Australian Politics Forum - Beware the Teaparty Downunder.

BlOoDy RiPpEr

Gold Member

Offline

aussie-patriot.com

Posts: 2475
Sydney
Gender: male

Re: Beware the Teaparty Downunder.
Reply #15 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 9:03am

Soren wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 9:00am:

MOTR wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 4:13am:

Quote:

He often refers to the current PM, Ms. Gillard, as unqualified on matters of family as she has no children.

Just out of curiosity - how exactly is Gillard qualified to speak on matters of family in the sense of being a parent and having kids and so forth? Or at least, how is she equally qualified, compared to someone who is actually a parent?
Would you take family/parenting advice from any other industrial lawyer/union official?

Gillard gets her parenting advise from people smugglers.

Back to top

host of the aussie-patriot.com site

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg Gold Member Offline WE ARE BORG Posts: 26486 Australia	Re: Beware the Teaparty Downunder. Reply #16 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 9:04am Im sure abbot has spent time looking after the kids while his wife is off @ work hey. SOB
Back to top	Whaaaaaah! I'm a Moron! - edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope IP Logged

FriYAY Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 7395	Re: Beware the Teaparty Downunder. Reply #17 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 9:10am Soooooooo desperate.
Back to top	IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: Beware the Teaparty Downunder.
Reply #18 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 4:48pm

Soren wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 9:00am:

MOTR wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 4:13am:

Quote:

He often refers to the current PM, Ms. Gillard, as unqualified on matters of family as she has no children.

Just out of curiosity - how exactly is Gillard qualified to speak on matters of family in the sense of being a parent and having kids and so forth? Or at least, how is she equally qualified, compared to someone who is actually a parent?
Would you take family/parenting advice from any other industrial lawyer/union official?

You are completely missing the point, Soren. The Labor government does not suffer from a lack of Ministers with parenting experience. Good leaders can empathise and take advice, they govern for all, irrespective of shared experiences. Abbott is dog whistling. He's uneccesarily highlighting her lack of children, deliberately appealing to known prejudices within our community.

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 73813
Gender: male

Re: Beware the Teaparty Downunder.
Reply #19 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 5:06pm

Soren wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 9:00am:

MOTR wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 4:13am:

Quote:

He often refers to the current PM, Ms. Gillard, as unqualified on matters of family as she has no children.

Just out of curiosity - how exactly is Gillard qualified to speak on matters of family in the sense of being a parent and having kids and so forth? Or at least, how is she equally qualified, compared to someone who is actually a parent?
Would you take family/parenting advice from any other industrial lawyer/union official?

Sure, Abbott has kids but as a member of parilament for most of that time, how qualified is he to give advice? He spent most of that time away from his kids and left his wife to raise the kids, it was once said that a parliamentarians wife is like a single mother ... not exactly a role model for a father now is he. If anything, I'd say his opinion is skewed by his experiences. Because he has kids he thinks he doesn't need to take advice and is less inclined to listen to others.

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 135384
Gender: male

Re: Beware the Teaparty Downunder.
Reply #20 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 5:29pm

MOTR wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 4:13am:

This is contrary to the findings of roughly 97% of climate scientists who study the effects of man-made pollutants on our global ecosphere. (Quote from the US Blogger).

Ah, the old "97% of climate scientists" again.

And strangely, when you click on the link provided, it says nothing about the "97%". That's because he's trying to hide the facts.

So, let's look at those facts shall we:

" ... the ’97% of active climate scientists’ quote/soundbite actually comes from a students MSc thesis, that the Doran EoS paper cites".

"Here are but just a few of many responses from scientists that actually took part in the survey, taken from the appendi of the MSc thesis:"

“..scientific issues cannot be decided by a vote of scientists. A consensus is not, at any given time, a good predictor of where the truth actually resides..”

“..The “hockey stick” graph that the IPCC so touted has, it is my understanding, been debunked as junk science..”

“..I’m not sure what you are trying to prove, but you will undoubtably be able to prove your pre-existing opinion with this survey! I’m sorry I even started it!..”

"The Doran paper has been criticised by many sceptics in the past, where a survey of 10,256 with 3146 respondents was whittled down to 75 out of 77 “expert” ’active climate researchers’ (ACR) to give the 97% figure, based on just two very simplistic (shallow) questions that even the majority of sceptics might agree with."

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/18/what-else-did-the-97-of-scientists-say/

Roll Eyes

Back to top

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: Beware the Teaparty Downunder.
Reply #21 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 5:47pm

MOTR wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 4:48pm:

Soren wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 9:00am:

MOTR wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 4:13am:

Quote:

He often refers to the current PM, Ms. Gillard, as unqualified on matters of family as she has no children.

Just out of curiosity - how exactly is Gillard qualified to speak on matters of family in the sense of being a parent and having kids and so forth? Or at least, how is she equally qualified, compared to someone who is actually a parent?
Would you take family/parenting advice from any other industrial lawyer/union official?

You are completely missing the point, Soren. The Labor government does not suffer from a lack of Ministers with parenting experience. Good leaders can empathise and take advice, they govern for all, irrespective of shared experiences. Abbott is dog whistling. He's uneccesarily highlighting her lack of children, deliberately appealing to known prejudices within our community.

Without names or gender identifiers, ask anyone with kids whether they think another parent or an unmarried, childless industrial lawyer understands their lives better.

This is a representative democracy. Gillard does not represent parents. Why can't this be uttered? Bob Brown didn't represent families, the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence don't represent families.

Anyway - Tea Party. What's the frothing about the Tea Party? Did they threaten to behead anyone who disrespects what they think? All you ninnies get worked up about a bunch of middle aged people with jobs who say what they think. Is it only the Gen Z (what letter are we up to anyway?), Occupy the Sofa crowd that is allowed to protest and voice their views?

Back to top

« Last Edit: Feb 20^th, 2013 at 5:56pm by Soren »

IP Logged

corporate_whitey Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 8896 Archivist	Re: Beware the Teaparty Downunder. Reply #22 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 5:52pm The false prophets of secular humanism, social Darwinism and social engineering don't represent families either...dont forget them....I believe John Howard will be judged harshly for his crimes against Australian families....
Back to top	World Wide Working Class Struggle IP Logged

Soren Gold Member Offline Posts: 25654 Gender:	Re: Beware the Teaparty Downunder. Reply #23 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 5:57pm corporate_whitey wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 5:52pm: The false prophets of secular humanism, social Darwinism and social engineering don't represent families either...dont forget them....I believe John Howard will be judged harshly for his crimes against Australian families.... Oh bugger!! Not you?!?!
Back to top	IP Logged

greggerypeccary Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 135384 Gender:	Re: Beware the Teaparty Downunder. Reply #24 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 6:02pm MOTR wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 6:22am: ... the anti science brigade. Actually, brainwashed followers of the AGW religion are the "anti science brigade". They don't include rational skepticism in their evaluation of the hypothesis. Nothing scientific about that.
Back to top	IP Logged

corporate_whitey

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 8896
Archivist

Re: Beware the Teaparty Downunder.
Reply #25 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 6:03pm

Soren wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 5:57pm:

corporate_whitey wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 5:52pm:

The false prophets of secular humanism, social Darwinism and social engineering don't represent families either...dont forget them....I believe John Howard will be judged harshly for his crimes against Australian families....

Oh bugger!! Not you?!?!

You got it wrong doers...there is no ideological mask you can hide your wickedness behind that we will not bring into the light of Gods judgment...

Back to top

World Wide Working Class Struggle

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Beware the Teaparty Downunder.
Reply #26 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 6:05pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 6:02pm:

MOTR wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 6:22am:

... the anti science brigade.

Actually, brainwashed followers of the AGW religion are the "anti science brigade".

They don't include rational skepticism in their evaluation of the hypothesis.

Nothing scientific about that.

-->>real estate agents can't look their kids in the eye after saying things like that!

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: Beware the Teaparty Downunder.
Reply #27 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 6:07pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 5:29pm:

MOTR wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 4:13am:

This is contrary to the findings of roughly 97% of climate scientists who study the effects of man-made pollutants on our global ecosphere. (Quote from the US Blogger).

Ah, the old "97% of climate scientists" again.

And strangely, when you click on the link provided, it says nothing about the "97%". That's because he's trying to hide the facts.

So, let's look at those facts shall we:

" ... the ’97% of active climate scientists’ quote/soundbite actually comes from a students MSc thesis, that the Doran EoS paper cites".

"Here are but just a few of many responses from scientists that actually took part in the survey, taken from the appendi of the MSc thesis:"

“..scientific issues cannot be decided by a vote of scientists. A consensus is not, at any given time, a good predictor of where the truth actually resides..”

“..The “hockey stick” graph that the IPCC so touted has, it is my understanding, been debunked as junk science..”

“..I’m not sure what you are trying to prove, but you will undoubtably be able to prove your pre-existing opinion with this survey! I’m sorry I even started it!..”

"The Doran paper has been criticised by many sceptics in the past, where a survey of 10,256 with 3146 respondents was whittled down to 75 out of 77 “expert” ’active climate researchers’ (ACR) to give the 97% figure, based on just two very simplistic (shallow) questions that even the majority of sceptics might agree with."

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/18/what-else-did-the-97-of-scientists-say/

Roll Eyes

What's your point, greggery. Doran surveyed a whole host of earth scientists of which climate scientists were a small subset. Not all replied, but a good chunk of them did. Of the 77 climate scientists that did reply, 75 of them accepted the AGW hypothesis. If you were at all familiar with the peer reviewed scientific literature, you'd know this sort of result is to be expected. Unfortunately, you're not overly familiar with the scientific literature and you allow the obtuse Watts to do your thinking for you.

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Beware the Teaparty Downunder.
Reply #28 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 6:07pm

corporate_whitey wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 6:03pm:

Soren wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 5:57pm:

corporate_whitey wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 5:52pm:

The false prophets of secular humanism, social Darwinism and social engineering don't represent families either...dont forget them....I believe John Howard will be judged harshly for his crimes against Australian families....

Oh bugger!! Not you?!?!

You got it wrong doers...there is no ideological mask you can hide your wickedness behind that we will not bring into the light of Gods judgment...

...
why won't
god judge you

for asking that Craig Thompson be hung untried from the Sydney Harbor Bridge??

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

adelcrow Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20133 everywhere Gender:	Re: Beware the Teaparty Downunder. Reply #29 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 6:07pm Dont let the Tea Party take over the Liberal Party..join up today and back the moderate factions in your state
Back to top	Go the Bunnies IP Logged