promised to keep rates 'at record lows'.
topsywaldron wrote:PS No mention of what great mates you are with Downer? You do surprise me.
by Leaping Lindner » Sun Nov 11, 2007 12:56 am
Psyber wrote:topsywaldron wrote:Psyber wrote:I do know housing rates topped 17% under two past federal "Labor" governments.
They only didn't reach those numbers when Howard was treasurer as they were artificially capped, otherwise they would have topped the 20% mark.
Were they and would they, or is that your own conjecture?? That was before I took an interest in politics triggered by my remorse at having voted for Gough Whitlam. Unbiased source please??
Psyber wrote:topsywaldron wrote:Psyber wrote:He was very careful not to promise they would stay at the "record lows".
Not only did he personally say that, for the record in a radio interview, but he authorised Liberal Party advertising that promised to keep rates 'at record lows'.
I don't recall hearing that either, and I would have expected to remember if I had because it would have sounded silly to me - perhaps we listen to different radio stations - source please - I'll look it up if it is traceable..
by redandblack » Sun Nov 11, 2007 8:19 am
by Dogwatcher » Sun Nov 11, 2007 11:22 am
Psyber wrote: It is just that some people think only the ones on the other side do it.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |