Tony Abbott surely knows someone upstairs likes him - a lot. While the former Catholic seminary student turned politician is struggling in the polls and with his recent recovery now stalled, the ALP has gifted the Federal Liberals the keys to the Lodge (should it ever be finished) and the treasury benches for another term.

In a decision that has left commentators gobsmacked, the ALP has formulated a draft policy to reintroduce the Carbon Tax, a policy that was despised by the majority of Australians and dogged the Gillard Government from day one until its inevitable landslide demise. The tax wasn't merely unpopular and unwanted, it was introduced after strident and repeated promises to not bring it in. It is the singular policy that brought down the Gillard Government which after the horrors of the Rudd leadership showed signs of competence. But the lie surrounding the Carbon Tax was the death knell to the Labor party and its doom was signed the same day the bill was passed.

John Howard's Liberals were put to the sword in 2007 over WorkChoices, a policy that had no mandate and was arguably in opposition to the election commitment to make no substantial changes to industrial legislation.  Possessing more bravado than brains, the Labor government showed they had learned nothing from John Howard's demise and introduced a hated policy in direct opposition to their stated promises. The Carbon Tax was the final nail in the coffin of a government already with one foot in the grave.

Somehow though, the notion of each party having to endure their own self-inflicted political suicide makes some sense. Many lessons can only be learned through personal experience. What doesn't make sense however, is to do it all over again as the Shorten-led Labor Opposition seems intent on doing.  The Liberals have buried WorkChoices having learned from that mistake, but the ALP seems intent on ensuring the Titanic can sink yet again.

Bill Shorten has impressed no one with his political nous or tactical skill and this mistake is simply the latest in a long list.  Labor has lumbered from one faux pas to another and this is the mother of all of them. The utter stupidity of even considering a return of the Carbon Tax is an indication that Labor is not yet fit or ready to return to government. Tony Abbott has certainly made his mistakes, but Has learned from them. Labor it seems, has learned nothing.

There is no retreating from this mistake.  Claims that it is just an internal policy document aren't going to wash with voters. Bill Shorten cannot say during the election campaign "There will be no carbon tax under any government I lead".  They will just laugh at him and rightly so.

John Howard's repeated come-from-behind victories prompted one smart alec to suggest that God votes Liberal. While that might have been a joke, it is however apparent that the Devil votes Labor and is currently working in their policy development area.

reprinted with permission

Quote:

reprinted with permission

There is nothing really special about a tax on Carbon. It is perfectly saleable as long as it does not increase the overall tax burden. That equates to making it revenue neutral by the complete elimination of other taxes with the revenue generated.

There is a good case to be had for eliminating corporate tax and grossly inefficient taxes like stamp duties. Taxing carbon is relatively efficient and difficult to avoid. Stamp duties just act as a restraint to people doing business with each other.

However, your observation "Bill Shorten has impressed no one with his political nous" is the obvious hurdle.

crocodile wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 1:44pm:

There is nothing really special about a tax on Carbon. It is perfectly saleable as long as it does not increase the overall tax burden. That equates to making it revenue neutral by the complete elimination of other taxes with the revenue generated. There is a good case to be had for eliminating corporate tax and grossly inefficient taxes like stamp duties. Taxing carbon is relatively efficient and difficult to avoid. Stamp duties just act as a restraint to people doing business with each other. However, your observation "Bill Shorten has impressed no one with his political nous" is the obvious hurdle.

You miss the point.  The argument isn't fiscal or economic but rather political.  The Carbon Tax is a popular a floating turd in the swimming pool.  Promising to bring it back is political death.

Bullshitten says that the will be no carbon tax blah blah...

BUT...

there is this little things about an Emissions Trading Scheme...

bugger me... how stupid do they think we are...  >:(

Events in Paris later this year might change the political environment.  So, who wrote it melielongtime?  The same person who wrote that OP which brought on the challenge people took up, the one you then bolted from?

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 1:46pm:

crocodile wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 1:44pm: There is nothing really special about a tax on Carbon. It is perfectly saleable as long as it does not increase the overall tax burden. That equates to making it revenue neutral by the complete elimination of other taxes with the revenue generated. There is a good case to be had for eliminating corporate tax and grossly inefficient taxes like stamp duties. Taxing carbon is relatively efficient and difficult to avoid. Stamp duties just act as a restraint to people doing business with each other. However, your observation "Bill Shorten has impressed no one with his political nous" is the obvious hurdle. You miss the point.  The argument isn't fiscal or economic but rather political.  The Carbon Tax is a popular a floating turd in the swimming pool.  Promising to bring it back is political death.

Yes, I understand that Longy. It requires supreme sales skills and if done correctly could even be beneficial. The impediment is the leader.

Aussie wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 1:52pm:

Events in Paris later this year might change the political environment.  So, who wrote it melielongtime?  The same person who wrote that OP which brought on the challenge people took up, the one you then bolted from?

no one took up the challenge.

crocodile wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 1:52pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 1:46pm: crocodile wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 1:44pm: There is nothing really special about a tax on Carbon. It is perfectly saleable as long as it does not increase the overall tax burden. That equates to making it revenue neutral by the complete elimination of other taxes with the revenue generated. There is a good case to be had for eliminating corporate tax and grossly inefficient taxes like stamp duties. Taxing carbon is relatively efficient and difficult to avoid. Stamp duties just act as a restraint to people doing business with each other. However, your observation "Bill Shorten has impressed no one with his political nous" is the obvious hurdle. You miss the point.  The argument isn't fiscal or economic but rather political.  The Carbon Tax is a popular a floating turd in the swimming pool.  Promising to bring it back is political death. Yes, I understand that Longy. It requires supreme sales skills and if done correctly could even be beneficial. The impediment is the leader.

I'm not sure anyone could sell a policy that has been comprehensively rejected and the subject of a breathtakingly arrogant promise breach.  And that is before you try to seel the actual merits of the policy in dealing with Climate Change which is very much a minority opinion nowadays.

Aussie wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 1:52pm:

Events in Paris later this year might change the political environment.  So, who wrote it melielongtime?  The same person who wrote that OP which brought on the challenge people took up, the one you then bolted from?

OK, I'll bite.  What "events" in Paris?  ::)

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 3:16pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 1:52pm: Events in Paris later this year might change the political environment.  So, who wrote it melielongtime?  The same person who wrote that OP which brought on the challenge people took up, the one you then bolted from? no one took up the challenge.

No one? But Longy, your account of gay incest is superb.

I could not possibly compete with my own essay, but I got Bill Shorten. You got something you have personal experience of, which always helps.

"The death of the economy swill not be used as a reason to restore a carbon tax?"

"No.. period, finished, El-Ae-Dubbya LAW - it's dead, buried and cremated (thus adding to pollution but who cares)....."

http://s3.amazonaws.com/data.tumblr.com/tumblr_m1ml5dpv6r1rrimczo1_1280.gif

Neferti wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 3:19pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 1:52pm: Events in Paris later this year might change the political environment.  So, who wrote it melielongtime?  The same person who wrote that OP which brought on the challenge people took up, the one you then bolted from? OK, I'll bite.  What "events" in Paris?  ::)

You'd have to be the only person who frequents a Forum like this who does not know.  No surprise to me.

Link.

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 3:16pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 1:52pm: Events in Paris later this year might change the political environment.  So, who wrote it melielongtime?  The same person who wrote that OP which brought on the challenge people took up, the one you then bolted from? no one took up the challenge.

Oh yeas they did.  You have read Karnal's offering.  He seems to have nailed yours as well.  You bolted on your own challenge melielongtime.

Aussie wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 3:40pm:

Neferti wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 3:19pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 1:52pm: Events in Paris later this year might change the political environment.  So, who wrote it melielongtime?  The same person who wrote that OP which brought on the challenge people took up, the one you then bolted from? OK, I'll bite.  What "events" in Paris?  ::) You'd have to be the only person who frequents a Forum like this who does not know.  No surprise to me. Link.

those events come and go every couple years and change nothing. They never do.  Who could forget Copenhagen where the dopes gathered to address global warming in the middle of the coldest snap in decades and so much snow that most of the luvvies planes were grounded.

it will be the same in Paris.  Lots of talk, lots of promises, lots of phots and absolutely no agreement on anything other than to come back again and do it all over - at taxpayer expense.

Aussie wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 3:41pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 3:16pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 1:52pm: Events in Paris later this year might change the political environment.  So, who wrote it melielongtime?  The same person who wrote that OP which brought on the challenge people took up, the one you then bolted from? no one took up the challenge. Oh yeas they did.  You have read Karnal's offering.  He seems to have nailed yours as well.  You bolted on your own challenge melielongtime.

I haven't read it and I wont unless it is posted in the general section for all to read - which was the point.

and I wrote this OP too

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 4:07pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 3:40pm: Neferti wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 3:19pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 1:52pm: Events in Paris later this year might change the political environment.  So, who wrote it melielongtime?  The same person who wrote that OP which brought on the challenge people took up, the one you then bolted from? OK, I'll bite.  What "events" in Paris?  ::) You'd have to be the only person who frequents a Forum like this who does not know.  No surprise to me. Link. those events come and go every couple years and change nothing. They never do.  Who could forget Copenhagen where the dopes gathered to address global warming in the middle of the coldest snap in decades and so much snow that most of the luvvies planes were grounded. it will be the same in Paris.  Lots of talk, lots of promises, lots of phots and absolutely no agreement on anything other than to come back again and do it all over - at taxpayer expense.

Copenhagen was ambushed by the Chinese.  Since then, they seem to have had a change in attitude.  The USA will present a strong case if what Bush has been saying is any guide.  Copenhagen failed, and it can be argued that Rudd may have contributed by attempting to put Australia out there as the leading mover and shaker.

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 4:10pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 3:41pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 3:16pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 1:52pm: Events in Paris later this year might change the political environment.  So, who wrote it melielongtime?  The same person who wrote that OP which brought on the challenge people took up, the one you then bolted from? no one took up the challenge. Oh yeas they did.  You have read Karnal's offering.  He seems to have nailed yours as well.  You bolted on your own challenge melielongtime. I haven't read it and I wont unless it is posted in the general section for all to read - which was the point. and I wrote this OP too

Everyone can read Karnal's and yours where it has been set up.  Your eyes will not bleed if you read posts in Relationships.  You are not too good to lower yourself are you melielongtime?  Surely you do not really believe that anyone regards you as some sort of Forum deity, even though you clearly think you are.  You wouldn't be using that pissantery as a pathetic excuse to justify your running away, would you?  The terms of your challenge were accommodated.

I do not believe you wrote the OP in this Thread.  Very current form compels me to the view it is way beyond you.

Aussie wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 4:18pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 4:10pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 3:41pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 3:16pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 1:52pm: Events in Paris later this year might change the political environment.  So, who wrote it melielongtime?  The same person who wrote that OP which brought on the challenge people took up, the one you then bolted from? no one took up the challenge. Oh yeas they did.  You have read Karnal's offering.  He seems to have nailed yours as well.  You bolted on your own challenge melielongtime. I haven't read it and I wont unless it is posted in the general section for all to read - which was the point. and I wrote this OP too Everyone can read Karnal's and yours where it has been set up.  Your eyes will not bleed if you read posts in Relationships.  You are not too good to lower yourself are you melielongtime?  Surely you do not really believe that anyone regards you as some sort of Forum deity, even though you clearly think you are.  You wouldn't be using that pissantery as a pathetic excuse to justify your running away, would you?  The terms of your challenge were accommodated. I do not believe you wrote the OP in this Thread.  Very current form compels me to the view it is way beyond you.

all the more reason for the Challenge as originally proposed.  people write about a topic they absolutely oppose.  It is easy to write FOR something you believe.  The real skill is in doing the opposite.  Now when someone agrees to challeng me on that then fine. Until then, it doesn't matter.

and I did write the OP in a few minutes. I did say I was a published author right?

Aussie wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 4:18pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 4:10pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 3:41pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 3:16pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 1:52pm: Events in Paris later this year might change the political environment.  So, who wrote it melielongtime?  The same person who wrote that OP which brought on the challenge people took up, the one you then bolted from? no one took up the challenge. Oh yeas they did.  You have read Karnal's offering.  He seems to have nailed yours as well.  You bolted on your own challenge melielongtime. I haven't read it and I wont unless it is posted in the general section for all to read - which was the point. and I wrote this OP too Everyone can read Karnal's and yours where it has been set up.  Your eyes will not bleed if you read posts in Relationships.  You are not too good to lower yourself are you melielongtime?  Surely you do not really believe that anyone regards you as some sort of Forum deity, even though you clearly think you are.  You wouldn't be using that pissantery as a pathetic excuse to justify your running away, would you?  The terms of your challenge were accommodated. I do not believe you wrote the OP in this Thread.  Very current form compels me to the view it is way beyond you.

No, Aussie, Longie's that good.

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 4:30pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 4:18pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 4:10pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 3:41pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 3:16pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 1:52pm: Events in Paris later this year might change the political environment.  So, who wrote it melielongtime?  The same person who wrote that OP which brought on the challenge people took up, the one you then bolted from? no one took up the challenge. Oh yeas they did.  You have read Karnal's offering.  He seems to have nailed yours as well.  You bolted on your own challenge melielongtime. I haven't read it and I wont unless it is posted in the general section for all to read - which was the point. and I wrote this OP too Everyone can read Karnal's and yours where it has been set up.  Your eyes will not bleed if you read posts in Relationships.  You are not too good to lower yourself are you melielongtime?  Surely you do not really believe that anyone regards you as some sort of Forum deity, even though you clearly think you are.  You wouldn't be using that pissantery as a pathetic excuse to justify your running away, would you?  The terms of your challenge were accommodated. I do not believe you wrote the OP in this Thread.  Very current form compels me to the view it is way beyond you. all the more reason for the Challenge as originally proposed.  people write about a topic they absolutely oppose.  It is easy to write FOR something you believe.  The real skill is in doing the opposite.  Now when someone agrees to challeng me on that then fine. Until then, it doesn't matter. and I did write the OP in a few minutes. I did say I was a published author right?

I accept your challenge, Longy.

Karnal wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 4:36pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 4:30pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 4:18pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 4:10pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 3:41pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 3:16pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 1:52pm: Events in Paris later this year might change the political environment.  So, who wrote it melielongtime?  The same person who wrote that OP which brought on the challenge people took up, the one you then bolted from? no one took up the challenge. Oh yeas they did.  You have read Karnal's offering.  He seems to have nailed yours as well.  You bolted on your own challenge melielongtime. I haven't read it and I wont unless it is posted in the general section for all to read - which was the point. and I wrote this OP too Everyone can read Karnal's and yours where it has been set up.  Your eyes will not bleed if you read posts in Relationships.  You are not too good to lower yourself are you melielongtime?  Surely you do not really believe that anyone regards you as some sort of Forum deity, even though you clearly think you are.  You wouldn't be using that pissantery as a pathetic excuse to justify your running away, would you?  The terms of your challenge were accommodated. I do not believe you wrote the OP in this Thread.  Very current form compels me to the view it is way beyond you. all the more reason for the Challenge as originally proposed.  people write about a topic they absolutely oppose.  It is easy to write FOR something you believe.  The real skill is in doing the opposite.  Now when someone agrees to challeng me on that then fine. Until then, it doesn't matter. and I did write the OP in a few minutes. I did say I was a published author right? I accept your challenge, Longy.

we've been down this road before.  It has to be something you would normally passionately oppose.  And that would be....?

and so there's the problem. You don't appear to have actual strongly-held positions on anything.

Quote:

all the more reason for the Challenge as originally proposed.  people write about a topic they absolutely oppose.  It is easy to write FOR something you believe.  The real skill is in doing the opposite.  Now when someone agrees to challeng me on that then fine. Until then, it doesn't matter. and I did write the OP in a few minutes. I did say I was a published author right?

I now take what you say with less than a grain of salt.  Your topic and your Thread awaits you in Relationships.  How about you prove you are not all piss and wind for a change?

I do not believe you are a published anything and I certainly do  not believe you wrote the OP.

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 4:38pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 4:36pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 4:30pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 4:18pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 4:10pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 3:41pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 3:16pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 1:52pm: Events in Paris later this year might change the political environment.  So, who wrote it melielongtime?  The same person who wrote that OP which brought on the challenge people took up, the one you then bolted from? no one took up the challenge. Oh yeas they did.  You have read Karnal's offering.  He seems to have nailed yours as well.  You bolted on your own challenge melielongtime. I haven't read it and I wont unless it is posted in the general section for all to read - which was the point. and I wrote this OP too Everyone can read Karnal's and yours where it has been set up.  Your eyes will not bleed if you read posts in Relationships.  You are not too good to lower yourself are you melielongtime?  Surely you do not really believe that anyone regards you as some sort of Forum deity, even though you clearly think you are.  You wouldn't be using that pissantery as a pathetic excuse to justify your running away, would you?  The terms of your challenge were accommodated. I do not believe you wrote the OP in this Thread.  Very current form compels me to the view it is way beyond you. all the more reason for the Challenge as originally proposed.  people write about a topic they absolutely oppose.  It is easy to write FOR something you believe.  The real skill is in doing the opposite.  Now when someone agrees to challeng me on that then fine. Until then, it doesn't matter. and I did write the OP in a few minutes. I did say I was a published author right? I accept your challenge, Longy. we've been down this road before.  It has to be something you would normally passionately oppose.  And that would be....? and so there's the problem. You don't appear to have actual strongly-held positions on anything.

I accept your challenge, Longy. As stated, I have a strong aversion to Bill Shorten.

How about you, Greggery? Are you in?

Aussie wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 4:40pm:

Quote: all the more reason for the Challenge as originally proposed.  people write about a topic they absolutely oppose.  It is easy to write FOR something you believe.  The real skill is in doing the opposite.  Now when someone agrees to challeng me on that then fine. Until then, it doesn't matter. and I did write the OP in a few minutes. I did say I was a published author right? I now take what you say with less than a grain of salt.  Your topic and your Thread awaits you in Relationships.  How about you prove you are not all piss and wind for a change? I do not believe you are a published anything and I certainly do  not believe you wrote the OP.

I used to believe Longy wrote the OP. I don't anymore.

I accept your challenge, Longy. This should be a piece of cake.

You're that good.

There NEVER WAS a 'carbon tax', you fools.

NOR did Gillard 'lie' about it.

DIRECT ACTION IS A CARBON TAX BY STEALTH

FESS UP MR ABBOTT ITS PAID FOR OUT OF OUR TAXES

GIVE US A TAX CUT MR ABBOTT

Gillard DIDN'T LIE? like hell she didn't:



Gillard regrets not lying about her carbon tax lie. Trust women?

The following events are on record.


Talk about denial. One of her biggest regrets now is that she didn’t lie about the tax she imposed with a lie:


JULIA Gillard says the greatest regret of her government was not explaining to Australians why she toppled Kevin Rudd in 2010.

And “another bad error” had been effectively conceding the use of the term “carbon tax”, the former prime minister said today.

Neither would have saved her.

For a start, Gillard was absolutely right in March 2011 to work out that playing semantic games with what the public knew full well was in fact a carbon tax would just damn her more completely as a liar:

Julia Gillard during a press conference on Thursday:

People have heard a lot of debate about a carbon tax, and today can I say to Australians the debate that they are hearing about a carbon tax is a debate about what Tony Abbott calls a carbon tax . . .


Gillard’s presser yesterday:

Journalist: Does the climate change policy you’re about to announce include a carbon tax, you seemed a bit reluctant to talk about the tax side of things yesterday?

Gillard: Certainly not at all reluctant and very happy to explain the way carbon pricing will work. . . . whatever you want to call it, this isn’t about the terminology, whatever you want to call it, a carbon tax is temporary, an emissions trading scheme is permanent.

Journalist: You say it’s like a tax, but it is a tax, isn’t it?

Gillard: It works through a permit system, it’s the start up of getting ready for the emissions trading scheme, but I’m happy to say yes it works effectively like a tax. But the point here is with the design of the scheme, I’ve been working hard to ensure that the period of the carbon tax is as short as possible and we get to the emissions trading scheme.


Wayne Swan on ABC 612 yesterday:



Yes, some people call that a carbon tax and it can be called a carbon tax . . .

Gillard is just fantasising to claim she could have got away with denying the tax was a tax.

I wouldn't bother replying to Kat... everyone knows that he's the forums Political Retard...  ::)

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 5:55pm:

I wouldn't bother replying to Kat... everyone knows that he's the forums Political Retard...  ::)

There are retards here, all right, but I'm not one of them.

Check a mirror, maybe?

Aussie wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 4:40pm:

Quote: all the more reason for the Challenge as originally proposed.  people write about a topic they absolutely oppose.  It is easy to write FOR something you believe.  The real skill is in doing the opposite.  Now when someone agrees to challeng me on that then fine. Until then, it doesn't matter. and I did write the OP in a few minutes. I did say I was a published author right? I now take what you say with less than a grain of salt.  Your topic and your Thread awaits you in Relationships.  How about you prove you are not all piss and wind for a change? I do not believe you are a published anything and I certainly do  not believe you wrote the OP.

poor diddums.  cant cope with the fact that I actually write well?  And when I get a serious and willing participant in The Challenge  then I wil do it in the open and in the general forum and not run by an illiterate dimwit as yourself.

Kat wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 5:05pm:

There NEVER WAS a 'carbon tax', you fools. NOR did Gillard 'lie' about it.

well delusion has a name and it is Angry Kat.  time to kill people who vote Liberal again hey, Kat?

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 5:55pm:

I wouldn't bother replying to Kat... everyone knows that he's the forums Political Retard...  ::)

he is the forum's ANGRY retard.

Bicycle Boy should be his name

I watched the writing challenge with some interest.  Seemed  to me that those who were dissing the writing as not belonging to the poster presented no evidence and morover failed to respond to the challenge laid out by the one that was affronted. 

Major fails. 

Then aussie wanted to get involved and move it to a forum over which he had control.  :o

And I noticed that though the challenge was to write a piece that was contrary to the writers natural philosophy I can see much mischief making in future quotes being made and attributed. 

This forum is all levels of dodgy. 

Maybe it should be reduced to its essence, those that dissed the original post put up...or not, and that it occur in the thread where it originally happened.  Keeps it all neat that way. 

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 6:34pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 4:40pm: Quote: all the more reason for the Challenge as originally proposed.  people write about a topic they absolutely oppose.  It is easy to write FOR something you believe.  The real skill is in doing the opposite.  Now when someone agrees to challeng me on that then fine. Until then, it doesn't matter. and I did write the OP in a few minutes. I did say I was a published author right? I now take what you say with less than a grain of salt.  Your topic and your Thread awaits you in Relationships.  How about you prove you are not all piss and wind for a change? I do not believe you are a published anything and I certainly do  not believe you wrote the OP. poor diddums.  cant cope with the fact that I actually write well?  And when I get a serious and willing participant in The Challenge  then I wil do it in the open and in the general forum and not run by an illiterate dimwit as yourself.

Let’s go, Longy. You’re on.

crocodile wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 1:44pm:

There is nothing really special about a tax on Carbon. It is perfectly saleable as long as it does not increase the overall tax burden. That equates to making it revenue neutral by the complete elimination of other taxes with the revenue generated. There is a good case to be had for eliminating corporate tax and grossly inefficient taxes like stamp duties. Taxing carbon is relatively efficient and difficult to avoid. Stamp duties just act as a restraint to people doing business with each other. However, your observation "Bill Shorten has impressed no one with his political nous" is the obvious hurdle.

on my local news today.. we were told our electricity has come down by $500 pa thanks to the removal of the carbon tax....

I am hoping that is so true.. because we are having a very cold winter..

if it means putting back $500 on electricity I cant say as he will be popular....but then hes used to that isnt he??..

and labor are stuck with him.. boo hoo...  :) :) :) :)

Secret Wars wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 6:47pm:

I watched the writing challenge with some interest.  Seemed  to me that those who were dissing the writing as not belonging to the poster presented no evidence and morover failed to respond to the challenge laid out by the one that was affronted.  Major fails.

The proof is and always was self evident. Melielongtime's usual writing/posting standard is crap, yet suddenly, he produces something which meets average levels of 'English.'  We now have convincing proof, given he was set a topic which he naturally would  not support (something vital to his challenge)...he was given plenty of time to prepare his essay....at the stated time, his Thread was opened....and it remains empty, thus confirming what I suspected.  He is a flake.


Quote:

Then aussie wanted to get involved and move it to a forum over which he had control.  :o

Odd you would see it that way.  All I did was get the challenge (initiated by melielongtime) past an impasse of melielongtime's creation, set the topics as he wanted, and provided the Threads.  I also was able (because I can control to some extent trashing of Threads) to ensure the participants had a fair go.  Melielongtime can still post his essay on incest, yet, of no surprise to me, he has not.  He is a proven flake.


Quote:

And I noticed that though the challenge was to write a piece that was contrary to the writers natural philosophy I can see much mischief making in future quotes being made and attributed.

If there was mischief, that was the result of the terms of challenge set out by melielongtime.


Quote:

This forum is all levels of dodgy.  Maybe it should be reduced to its essence, those that dissed the original post put up...or not, and that it occur in the thread where it originally happened.  Keeps it all neat that way.

'Neat' is exactly how it was set up.  It is still very 'neat' and there is a gaping vacuum where melielongtime's essay is supposed to be.  He is a proven flake.

Kat wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 5:05pm:

There NEVER WAS a 'carbon tax', you fools. NOR did Gillard 'lie' about it.

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

cods wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 7:01pm:

Kat wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 5:05pm: There NEVER WAS a 'carbon tax', you fools. NOR did Gillard 'lie' about it. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Don't handle the truth very well, do you?

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 6:36pm:

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 5:55pm: I wouldn't bother replying to Kat... everyone knows that he's the forums Political Retard...  ::) he is the forum's ANGRY retard. Bicycle Boy should be his name

Make yourself useful, troll - go and emulate a camp-fire.

Aussie wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 7:01pm:

The proof is and always was self evident. Melielongtime's usual writing/posting standard is crap, yet suddenly, he produces something which meets average levels of 'English.'  We now have convincing proof, given he was set a topic which he naturally would  not support (something vital to his challenge)...he was given plenty of time to prepare his essay....at the stated time, his Thread was opened....and it remains empty, thus confirming what I suspected.  He is a flake.

and we all agree that 'ozzie' aka mod is an expert on the English language..

and boy is 'ozzie' suspects you of anything.. then you had better believe it.. he claims he has POWERS..and he will get very indignant if you stand up for yourself...

how anyone proves its their own work I will never know..

however the smart arses on here..

who know without a doubt longy didnt write said article..

then they must by that same token.. have some idea who did???...


so  who do you think he plagiarised from MOD.?   being an expert on writing skills and all.. ;D ;D

Aussie wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 7:01pm:

Secret Wars wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 6:47pm: I watched the writing challenge with some interest.  Seemed  to me that those who were dissing the writing as not belonging to the poster presented no evidence and morover failed to respond to the challenge laid out by the one that was affronted.  Major fails.  The proof is and always was self evident. Melielongtime's usual writing/posting standard is crap, yet suddenly, he produces something which meets average levels of 'English.'  We now have convincing proof, given he was set a topic which he naturally would  not support (something vital to his challenge)...he was given plenty of time to prepare his essay....at the stated time, his Thread was opened....and it remains empty, thus confirming what I suspected.  He is a flake. Quote: Then aussie wanted to get involved and move it to a forum over which he had control.  :o Odd you would see it that way.  All I did was get the challenge (initiated by melielongtime) past an impasse of melielongtime's creation, set the topics as he wanted, and provided the Threads.  I also was able (because I can control to some extent trashing of Threads) to ensure the participants had a fair go.  Melielongtime can still post his essay on incest, yet, of no surprise to me, he has not.  He is a proven flake. [quote]And I noticed that though the challenge was to write a piece that was contrary to the writers natural philosophy I can see much mischief making in future quotes being made and attributed.

If there was mischief, that was the result of the terms of challenge set out by melielongtime.


Quote:

This forum is all levels of dodgy.  Maybe it should be reduced to its essence, those that dissed the original post put up...or not, and that it occur in the thread where it originally happened.  Keeps it all neat that way.

'Neat' is exactly how it was set up.  It is still very 'neat' and there is a gaping vacuum where melielongtime's essay is supposed to be.  He is a proven flake.
[/quote]


Meh, would have been neater without your attempts at meddling and asserting control.  Why did you even want to get involved and farm it off to your little forum and become an adjudicator?

Power thing?  Penis issues? 

What reason?  What benefit did you see in getting yourself involved and modding?   

Kat wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 7:03pm:

cods wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 7:01pm: Kat wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 5:05pm: There NEVER WAS a 'carbon tax', you fools. NOR did Gillard 'lie' about it. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Don't handle the truth very well, do you?

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

so what was it then???... if it didnt flow through to my electricity bill and a few other things along the way..???

and what did she change.. a few months after her deal with the greens...???????

btw that was in the KILLING SEASON.. I am sure you have a signed copy of that havent you for your collection

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


lets hear you version of the TRUTH

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 6:34pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 4:40pm: Quote: all the more reason for the Challenge as originally proposed.  people write about a topic they absolutely oppose.  It is easy to write FOR something you believe.  The real skill is in doing the opposite.  Now when someone agrees to challeng me on that then fine. Until then, it doesn't matter. and I did write the OP in a few minutes. I did say I was a published author right? I now take what you say with less than a grain of salt.  Your topic and your Thread awaits you in Relationships.  How about you prove you are not all piss and wind for a change? I do not believe you are a published anything and I certainly do  not believe you wrote the OP. poor diddums.  cant cope with the fact that I actually write well?  And when I get a serious and willing participant in The Challenge  then I wil do it in the open and in the general forum and not run by an illiterate dimwit as yourself.

I'd be happy to see you write well.  Problem is.....I haven't, and I doubt I ever will.  You are a proven sham.  You had a willing participant (two in fact) and you had your topic, your had your stage (kept clean by me) and it matters not to the outcome of your own challenge that I set it up.  That you reckon I am an 'illiterate dimwit' is totally irrelevant.

I (and perhaps others) always suspected it, now it is proven.  You are a blow hard flake.

Secret Wars wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 7:11pm:

Meh, would have been neater without your attempts at meddling and asserting control.  Why did you even want to get involved and farm it off to your little forum and become an adjudicator? Power thing?  Penis issues?  What reason?  What benefit did you see in getting yourself involved and modding?

HA!  secret wars you are new to me...but behold someone sees this person as I see him... exactly.. a control freak..

I mean did you see the demands he made if someone wanted to write an essay.,.. or even if someone wanted to contribute... ::) ::) ::) it went through him first....a bit like the ABC and Q&A 

he has tried it with myself..only trouble is I fall about laughing....I am sure a few others do as well..

you see secret wars...


i
Aussie wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 7:14pm:

I'd be happy to see you write well.  Problem is.....I haven't, and I doubt I ever will.  You are a proven sham.  You had a willing participant (two in fact) and you had your topic, your had your stage (kept clean by me) and it matters not to the outcome of your own challenge that I set it up.  That you reckon I am an 'illiterate dimwit' is totally irrelevant. I (and perhaps others) always suspected it, now it is proven.  You are a blow hard flake.

if you dare not to follow MODS instructions...then you are shamed forever more.. 8-)


the fact that no one cares what he thinks  doesnt stop him ranting anyway....

I am sure longy is shaking in his jammies....

Quote:

Meh, would have been neater without your attempts at meddling and asserting control.  Why did you even want to get involved and farm it off to your little forum and become an adjudicator?

It would never have happened.  It still has not, because the proven flake is still offering pathetic excuses for his failure.  I did not offer to adjudicate.  If offered and I did, facilitate.  You do know the difference, yeas?


Quote:

Power thing?  Penis issues?

Not yet.  Perhaps down the track.


Quote:

What reason?  What benefit did you see in getting yourself involved and modding?

There was no modding.  There was facilitation.  The benefit was never mine.....it was an attempt (failed) to get melielongtime over the impasse of his own creation.  It removed an excuse he had for not performing.  I'm glad I did, because that Thread is still there, open for him, to insert his essay.  He hasn't, and is still making childish excuses.

Proven flake, and he has himself only to blame if the entire Membership treats him that way.

Really almost 50 posts on rubbish someone just made up ?

Aussie wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 7:01pm:

Secret Wars wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 6:47pm: I watched the writing challenge with some interest.  Seemed  to me that those who were dissing the writing as not belonging to the poster presented no evidence and morover failed to respond to the challenge laid out by the one that was affronted.  Major fails.  The proof is and always was self evident. Melielongtime's usual writing/posting standard is crap, yet suddenly, he produces something which meets average levels of 'English.'  We now have convincing proof, given he was set a topic which he naturally would  not support (something vital to his challenge)...he was given plenty of time to prepare his essay....at the stated time, his Thread was opened....and it remains empty, thus confirming what I suspected.  He is a flake. Quote: Then aussie wanted to get involved and move it to a forum over which he had control.  :o Odd you would see it that way.  All I did was get the challenge (initiated by melielongtime) past an impasse of melielongtime's creation, set the topics as he wanted, and provided the Threads.  I also was able (because I can control to some extent trashing of Threads) to ensure the participants had a fair go.  Melielongtime can still post his essay on incest, yet, of no surprise to me, he has not.  He is a proven flake. [quote]And I noticed that though the challenge was to write a piece that was contrary to the writers natural philosophy I can see much mischief making in future quotes being made and attributed.

If there was mischief, that was the result of the terms of challenge set out by melielongtime.


Quote:

This forum is all levels of dodgy.  Maybe it should be reduced to its essence, those that dissed the original post put up...or not, and that it occur in the thread where it originally happened.  Keeps it all neat that way.

'Neat' is exactly how it was set up.  It is still very 'neat' and there is a gaping vacuum where melielongtime's essay is supposed to be.  He is a proven flake.
[/quote]

Now now, Ausie, Longy makes a valuable contribution to the board. Unabashed Mr Abbott supporter, mathematician, creative writer, he was even once a moderator. He’s that good.

Yes, he may not want to write a piece on something he is deeply opposed to, but surely it’s his right to challenge others to do so in a free society.

You're right Karnal.  I ought just lie about it all, or perhaps pretend it never happened, like melielongtime.

Aussie wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 8:10pm:

You're right Karnal.  I ought just lie about it all, or perhaps pretend it never happened, like melielongtime.

Well, it’s worked for Mr Abbott. He’s a conviction politician.

He’s that good.

There has never been or will ever be a more serious assault on our standard of living than pricing carbon.

It taxes the air we breath and consumers will pay for it.

It's financial slavery on a myth that CO2 some how controls temperature here on Earth.

CO2 has never controlled temperature here on Earth even when it was at 7000ppm compared to todays 400ppm.

Ajax wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 8:26pm:

There has never been or will ever be a more serious assault on our standard of living than pricing carbon. It taxes the air we breath and consumers will pay for it. It's financial slavery on a myth that CO2 some how controls temperature here on Earth. CO2 has never controlled temperature here on Earth even when it was at 7000ppm compared to todays 400ppm.

That should work.

Weird, wot.  In my day, it was never contemplated that sometime down the track you'd have to pay for access to water.  Now, it's access to air/oxygen we have to pay for.

Karnal wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 8:35pm:

Ajax wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 8:26pm: There has never been or will ever be a more serious assault on our standard of living than pricing carbon. It taxes the air we breath and consumers will pay for it. It's financial slavery on a myth that CO2 some how controls temperature here on Earth. CO2 has never controlled temperature here on Earth even when it was at 7000ppm compared to todays 400ppm. That should work.

im sure "Kat" will come up with a witty intelligent reply to all of that..

................................................

oh who an I trying to kid...  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Aussie wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 7:01pm:

Secret Wars wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 6:47pm: I watched the writing challenge with some interest.  Seemed  to me that those who were dissing the writing as not belonging to the poster presented no evidence and morover failed to respond to the challenge laid out by the one that was affronted.  Major fails.  The proof is and always was self evident. Melielongtime's usual writing/posting standard is crap, yet suddenly, he produces something which meets average levels of 'English.'  We now have convincing proof, given he was set a topic which he naturally would  not support (something vital to his challenge)...he was given plenty of time to prepare his essay....at the stated time, his Thread was opened....and it remains empty, thus confirming what I suspected.  He is a flake. Quote: Then aussie wanted to get involved and move it to a forum over which he had control.  :o Odd you would see it that way.  All I did was get the challenge (initiated by melielongtime) past an impasse of melielongtime's creation, set the topics as he wanted, and provided the Threads.  I also was able (because I can control to some extent trashing of Threads) to ensure the participants had a fair go.  Melielongtime can still post his essay on incest, yet, of no surprise to me, he has not.  He is a proven flake. [quote]And I noticed that though the challenge was to write a piece that was contrary to the writers natural philosophy I can see much mischief making in future quotes being made and attributed.

If there was mischief, that was the result of the terms of challenge set out by melielongtime.


Quote:

This forum is all levels of dodgy.  Maybe it should be reduced to its essence, those that dissed the original post put up...or not, and that it occur in the thread where it originally happened.  Keeps it all neat that way.

'Neat' is exactly how it was set up.  It is still very 'neat' and there is a gaping vacuum where melielongtime's essay is supposed to be.  He is a proven flake.
[/quote]


the explanation is obvious and yet far past your intelligence.  NO ONE is going to write a pro-incest article and you chose that because you knew it to be true.  Also, who elected you to decide that you twit.  The original concept was that those who chose to be part of it would write an article on a topic THEY chose.  My choices were pro-gay marriage or pro climate change.  You deliberately went out of your way to choose a topic i could not ever morally support.  I know that in your amoral world the idea of having a line you will not cross doesnt occur to you, but the rest of us do.

I am still waiting for a candidate willing to take on this challenge seriously and without the intervention of an idiot like you.

It is a very simple challenge with very simple rules and to date... without a taker other than me.

cods wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 7:00pm:

crocodile wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 1:44pm: There is nothing really special about a tax on Carbon. It is perfectly saleable as long as it does not increase the overall tax burden. That equates to making it revenue neutral by the complete elimination of other taxes with the revenue generated. There is a good case to be had for eliminating corporate tax and grossly inefficient taxes like stamp duties. Taxing carbon is relatively efficient and difficult to avoid. Stamp duties just act as a restraint to people doing business with each other. However, your observation "Bill Shorten has impressed no one with his political nous" is the obvious hurdle. on my local news today.. we were told our electricity has come down by $500 pa thanks to the removal of the carbon tax.... I am hoping that is so true.. because we are having a very cold winter.. if it means putting back $500 on electricity I cant say as he will be popular....but then hes used to that isnt he??.. and labor are stuck with him.. boo hoo...  :) :) :) :)

Out at the farm the latest bill was well over $500 for residential - not business..... and that's with a wood fire I've spent heaps on for firewood... yummmmm

No saving of $500 on the horizon just yet....  if my home bill went down $500 for the quarter they'd owe me $345.

Secret Wars wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 6:47pm:

I watched the writing challenge with some interest.  Seemed  to me that those who were dissing the writing as not belonging to the poster presented no evidence and morover failed to respond to the challenge laid out by the one that was affronted.  Major fails.  Then aussie wanted to get involved and move it to a forum over which he had control.  :o And I noticed that though the challenge was to write a piece that was contrary to the writers natural philosophy I can see much mischief making in future quotes being made and attributed.  This forum is all levels of dodgy.  Maybe it should be reduced to its essence, those that dissed the original post put up...or not, and that it occur in the thread where it originally happened.  Keeps it all neat that way.

yep thats the nature of some of the clowns here - especially Aussie. 

;D ;D ;D ;D

longies still making excuses

this latest one is a beauty ... the essay was supposed to be in support of a position they were really opposed to, but longie couldn't write about incest because he's opposed to it.  :D :D :D :D :D :D

Kat wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 7:05pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 6:36pm: President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 5:55pm: I wouldn't bother replying to Kat... everyone knows that he's the forums Political Retard...  ::) he is the forum's ANGRY retard. Bicycle Boy should be his name Make yourself useful, troll - go and emulate a camp-fire.

Thats the best you can do, bicycle boy?

John Smith wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 8:45pm:

;D ;D ;D ;D longies still making excuses this latest one is a beauty ... the essay was supposed to be in support of a position they were really opposed to, but longie couldn't write about incest because he's opposed to it.  :D :D :D :D :D :D

MORALLY opposed.  I know 'morals' are something you might not fully understand, but while I can write on most topics, i cannot and will not cross a moral boundary - not even for creative writing.

ONe day you may understand what convictions are but at the moment you probably think they are something courts hand out.

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 8:42pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 7:01pm: Secret Wars wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 6:47pm: I watched the writing challenge with some interest.  Seemed  to me that those who were dissing the writing as not belonging to the poster presented no evidence and morover failed to respond to the challenge laid out by the one that was affronted.  Major fails.  The proof is and always was self evident. Melielongtime's usual writing/posting standard is crap, yet suddenly, he produces something which meets average levels of 'English.'  We now have convincing proof, given he was set a topic which he naturally would  not support (something vital to his challenge)...he was given plenty of time to prepare his essay....at the stated time, his Thread was opened....and it remains empty, thus confirming what I suspected.  He is a flake. Quote: Then aussie wanted to get involved and move it to a forum over which he had control.  :o Odd you would see it that way.  All I did was get the challenge (initiated by melielongtime) past an impasse of melielongtime's creation, set the topics as he wanted, and provided the Threads.  I also was able (because I can control to some extent trashing of Threads) to ensure the participants had a fair go.  Melielongtime can still post his essay on incest, yet, of no surprise to me, he has not.  He is a proven flake. [quote]And I noticed that though the challenge was to write a piece that was contrary to the writers natural philosophy I can see much mischief making in future quotes being made and attributed.  If there was mischief, that was the result of the terms of challenge set out by melielongtime. [quote]This forum is all levels of dodgy.  Maybe it should be reduced to its essence, those that dissed the original post put up...or not, and that it occur in the thread where it originally happened.  Keeps it all neat that way.

'Neat' is exactly how it was set up.  It is still very 'neat' and there is a gaping vacuum where melielongtime's essay is supposed to be.  He is a proven flake.
[/quote]


the explanation is obvious and yet far past your intelligence.  NO ONE is going to write a pro-incest article and you chose that because you knew it to be true.  Also, who elected you to decide that you twit.  The original concept was that those who chose to be part of it would write an article on a topic THEY chose.  My choices were pro-gay marriage or pro climate change.  You deliberately went out of your way to choose a topic i could not ever morally support.  I know that in your amoral world the idea of having a line you will not cross doesnt occur to you, but the rest of us do.

I am still waiting for a candidate willing to take on this challenge seriously and without the intervention of an idiot like you.

It is a very simple challenge with very simple rules and to date... without a taker other than me.[/quote]

Longy thinks it’s a topic he has to morally support.

No worries, Longy. Let’s change the whole thing and go with that. Pick your topic. I accept your challenge.

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 8:49pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 8:45pm: ;D ;D ;D ;D longies still making excuses this latest one is a beauty ... the essay was supposed to be in support of a position they were really opposed to, but longie couldn't write about incest because he's opposed to it.  :D :D :D :D :D :D MORALLY opposed.  I know 'morals' are something you might not fully understand, but while I can write on most topics, i cannot and will not cross a moral boundary - not even for creative writing. ONe day you may understand what convictions are but at the moment you probably think they are something courts hand out.

you should have thought of that before issuing such an open challenge you idiot ... don't make excuses after the fact.

And I wouldn't be lecturing anyone about conviction if I was you, If you really had any sort of conviction you'd take up your own challenge  :D :D :D :D

Karnal wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 8:49pm:

Longy thinks it’s a topic he has to morally support. No worries, Longy. Let’s change the whole thing and go with that. Pick your topic. I accept your challenge.

;D ;D ;D ;D

next week it'll change to it has to be something he supports, he can't write about something he's opposed to. :D :D

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 8:45pm:

Kat wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 7:05pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 6:36pm: President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 5:55pm: I wouldn't bother replying to Kat... everyone knows that he's the forums Political Retard...  ::) he is the forum's ANGRY retard. Bicycle Boy should be his name Make yourself useful, troll - go and emulate a camp-fire. Thats the best you can do, bicycle boy?

you called for lefties to be bombed by terrorists so as to learn a lesson and you call Kat angry? You'll need to do better than that water boy. :D :D :D :D :D

John Smith wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 8:53pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 8:49pm: Longy thinks it’s a topic he has to morally support. No worries, Longy. Let’s change the whole thing and go with that. Pick your topic. I accept your challenge. ;D ;D ;D ;D next week it'll change to it has to be something he supports, he can't write about something he's opposed to. :D :D

Have you thought of accepting Longy’s challenge?

Quote:

"The cost, paid by big polluters, will be passed through to the prices of the goods you buy." Julia Gillard

Quote:

"Australian households will ultimately bear the full cost of the carbon price." Ross Garnaut, Labor Government Appointee and Author of the Climate Change Review

Quote:

"A carbon tax does not guarantee emissions reductions" Former Labor Climate Change Minister Penny Wong

Quote:

"The introduction of a carbon price ahead of effective international action can lead to perverse incentives for such industries to relocate or source production offshore. There is no point in imposing a carbon price domestically which results in emissions and production transferring internationally for no environmental gain." Australian Climate Change Minister Penny Wong 6 feb 2008

Quote:

"International carbon markets will cover billions of consumers this decade. Ask the bankers at your table whether they want Australia to clip that ticket. We’re going to help them get their share." Julia Gillard www.pm.gov.au/press-office/speech-business-council-australia-dinner

Quote:

Generators have received $1 billion in government compensation money in the six months since the carbon price has been in place, the report prepared for lobby group Environment Victoria says. The report estimates generators will receive between $2.3 billion and $5.4 billion, depending on the future carbon price, unless the compensation system is reviewed. http://www.9news.com.au/national/2013/02/20/01/00/power-stations-reap-carbon-windfall-study

Quote:

the explanation is obvious and yet far past your intelligence.

I doubt anyone will takes any further notice of your evaluation of another person's intelligence, given it is proven you are a blow hard sham.


Quote:

NO ONE is going to write a pro-incest article and you chose that because you knew it to be true.

That is a terrific and another example (proof) that you have not written the various OPs under question.  It does not make any sense.


Quote:

Also, who elected you to decide that you twit.

No-one did.  It was my (failed) attempt to move on.  And here we are still reading your pathetic excuses.  Tell you what melielongtime.  Choose your topic, PM me with it, and I'll set up a dedicated secure Thread for you to post your essay.


Quote:

The original concept was that those who chose to be part of it would write an article on a topic THEY chose.  My choices were pro-gay marriage or pro climate change.

Oh, so you wanted an easy way out.  Typical of a sham I suppose. 


Quote:

You deliberately went out of your way to choose a topic i could not ever morally support.  I know that in your amoral world the idea of having a line you will not cross doesnt occur to you, but the rest of us do.

Not at all.  Incest was quite topical at the time, and you were being quite the smart arse by half about it.  That it would be your topic was obvious like dog gonads and I doubt anyone here who was reading it all at the time would have been surprised you were given that topic.


Quote:

I am still waiting for a candidate willing to take on this challenge seriously and without the intervention of an idiot like you.

I reckon it is now established you ought be the last person to pass judgement on anyone else's degree of idiocy.  Yours is now quite clear.  You are a flake.


Quote:

It is a very simple challenge with very simple rules and to date... without a taker other than me.

You have two takers.  One has posted his essay (not chosen by himself) and two others have not.  Mr Peccary has not yet explained his delay.  You spat the dummy, and bolted.

You are a flake.  Do not be surprised when people treat you like a blow hard, noisy empty (let alone abusive) vessel.

Get on with it melielongtime.  Cease the prevarication. 

Karnal wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 8:20pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 8:10pm: You're right Karnal.  I ought just lie about it all, or perhaps pretend it never happened, like melielongtime. Well, it’s worked for Mr Abbott. He’s a conviction politician. He’s that good.

Some people get 20 years for that type of conviction.

Karnal wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 8:49pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 8:42pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 7:01pm: Secret Wars wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 6:47pm: I watched the writing challenge with some interest.  Seemed  to me that those who were dissing the writing as not belonging to the poster presented no evidence and morover failed to respond to the challenge laid out by the one that was affronted.  Major fails.  The proof is and always was self evident. Melielongtime's usual writing/posting standard is crap, yet suddenly, he produces something which meets average levels of 'English.'  We now have convincing proof, given he was set a topic which he naturally would  not support (something vital to his challenge)...he was given plenty of time to prepare his essay....at the stated time, his Thread was opened....and it remains empty, thus confirming what I suspected.  He is a flake. Quote: Then aussie wanted to get involved and move it to a forum over which he had control.  :o Odd you would see it that way.  All I did was get the challenge (initiated by melielongtime) past an impasse of melielongtime's creation, set the topics as he wanted, and provided the Threads.  I also was able (because I can control to some extent trashing of Threads) to ensure the participants had a fair go.  Melielongtime can still post his essay on incest, yet, of no surprise to me, he has not.  He is a proven flake. [quote]And I noticed that though the challenge was to write a piece that was contrary to the writers natural philosophy I can see much mischief making in future quotes being made and attributed.  If there was mischief, that was the result of the terms of challenge set out by melielongtime. [quote]This forum is all levels of dodgy.  Maybe it should be reduced to its essence, those that dissed the original post put up...or not, and that it occur in the thread where it originally happened.  Keeps it all neat that way.  'Neat' is exactly how it was set up.  It is still very 'neat' and there is a gaping vacuum where melielongtime's essay is supposed to be.  He is a proven flake.

the explanation is obvious and yet far past your intelligence.  NO ONE is going to write a pro-incest article and you chose that because you knew it to be true.  Also, who elected you to decide that you twit.  The original concept was that those who chose to be part of it would write an article on a topic THEY chose.  My choices were pro-gay marriage or pro climate change.  You deliberately went out of your way to choose a topic i could not ever morally support.  I know that in your amoral world the idea of having a line you will not cross doesnt occur to you, but the rest of us do.

