http://au.news.yahoo.com/latest/a/-/latest/16190166/greens-are-protest-party-says-gillard/

Prime Minister Julia Gillard says the Australian Greens are a "party of protest" and the tearing up of their post-election deal with Labor won't impact the government.

In her first public comments after Greens leader Christine Milne signalled the end of the agreement on Tuesday, Ms Gillard said Labor had entered into deals with the Greens and independents after the deadlocked 2010 election to "get on with the job".

The prime minister said she was "unsurprised" the Greens had decided to walk away from the agreement in an election year.

"At the end of the day, the Greens party is fundamentally a party of protest rather than a party of government," she told reporters in Adelaide on Wednesday.

"The Greens party is fundamentally a party that would prefer to complain about things than get solutions."

Responding to Greens criticism of Labor for allowing mining in Tasmania's Tarkine region, Ms Gillard said the government would always stand up for the jobs of Australian workers.

Ms Gillard said Senator Milne had phoned her before the National Press Club address on Tuesday to inform her of the decision.

"I did always anticipate that they would revert to type and they've done so," Ms Gillard said.

"I said sort of `thanks, rightio' and that was it."

She noted Senator Milne had confirmed the Greens would continue to provide confidence and supply in parliament.

"There are no consequences in relation to stability," Ms Gillard said.

even if there is no fighting - they are still biatches

most hated pollies going around

This calls into question Gillards' judgement. If she believed what she has said today of the Greens, then why enter into an agreement with that party in the first place? Way to talk yourself into a corner, Jules!!!

Another sexist thread by an Abbott fanboi.

Quote:

then why enter into an agreement with that party in the first place?

To 'get on with the job' perhaps?

MOTR wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 6:40pm:

Another sexist thread by an Abbott fanboi.

You don't like sexism then don't support the current sexist PM

Gillard and Milne think they can adjust the planets temperature from their office in Canberra, both mental patients if you ask me.

Maqqa, I asked you a question on another thread, but, being a busy person, you obviously missed it.

The question was: I n all your time on this forum, have you ever posted a comment that wasn't anti Labor?

Quote:

The question was: I n all your time on this forum, have you ever posted a comment that wasn't anti Labor?

Of course he has. Many of his posts are pro liberal.

Innocent bystander wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 6:58pm:

Gillard and Milne think they can adjust the planets temperature from their office in Canberra, both mental patients if you ask me.

Neither of them believe that. They both understand that collective action is required. They also understand that collective action doesn't happen without individuals being willing to take individual responsibility.

Peter Freedman wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 7:07pm:

Maqqa, I asked you a question on another thread, but, being a busy person, you obviously missed it. The question was: I n all your time on this forum, have you ever posted a comment that wasn't anti Labor?

Freedman, why don't you ask adel, skippy, MOTR, Alevine, both the Smiths, DNA etc if they have ever posted a comment that was anti labor.

freediver wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 7:09pm:

Quote: The question was: I n all your time on this forum, have you ever posted a comment that wasn't anti Labor? Of course he has. Many of his posts are pro liberal.

I have to disagree, as he is actually She!

KJT1981 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 7:25pm:

Peter Freedman wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 7:07pm: Maqqa, I asked you a question on another thread, but, being a busy person, you obviously missed it. The question was: I n all your time on this forum, have you ever posted a comment that wasn't anti Labor? Freedman, why don't you ask adel, skippy, MOTR, Alevine, both the Smiths, DNA etc if they have ever posted a comment that was anti labor.

Why don't you ask me?

I will answer anyway!

Yes, I have posted anti Labor AND I have posted anti Liberal AND that's because they aren't worth 2 knobs of goat Sh!t, between both of them!

KJT1981 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 7:25pm:

Peter Freedman wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 7:07pm: Maqqa, I asked you a question on another thread, but, being a busy person, you obviously missed it. The question was: I n all your time on this forum, have you ever posted a comment that wasn't anti Labor? Freedman, why don't you ask adel, skippy, MOTR, Alevine, both the Smiths, DNA etc if they have ever posted a comment that was anti labor.

I know I've posted comments critical of the Labor government. I'd post more if Abbott wasnt such a threat to my family.

freediver wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 6:50pm:

Quote: then why enter into an agreement with that party in the first place? To 'get on with the job' perhaps?

If that were true, and Gillard honestly believed what she said today way back when the agreement was being signed, then why make the agreement? She didn't need to do that because the Greens were never going to support Abbott. Gillard made an enormous blunder in signing that agreement with Brown. She would've had the support of the Greens even if she had not signed that agreement. She has no one else to blame for this mess but herself and this is yet another example of why people should seriously question her lack of good judgement.

MOTR wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 7:31pm:

[ I'd post more if Abbott wasnt such a threat to my family.

Are you a family of lying cheating asylum centrelink seekers?, or are you in on the great global warming rort?

KJT1981 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 7:25pm:

Peter Freedman wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 7:07pm: Maqqa, I asked you a question on another thread, but, being a busy person, you obviously missed it. The question was: I n all your time on this forum, have you ever posted a comment that wasn't anti Labor? Freedman, why don't you ask adel, skippy, MOTR, Alevine, both the Smiths, DNA etc if they have ever posted a comment that was anti labor.

yes , I have ... and before you ask, you look for it you useless twat. Now go and ask mummy to read you a story and off to bed with you.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 7:56pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 6:50pm: Quote: then why enter into an agreement with that party in the first place? To 'get on with the job' perhaps? If that were true, and Gillard honestly believed what she said today way back when the agreement was being signed, then why make the agreement?

To 'get on with the job' perhaps?

Peter Freedman wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 7:07pm:

Maqqa, I asked you a question on another thread, but, being a busy person, you obviously missed it. The question was: I n all your time on this forum, have you ever posted a comment that wasn't anti Labor?

Yes

Quote:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1337923454

I thought Rudd was a great tactician. You have to admire his strategy of becoming the teflon-man

The last Labor leadership challenge - those who came out in public support for Rudd took a brave stance. Albo was particularly brave

But Labor have done so many bad things - that drowns out a couple of good things they did

I just don't like Gillard or Swan or Carr or any of the ex-union bosses sitting on the ALP front bench (about 80% of them)

Maqqa wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 9:45pm:

Peter Freedman wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 7:07pm: Maqqa, I asked you a question on another thread, but, being a busy person, you obviously missed it. The question was: I n all your time on this forum, have you ever posted a comment that wasn't anti Labor? Yes Quote: http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1337923454 I thought Rudd was a great tactician. You have to admire his strategy of becoming the teflon-man The last Labor leadership challenge - those who came out in public support for Rudd took a brave stance. Albo was particularly brave But Labor have done so many bad things - that drowns out a couple of good things they did I just don't like Gillard or Swan or Carr or any of the ex-union bosses sitting on the ALP front bench (about 80% of them)

You'll probably find that post was inspired by an overwhelming need to sexualise Keneally. Why do so many of Abbott's fanbois seem to lack common decency.

MOTR wrote on Feb 21^st, 2013 at 12:00am:

Maqqa wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 9:45pm: Peter Freedman wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 7:07pm: Maqqa, I asked you a question on another thread, but, being a busy person, you obviously missed it. The question was: I n all your time on this forum, have you ever posted a comment that wasn't anti Labor? Yes Quote: http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1337923454 I thought Rudd was a great tactician. You have to admire his strategy of becoming the teflon-man The last Labor leadership challenge - those who came out in public support for Rudd took a brave stance. Albo was particularly brave But Labor have done so many bad things - that drowns out a couple of good things they did I just don't like Gillard or Swan or Carr or any of the ex-union bosses sitting on the ALP front bench (about 80% of them) You'll probably find that post was inspired by an overwhelming need to sexualise Keneally. Why do so many of Abbott's fanbois seem to lack common decency.

Read the article - I was applauding the article

Maqqa wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 4:34pm:

Not sure about the pants but nice set

And you clearly couldn't do it without sexualising Keneally. Just like you couldn't intelligently discuss the manoeuvrings of two female politicians without demeaning their gender.

Why is it that Abbott collects such a fan base.

Innocent bystander wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 6:58pm:

Gillard and Milne think they can adjust the planets temperature from their office in Canberra, both mental patients if you ask me.

Tony thinks climate change is crap.

Do you really want to vote for someone who ignores all scientific advice, yet still gives character references for pedophiles?

MOTR wrote on Feb 21^st, 2013 at 12:46am:

Maqqa wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 4:34pm: Not sure about the pants but nice set And you clearly couldn't do it without sexualising Keneally. Just like you couldn't intelligently discuss the manoeuvrings of two female politicians without demeaning their gender. Why is it that Abbott collects such a fan base.

I was using the same standards Gillard used to describe the interactions between Abbott and women

Maqqa wrote on Feb 21^st, 2013 at 12:59am:

MOTR wrote on Feb 21st, 2013 at 12:46am: Maqqa wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 4:34pm: Not sure about the pants but nice set And you clearly couldn't do it without sexualising Keneally. Just like you couldn't intelligently discuss the manoeuvrings of two female politicians without demeaning their gender. Why is it that Abbott collects such a fan base. I was using the same standards Gillard used to describe the interactions between Abbott and women

No, Maqqa. How about you pull your head in and show a little more respect for women.

MOTR wrote on Feb 21^st, 2013 at 1:56am:

Maqqa wrote on Feb 21st, 2013 at 12:59am: MOTR wrote on Feb 21st, 2013 at 12:46am: Maqqa wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 4:34pm: Not sure about the pants but nice set And you clearly couldn't do it without sexualising Keneally. Just like you couldn't intelligently discuss the manoeuvrings of two female politicians without demeaning their gender. Why is it that Abbott collects such a fan base. I was using the same standards Gillard used to describe the interactions between Abbott and women No, Maqqa. How about you pull your head in and show a little more respect for women.

What makes you think I don't have respect for women?

I just don't respect Gillard and Milne and the way they try to use sexism to further their political gains.

If they want to use it for gains then I will use it to blunt that advance

MOTR wrote on Feb 21^st, 2013 at 12:46am:

Maqqa wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 4:34pm: Not sure about the pants but nice set And you clearly couldn't do it without sexualising Keneally. Just like you couldn't intelligently discuss the manoeuvrings of two female politicians without demeaning their gender. Why is it that Abbott collects such a fan base.

that was in response to the other posts

the initial intention of the thread is reflected in the title and content of the article

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 7:56pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 6:50pm: Quote: then why enter into an agreement with that party in the first place? To 'get on with the job' perhaps? If that were true, and Gillard honestly believed what she said today way back when the agreement was being signed, then why make the agreement? She didn't need to do that because the Greens were never going to support Abbott. Gillard made an enormous blunder in signing that agreement with Brown. She would've had the support of the Greens even if she had not signed that agreement. She has no one else to blame for this mess but herself and this is yet another example of why people should seriously question her lack of good judgement.

See this is whats wrong with you ppl (by you ppl i mean ppl that call themselves "the right"). you refuse to compromise or make any agreements with who you have declared is your enemy. No working together @ all.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Feb 21^st, 2013 at 4:08am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 7:56pm: freediver wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 6:50pm: Quote: then why enter into an agreement with that party in the first place? To 'get on with the job' perhaps? If that were true, and Gillard honestly believed what she said today way back when the agreement was being signed, then why make the agreement? She didn't need to do that because the Greens were never going to support Abbott. Gillard made an enormous blunder in signing that agreement with Brown. She would've had the support of the Greens even if she had not signed that agreement. She has no one else to blame for this mess but herself and this is yet another example of why people should seriously question her lack of good judgement. See this is whats wrong with you ppl (by you ppl i mean ppl that call themselves "the right"). you refuse to compromise or make any agreements with who you have declared is your enemy. No working together @ all. SOB

Yeah, you know that obviously isn't true and especially not in this instance.

rabbitoh07 wrote on Feb 21^st, 2013 at 12:56am:

Innocent bystander wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 6:58pm: Gillard and Milne think they can adjust the planets temperature from their office in Canberra, both mental patients if you ask me. Tony thinks climate change is crap. Do you really want to vote for someone who ignores all scientific advice, yet still gives character references for pedophiles?

Well at least its only a reference and he's not a pedophile himself, unlike half the labor party  ;D

Funny stuff, theres no end of f#ckwittery from the left, I love it, ... ie I will not vote for a party that allegedly gave a reference to a pedophile but I will vote for a party that has had many pedophiles in it LOL, do they ever stop and listen to themselves  ;D