I am still waiting for a candidate willing to take on this challenge seriously and without the intervention of an idiot like you.

It is a very simple challenge with very simple rules and to date... without a taker other than me.[/quote]

Longy thinks it’s a topic he has to morally support.

No worries, Longy. Let’s change the whole thing and go with that. Pick your topic. I accept your challenge. [/quote]

Well Longie The Literate does like to open a sentence with a small letter....

e.g.:-

you need to start thinking mathematically since everything you say is just garbage...

Response:-  Can you show where my figures are wrong?

you're just a complete idiot and not worth talking to.....

No - Longie is not an angry kid troll at all.. he just writes and acts that way, in between singing in the choir at Hillsong alongside the NSW Police Commissioner.... now there's a scary thought.

Until Red came here I tended to assume that Monsieur Scipione was not too bad as a copper - but all political coppers are bad news for their own and the general public... and then I heard 'Hillsong Member'......

Actually, Aussie, Longy agreed to write about gay incest if I wrote about paedophilia. He then had a fantasy about my being raided by the Feds at 3 in the morning, but I agreed. I still do.

If Longy stands by his challenge, I’ll write a serious article supporting paedophilia.

Agreed?

Quote:

"There will be no Carbon Tax": Shorten

You could think that this topic is about Shorten saying there will be no carbon tax - you would be wrong.

Isnt this next election going to be brilliant.

Labor cant (but will try and fail) use 'we are the workers friends' (if you like back room deals under secrecy and we getting a payoff in secret while you get less money). Work choices type arguments haha, dead.  ;D ;D

Labor cant just bring in a tax on carbon and try to call it anything but.

Labor cant use Abbotts university days. Been there done that

Labor cant use Abbott is a sexist. Been there done that.

Labor are screwed.

Karnal wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 8:49pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 8:42pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 7:01pm: Secret Wars wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 6:47pm: I watched the writing challenge with some interest.  Seemed  to me that those who were dissing the writing as not belonging to the poster presented no evidence and morover failed to respond to the challenge laid out by the one that was affronted.  Major fails.  The proof is and always was self evident. Melielongtime's usual writing/posting standard is crap, yet suddenly, he produces something which meets average levels of 'English.'  We now have convincing proof, given he was set a topic which he naturally would  not support (something vital to his challenge)...he was given plenty of time to prepare his essay....at the stated time, his Thread was opened....and it remains empty, thus confirming what I suspected.  He is a flake. Quote: Then aussie wanted to get involved and move it to a forum over which he had control.  :o Odd you would see it that way.  All I did was get the challenge (initiated by melielongtime) past an impasse of melielongtime's creation, set the topics as he wanted, and provided the Threads.  I also was able (because I can control to some extent trashing of Threads) to ensure the participants had a fair go.  Melielongtime can still post his essay on incest, yet, of no surprise to me, he has not.  He is a proven flake. [quote]And I noticed that though the challenge was to write a piece that was contrary to the writers natural philosophy I can see much mischief making in future quotes being made and attributed.  If there was mischief, that was the result of the terms of challenge set out by melielongtime. [quote]This forum is all levels of dodgy.  Maybe it should be reduced to its essence, those that dissed the original post put up...or not, and that it occur in the thread where it originally happened.  Keeps it all neat that way.  'Neat' is exactly how it was set up.  It is still very 'neat' and there is a gaping vacuum where melielongtime's essay is supposed to be.  He is a proven flake.

the explanation is obvious and yet far past your intelligence.  NO ONE is going to write a pro-incest article and you chose that because you knew it to be true.  Also, who elected you to decide that you twit.  The original concept was that those who chose to be part of it would write an article on a topic THEY chose.  My choices were pro-gay marriage or pro climate change.  You deliberately went out of your way to choose a topic i could not ever morally support.  I know that in your amoral world the idea of having a line you will not cross doesnt occur to you, but the rest of us do.

I am still waiting for a candidate willing to take on this challenge seriously and without the intervention of an idiot like you.

It is a very simple challenge with very simple rules and to date... without a taker other than me.[/quote]

Longy thinks it’s a topic he has to morally support.

No worries, Longy. Let’s change the whole thing and go with that. Pick your topic. I accept your challenge. [/quote]


why must you so dumb, stupid and incomprehensibly foolish?  Maybe as a buddhist the idea of right and wrong does not occur to you but there are actually lines which someone will NOT cross. Period.  You can write and posit a position you do not actually support but there are those places you do not go to EVER.

please.  write an article in support of paedophilia.  go  on. I dare you.  a serious one.  and when you refuse, maybe then you will understand.

or not.  I'm still guessing you wont.

Dnarever wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 9:24pm:

Quote: "There will be no Carbon Tax": Shorten You could think that this topic is about Shorten saying there will be no carbon tax - you would be wrong.

It got derailed by Aussie's pitiful disbelief that I wrote the OP.  He thinks everyone is as angry and illiterate as he is.

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 11:41pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 8:49pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 8:42pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 7:01pm: Secret Wars wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 6:47pm: I watched the writing challenge with some interest.  Seemed  to me that those who were dissing the writing as not belonging to the poster presented no evidence and morover failed to respond to the challenge laid out by the one that was affronted.  Major fails.  The proof is and always was self evident. Melielongtime's usual writing/posting standard is crap, yet suddenly, he produces something which meets average levels of 'English.'  We now have convincing proof, given he was set a topic which he naturally would  not support (something vital to his challenge)...he was given plenty of time to prepare his essay....at the stated time, his Thread was opened....and it remains empty, thus confirming what I suspected.  He is a flake. Quote: Then aussie wanted to get involved and move it to a forum over which he had control.  :o Odd you would see it that way.  All I did was get the challenge (initiated by melielongtime) past an impasse of melielongtime's creation, set the topics as he wanted, and provided the Threads.  I also was able (because I can control to some extent trashing of Threads) to ensure the participants had a fair go.  Melielongtime can still post his essay on incest, yet, of no surprise to me, he has not.  He is a proven flake. [quote]And I noticed that though the challenge was to write a piece that was contrary to the writers natural philosophy I can see much mischief making in future quotes being made and attributed.  If there was mischief, that was the result of the terms of challenge set out by melielongtime. [quote]This forum is all levels of dodgy.  Maybe it should be reduced to its essence, those that dissed the original post put up...or not, and that it occur in the thread where it originally happened.  Keeps it all neat that way.  'Neat' is exactly how it was set up.  It is still very 'neat' and there is a gaping vacuum where melielongtime's essay is supposed to be.  He is a proven flake. the explanation is obvious and yet far past your intelligence.  NO ONE is going to write a pro-incest article and you chose that because you knew it to be true.  Also, who elected you to decide that you twit.  The original concept was that those who chose to be part of it would write an article on a topic THEY chose.  My choices were pro-gay marriage or pro climate change.  You deliberately went out of your way to choose a topic i could not ever morally support.  I know that in your amoral world the idea of having a line you will not cross doesnt occur to you, but the rest of us do. I am still waiting for a candidate willing to take on this challenge seriously and without the intervention of an idiot like you. It is a very simple challenge with very simple rules and to date... without a taker other than me.

Longy thinks it’s a topic he has to morally support.

No worries, Longy. Let’s change the whole thing and go with that. Pick your topic. I accept your challenge. [/quote]


why must you so dumb, stupid and incomprehensibly foolish?  Maybe as a buddhist the idea of right and wrong does not occur to you but there are actually lines which someone will NOT cross. Period.  You can write and posit a position you do not actually support but there are those places you do not go to EVER.

please.  write an article in support of paedophilia.  go  on. I dare you.  a serious one.  and when you refuse, maybe then you will understand.

or not.  I'm still guessing you wont.[/quote]

No worries. You don’t want to write about a topic you feel strongly against. I understand.

A 600 word essay on Mr Abbott should do you.

What do you want me to write about?

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 11:42pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 9:24pm: Quote: "There will be no Carbon Tax": Shorten You could think that this topic is about Shorten saying there will be no carbon tax - you would be wrong. It got derailed by Aussie's pitiful disbelief that I wrote the OP.  He thinks everyone is as angry and illiterate as he is.

No one believes you now. Accept the challenge and you might gain back some credibility.

I’m only trying to help, Longy. Write on a topic you feel strongly about. What do you choose?

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 11:14pm:

Isnt this next election going to be brilliant. Labor cant (but will try and fail) use 'we are the workers friends' (if you like back room deals under secrecy and we getting a payoff in secret while you get less money). Work choices type arguments haha, dead.  ;D ;D Labor cant just bring in a tax on carbon and try to call it anything but. Labor cant use Abbotts university days. Been there done that Labor cant use Abbott is a sexist. Been there done that. Labor are screwed.

You seem to be missing just how much ammunition Abort has given his political opponents , but you will find out around election time to refresh your memory  :).

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 11:42pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 9:24pm: Quote: "There will be no Carbon Tax": Shorten You could think that this topic is about Shorten saying there will be no carbon tax - you would be wrong. It got derailed by Aussie's pitiful disbelief that I wrote the OP.  He thinks everyone is as angry and illiterate as he is.

Not to worry melielongtime.  I've written and posted your piece for you.

Aussie wrote on Jul 16^th, 2015 at 6:41am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 11:42pm: Dnarever wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 9:24pm: Quote: "There will be no Carbon Tax": Shorten You could think that this topic is about Shorten saying there will be no carbon tax - you would be wrong. It got derailed by Aussie's pitiful disbelief that I wrote the OP.  He thinks everyone is as angry and illiterate as he is. Not to worry melielongtime.  I've written and posted your piece for you.

Longy’s changed the rules now, Aussie. He now wants to write a story he deeply believes in. I’ve suggested Mr Abbott, but I know he’s going to struggle with that.

I’ve give you some help if you want, Longy. You’ll really need to ramp it up with this one.

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 11:14pm:

Isnt this next election going to be brilliant. Labor cant (but will try and fail) use 'we are the workers friends' (if you like back room deals under secrecy and we getting a payoff in secret while you get less money). Work choices type arguments haha, dead.  ;D ;D Labor cant just bring in a tax on carbon and try to call it anything but. Labor cant use Abbotts university days. Been there done that Labor cant use Abbott is a sexist. Been there done that. Labor are screwed.

At the next Leaders debate what do you think the worms repose will be to the return of the guy who told about 347 direct lies at his previous appearance in 2013 ?

How can Tony open his mouth on any topic and think that anyone would believe what he is saying ?

Tony Abbott and http://www.elephantsgifts.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/copper-elephant-figurine-278x300.jpg - gate!

..wait, let's not forget http://www.uaf.edu/files/news/download/releasephotos/08/7-image.jpg - gate!!

WhAT ABOUT SLAVES-HAVE- https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/67/2e/ce/672ece37cdd02b3d220fecc3db2e80a1.jpg-NO-choiCEs-gate?????

Its time wrote on Jul 16^th, 2015 at 5:25am:

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 11:14pm: Isnt this next election going to be brilliant. Labor cant (but will try and fail) use 'we are the workers friends' (if you like back room deals under secrecy and we getting a payoff in secret while you get less money). Work choices type arguments haha, dead.  ;D ;D Labor cant just bring in a tax on carbon and try to call it anything but. Labor cant use Abbotts university days. Been there done that Labor cant use Abbott is a sexist. Been there done that. Labor are screwed. You seem to be missing just how much ammunition Abort has given his political opponents , but you will find out around election time to refresh your memory  :).

Hmmmmmmn, I wouldn't want an election around summertime and wintertime would mean another budget unless.........  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

John Smith wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 8:52pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 8:49pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 8:45pm: ;D ;D ;D ;D longies still making excuses this latest one is a beauty ... the essay was supposed to be in support of a position they were really opposed to, but longie couldn't write about incest because he's opposed to it.  :D :D :D :D :D :D MORALLY opposed.  I know 'morals' are something you might not fully understand, but while I can write on most topics, i cannot and will not cross a moral boundary - not even for creative writing. ONe day you may understand what convictions are but at the moment you probably think they are something courts hand out. you should have thought of that before issuing such an open challenge you idiot ... don't make excuses after the fact. And I wouldn't be lecturing anyone about conviction if I was you, If you really had any sort of conviction you'd take up your own challenge  :D :D :D :D

i said that right from the start you complete boofhead.

Karnal wrote on Jul 16^th, 2015 at 12:03am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 11:42pm: Dnarever wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 9:24pm: Quote: "There will be no Carbon Tax": Shorten You could think that this topic is about Shorten saying there will be no carbon tax - you would be wrong. It got derailed by Aussie's pitiful disbelief that I wrote the OP.  He thinks everyone is as angry and illiterate as he is. No one believes you now. Accept the challenge and you might gain back some credibility. I’m only trying to help, Longy. Write on a topic you feel strongly about. What do you choose?

you dont want to help at all.  you are doing a greens-win by taking every post and distorting it to suit your own agenda - whatever the hell that is!  everything you do and say is evidence of why you re an unsuitable candidate for The Challenge.  You are not serious and apparently dont have an opinion on anything that you hold strongly.

Dnarever wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 9:01pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 8:20pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 8:10pm: You're right Karnal.  I ought just lie about it all, or perhaps pretend it never happened, like melielongtime. Well, it’s worked for Mr Abbott. He’s a conviction politician. He’s that good. Some people get 20 years for that type of conviction.

Howard got 12 years... as PM

Still waiting for our 550 bucks  :D

Its time wrote on Jul 16^th, 2015 at 10:19am:

Still waiting for our 550 bucks  :D

Oh, yeh, then there's 550-bucks-gate  :) :)

Dnarever wrote on Jul 16^th, 2015 at 8:57am:

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 11:14pm: Isnt this next election going to be brilliant. Labor cant (but will try and fail) use 'we are the workers friends' (if you like back room deals under secrecy and we getting a payoff in secret while you get less money). Work choices type arguments haha, dead.  ;D ;D Labor cant just bring in a tax on carbon and try to call it anything but. Labor cant use Abbotts university days. Been there done that Labor cant use Abbott is a sexist. Been there done that. Labor are screwed. At the next Leaders debate what do you think the worms repose will be to the return of the guy who told about 347 direct lies at his previous appearance in 2013 ? How can Tony open his mouth on any topic and think that anyone would believe what he is saying ?

lol like the carbon tax.

You and the post above you are not realising the most affective campaigns that labor have had, are also the most hypocritical if they try to use them again. Abbott lied, yeh so what, so did labor but on items that hit home to the average voter much more than any Abbott lie labor dares trot out at election time.

Labor will be ineffective with their campaign because as you say, they will try the tired and now openly hypocritical arguments against Abbott. Labor will be found very wanting.

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 16^th, 2015 at 11:13am:

Dnarever wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 8:57am: progressiveslol wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 11:14pm: Isnt this next election going to be brilliant. Labor cant (but will try and fail) use 'we are the workers friends' (if you like back room deals under secrecy and we getting a payoff in secret while you get less money). Work choices type arguments haha, dead.  ;D ;D Labor cant just bring in a tax on carbon and try to call it anything but. Labor cant use Abbotts university days. Been there done that Labor cant use Abbott is a sexist. Been there done that. Labor are screwed. At the next Leaders debate what do you think the worms repose will be to the return of the guy who told about 347 direct lies at his previous appearance in 2013 ? How can Tony open his mouth on any topic and think that anyone would believe what he is saying ? lol like the carbon tax. You and the post above you are not realising the most affective campaigns that labor have had, are also the most hypocritical if they try to use them again. Abbott lied, yeh so what, so did labor but on items that hit home to the average voter much more than any Abbott lie labor dares trot out at election time. Labor will be ineffective with their campaign because as you say, they will try the tired and now openly hypocritical arguments against Abbott. Labor will be found very wanting.

Let's bring on the election then and find out  :D :D :D :D :D :D

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 16^th, 2015 at 11:13am:

Dnarever wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 8:57am: progressiveslol wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 11:14pm: Isnt this next election going to be brilliant. Labor cant (but will try and fail) use 'we are the workers friends' (if you like back room deals under secrecy and we getting a payoff in secret while you get less money). Work choices type arguments haha, dead.  ;D ;D Labor cant just bring in a tax on carbon and try to call it anything but. Labor cant use Abbotts university days. Been there done that Labor cant use Abbott is a sexist. Been there done that. Labor are screwed. At the next Leaders debate what do you think the worms repose will be to the return of the guy who told about 347 direct lies at his previous appearance in 2013 ? How can Tony open his mouth on any topic and think that anyone would believe what he is saying ? lol like the carbon tax. You and the post above you are not realising the most affective campaigns that labor have had, are also the most hypocritical if they try to use them again. Abbott lied, yeh so what, so did labor but on items that hit home to the average voter much more than any Abbott lie labor dares trot out at election time. Labor will be ineffective with their campaign because as you say, they will try the tired and now openly hypocritical arguments against Abbott. Labor will be found very wanting.

The carbon tax was one incident that was somewhat mitigated and probably no lie anyway in comparison to the Liberals lies on everything. You have to be kidding if you see no difference.

Tony Abbott told 6 lies in 24 words and he presented all the same lies plus many more during the Leaders debate.

something like 70% of Abbotts leaders debate content was dishonest.

Dnarever wrote on Jul 16^th, 2015 at 11:40am:

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 11:13am: Dnarever wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 8:57am: progressiveslol wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 11:14pm: Isnt this next election going to be brilliant. Labor cant (but will try and fail) use 'we are the workers friends' (if you like back room deals under secrecy and we getting a payoff in secret while you get less money). Work choices type arguments haha, dead.  ;D ;D Labor cant just bring in a tax on carbon and try to call it anything but. Labor cant use Abbotts university days. Been there done that Labor cant use Abbott is a sexist. Been there done that. Labor are screwed. At the next Leaders debate what do you think the worms repose will be to the return of the guy who told about 347 direct lies at his previous appearance in 2013 ? How can Tony open his mouth on any topic and think that anyone would believe what he is saying ? lol like the carbon tax. You and the post above you are not realising the most affective campaigns that labor have had, are also the most hypocritical if they try to use them again. Abbott lied, yeh so what, so did labor but on items that hit home to the average voter much more than any Abbott lie labor dares trot out at election time. Labor will be ineffective with their campaign because as you say, they will try the tired and now openly hypocritical arguments against Abbott. Labor will be found very wanting. The carbon tax was one incident that was somewhat mitigated and probably no lie anyway in comparison to the Liberals lies on everything. You have to be kidding if you see no difference. Tony Abbott told 6 lies in 24 words and he presented all the same lies plus many more during the Leaders debate. something like 70% of Abbotts leaders debate content was dishonest.

Abbott might be viewed by the electorate as a liar rightly or wrongly, but this is a comparison event.  Do you really think Bill SHorten is going to look less like a liar?  If anything, his reputation is worse and as the heir to Gillard and Rudd he inherits part of their reputation as liars as well.

Shorten is still Abbotts biggest asset.

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 16^th, 2015 at 12:04pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 11:40am: progressiveslol wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 11:13am: Dnarever wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 8:57am: progressiveslol wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 11:14pm: Isnt this next election going to be brilliant. Labor cant (but will try and fail) use 'we are the workers friends' (if you like back room deals under secrecy and we getting a payoff in secret while you get less money). Work choices type arguments haha, dead.  ;D ;D Labor cant just bring in a tax on carbon and try to call it anything but. Labor cant use Abbotts university days. Been there done that Labor cant use Abbott is a sexist. Been there done that. Labor are screwed. At the next Leaders debate what do you think the worms repose will be to the return of the guy who told about 347 direct lies at his previous appearance in 2013 ? How can Tony open his mouth on any topic and think that anyone would believe what he is saying ? lol like the carbon tax. You and the post above you are not realising the most affective campaigns that labor have had, are also the most hypocritical if they try to use them again. Abbott lied, yeh so what, so did labor but on items that hit home to the average voter much more than any Abbott lie labor dares trot out at election time. Labor will be ineffective with their campaign because as you say, they will try the tired and now openly hypocritical arguments against Abbott. Labor will be found very wanting. The carbon tax was one incident that was somewhat mitigated and probably no lie anyway in comparison to the Liberals lies on everything. You have to be kidding if you see no difference. Tony Abbott told 6 lies in 24 words and he presented all the same lies plus many more during the Leaders debate. something like 70% of Abbotts leaders debate content was dishonest. Abbott might be viewed by the electorate as a liar rightly or wrongly, but this is a comparison event.  Do you really think Bill SHorten is going to look less like a liar?  If anything, his reputation is worse and as the heir to Gillard and Rudd he inherits part of their reputation as liars as well. Shorten is still Abbotts biggest asset.

Lol, is this Maurice Newman or something?  :D :D

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 16^th, 2015 at 10:12am:

Karnal wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 12:03am: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 11:42pm: Dnarever wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 9:24pm: Quote: "There will be no Carbon Tax": Shorten You could think that this topic is about Shorten saying there will be no carbon tax - you would be wrong. It got derailed by Aussie's pitiful disbelief that I wrote the OP.  He thinks everyone is as angry and illiterate as he is. No one believes you now. Accept the challenge and you might gain back some credibility. I’m only trying to help, Longy. Write on a topic you feel strongly about. What do you choose? you dont want to help at all.  you are doing a greens-win by taking every post and distorting it to suit your own agenda - whatever the hell that is!  everything you do and say is evidence of why you re an unsuitable candidate for The Challenge.  You are not serious and apparently dont have an opinion on anything that you hold strongly.

Are you worried I'll beat you, Longy?

You're struggling very hard to get out of this, you know. They say you learn to like it if you just submit.

Why don't you just follow through with your own challenge?

Karnal wrote on Jul 16^th, 2015 at 1:26pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 10:12am: Karnal wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 12:03am: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 11:42pm: Dnarever wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 9:24pm: Quote: "There will be no Carbon Tax": Shorten You could think that this topic is about Shorten saying there will be no carbon tax - you would be wrong. It got derailed by Aussie's pitiful disbelief that I wrote the OP.  He thinks everyone is as angry and illiterate as he is. No one believes you now. Accept the challenge and you might gain back some credibility. I’m only trying to help, Longy. Write on a topic you feel strongly about. What do you choose? you dont want to help at all.  you are doing a greens-win by taking every post and distorting it to suit your own agenda - whatever the hell that is!  everything you do and say is evidence of why you re an unsuitable candidate for The Challenge.  You are not serious and apparently dont have an opinion on anything that you hold strongly. Are you worried I'll beat you, Longy? You're struggling very hard to get out of this, you know. They say you learn to like it if you just submit. Why don't you just follow through with your own challenge?

and for the 100th time, propose a subject you passionately oppose and then write an article in support of that.  Whenever I ask that you bluster and deflect and say something you (and only you) thinks is humourous.  when you get serious, I will get serious.  Until then...

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 16^th, 2015 at 3:22pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 1:26pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 10:12am: Karnal wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 12:03am: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 11:42pm: Dnarever wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 9:24pm: Quote: "There will be no Carbon Tax": Shorten You could think that this topic is about Shorten saying there will be no carbon tax - you would be wrong. It got derailed by Aussie's pitiful disbelief that I wrote the OP.  He thinks everyone is as angry and illiterate as he is. No one believes you now. Accept the challenge and you might gain back some credibility. I’m only trying to help, Longy. Write on a topic you feel strongly about. What do you choose? you dont want to help at all.  you are doing a greens-win by taking every post and distorting it to suit your own agenda - whatever the hell that is!  everything you do and say is evidence of why you re an unsuitable candidate for The Challenge.  You are not serious and apparently dont have an opinion on anything that you hold strongly. Are you worried I'll beat you, Longy? You're struggling very hard to get out of this, you know. They say you learn to like it if you just submit. Why don't you just follow through with your own challenge? and for the 100th time, propose a subject you passionately oppose and then write an article in support of that.  Whenever I ask that you bluster and deflect and say something you (and only you) thinks is humourous.  when you get serious, I will get serious.  Until then...

I have, Longy. Bill Shorten. I'm serious. You know I'm serious because you commented on this in the Bill Shorten thread.

I've opened a thread with your challenge in the General board, as you requested.

What subject will you write on?

I wonder if melielongtime will regard me as a suitable challenger.  Surely he must, given I have done his piece for him.

Melielingtime, am I worthy?

Aussie wrote on Jul 16^th, 2015 at 3:28pm:

I wonder if melielongtime will regard me as a suitable challenger.  Surely he must, given I have done his piece for him. Melielingtime, am I worthy?

You're free to join in too, Aussie. Longy's changed it to be a subject you get to choose.

Karnal wrote on Jul 16^th, 2015 at 3:30pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 3:28pm: I wonder if melielongtime will regard me as a suitable challenger.  Surely he must, given I have done his piece for him. Melielingtime, am I worthy? You're free to join in too, Aussie. Longy's changed it to be a subject you get to choose.

it was ALWAYS that.  i cant work out if you are stupid or simply cannot read.  why dont you try - just for a moment - and imagine that most people actually say what they mean and mean what they say.

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 16^th, 2015 at 3:47pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 3:30pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 3:28pm: I wonder if melielongtime will regard me as a suitable challenger.  Surely he must, given I have done his piece for him. Melielingtime, am I worthy? You're free to join in too, Aussie. Longy's changed it to be a subject you get to choose. it was ALWAYS that.  i cant work out if you are stupid or simply cannot read.  why dont you try - just for a moment - and imagine that most people actually say what they mean and mean what they say.

Believe you me . Is that you Tony ?

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 16^th, 2015 at 12:04pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 11:40am: progressiveslol wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 11:13am: Dnarever wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 8:57am: progressiveslol wrote on Jul 15th, 2015 at 11:14pm: Isnt this next election going to be brilliant. Labor cant (but will try and fail) use 'we are the workers friends' (if you like back room deals under secrecy and we getting a payoff in secret while you get less money). Work choices type arguments haha, dead.  ;D ;D Labor cant just bring in a tax on carbon and try to call it anything but. Labor cant use Abbotts university days. Been there done that Labor cant use Abbott is a sexist. Been there done that. Labor are screwed. At the next Leaders debate what do you think the worms repose will be to the return of the guy who told about 347 direct lies at his previous appearance in 2013 ? How can Tony open his mouth on any topic and think that anyone would believe what he is saying ? lol like the carbon tax. You and the post above you are not realising the most affective campaigns that labor have had, are also the most hypocritical if they try to use them again. Abbott lied, yeh so what, so did labor but on items that hit home to the average voter much more than any Abbott lie labor dares trot out at election time. Labor will be ineffective with their campaign because as you say, they will try the tired and now openly hypocritical arguments against Abbott. Labor will be found very wanting. The carbon tax was one incident that was somewhat mitigated and probably no lie anyway in comparison to the Liberals lies on everything. You have to be kidding if you see no difference. Tony Abbott told 6 lies in 24 words and he presented all the same lies plus many more during the Leaders debate. something like 70% of Abbotts leaders debate content was dishonest. Abbott might be viewed by the electorate as a liar rightly or wrongly, but this is a comparison event.  Do you really think Bill SHorten is going to look less like a liar?  If anything, his reputation is worse and as the heir to Gillard and Rudd he inherits part of their reputation as liars as well. Shorten is still Abbotts biggest asset.

Do you really think Bill SHorten is going to look less like a liar?

Yes by a huge margin.

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 16^th, 2015 at 12:04pm:

Shorten is still Abbotts biggest asset.

And if memory serves that what Labor (and I) thought about Abbott.

Be careful placing faith in the electorate, they are a bunch of friggin idiots.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Jul 16^th, 2015 at 4:00pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 12:04pm: Shorten is still Abbotts biggest asset. And if memory serves that what Labor (and I) thought about Abbott. Be careful placing faith in the electorate, they are a bunch of friggin idiots.

there werent many serious or intelligent people who thought that.  Abbott had already dispatched 2 PMs and comes with a handful of votes of winning his first unwinnable election.  you under-estimate him at your peril. and you did.

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 16^th, 2015 at 4:16pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 4:00pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 12:04pm: Shorten is still Abbotts biggest asset. And if memory serves that what Labor (and I) thought about Abbott. Be careful placing faith in the electorate, they are a bunch of friggin idiots. there werent many serious or intelligent people who thought that.  Abbott had already dispatched 2 PMs and comes with a handful of votes of winning his first unwinnable election.  you under-estimate him at your peril. and you did.

Labor destroyed themselves with factional fighting and an aggressive murdoch led campaign that was served up to the masses who swallowed 3 word slogans with zero substance , tony played his part with his over reaction over carbon pricing , his who can you trust line will haunt him at next election .

Abort will be like Howard when he handed over economy to Keating thanking god they dont have to deal with it after making a total shambles of it .

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 16^th, 2015 at 3:47pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 3:30pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 16th, 2015 at 3:28pm: I wonder if melielongtime will regard me as a suitable challenger.  Surely he must, given I have done his piece for him. Melielingtime, am I worthy? You're free to join in too, Aussie. Longy's changed it to be a subject you get to choose. it was ALWAYS that.  i cant work out if you are stupid or simply cannot read.  why dont you try - just for a moment - and imagine that most people actually say what they mean and mean what they say.

That's strange. You've chosen both mine and Aussie's topics.

Do you actually read your own posts or just not mean them?

I'm curious.

So Labor plans a new carbon tax. Or is it a Carbon Levy or....

it will raise power prices ten percent.... AGAIN