Julie Bishop asked a series of questions in Question Time yesterday. All of them directed at the Prime Minister. Two questions were ruled out of order.
First out of order question:
Ms JULIE BISHOP (Curtin—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (14:39): My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to the Prime Minister’s statement yesterday and to this 1996 affidavit of Ian Cambridge that states $300,000 in cash was withdrawn by Bruce Wilson from bank accounts in the name of the AWU over four years to:
… “launder” Union funds, as a step in the conversion of those funds to unauthorised, … irregular, and possibly illegal uses.
As the Prime Minister cannot recall receiving $5,000 from Bruce Wilson, how can the Prime Minister rule out receiving any cash or benefit at any time from these accounts?
The SPEAKER: I think that question was a step too far, and I will be ruling it out of order.
Ms Julie Bishop: Speaker—
The SPEAKER: I do not need to explain. I am ruling the question out of order.
Ms Julie Bishop: Speaker, I rise on a point of order. These are a series of questions that I have asked in this form over the last couple of days. The preamble is the same, so it is not the preamble. In relation to the last part of the question, I will ask if the Prime Minister received any funds from any of these accounts, on that basis.
The SPEAKER: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will resume her seat. I have ruled the question out of order.
Second out of order question:
Ms JULIE BISHOP (Curtin—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (14:43): My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer the Prime Minister to her statement yesterday and to the affidavit of then AWU head Ian Cambridge that states around $100,000 from the AWU slush fund was used to purchase a house in Fitzroy in which Bruce Wilson lived. When did the Prime Minister first learn that funds from the AWU Workplace Reform Association were used in the purchase of the Fitzroy property which her then boyfriend Bruce Wilson lived in?
The SPEAKER: Again, I am not sure that this, like the last question, is in the realm of the Prime Minister’s discretion. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition would like to argue the toss or rephrase, but I am finding it hard to know why the last two questions are within the area of the Prime Minister’s responsibility.
Mr Pyne: Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The standing orders—and, in fact, the House of Representatives Practice—make it very clear that ministers and the Prime Minister can be questioned about public statements that they have made. The Prime Minister has held two press conferences on this issue. She has stated on many occasions that she had no wrongdoing at any time with respect to the AWU slush fund. But she has said that, when she became aware of wrongdoing, she ended the relationship with her then boyfriend. That is why it goes within her responsibilities.
The SPEAKER: The Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat. I have allowed a great deal of latitude in respect of these issues by virtue of the issue that the Manager of Opposition Business has gone to—that is, that the Prime Minister has made numerous statements. I think these last two questions are going beyond that, and I am ruling them out of order.
Mrs Bronwyn Bishop: Speaker, I rise on a point of order.
The SPEAKER: The member for Mackellar has the call. This is a very important matter, and I am prepared to listen to argument in respect of it. This would not be allowed under normal circumstances.
Mrs Bronwyn Bishop: The Practice makes it quite clear that ministers, which includes the Prime Minister, should be ready and able to answer questions which are reported upon in newspapers and other forms of media. The Prime Minister has deliberately chosen a course of making statements to the media and not answering questions asked in this place. The reason for that is that you can say anything you like to the media and it has no consequences but if in this place you make statements which are misleading there are consequences. Continually we have sat here and listened to the Prime Minister say ‘it is sleaze’, and whatever it is which she seems to attract. The idea that—
The SPEAKER: The member for Mackellar will resume her seat before she goes too far and I have to remove her for again abusing points of order. I understand the point the member for Mackellar has raised, but I think these issues have been canvassed, and these areas are outside the responsibility of the Prime Minister in relation to this issue.
Mr Albanese: Speaker, on a point of order: the member for Mackellar during her point of order suggested that the Prime Minister could say whatever she liked to the media and have no consequences for it. That is an extraordinary statement for the member for Mackellar to have—
Mr Secker interjecting—
The SPEAKER: The member for Barker could have asked that of everybody before the Leader of the House got to his feet. The Leader of the House has the call.
Mr Albanese: There is of course political accountability for our actions.
Mr Pyne interjecting—
The SPEAKER: The Manager of Opposition Business was allowed to make his statement without interruption. The Leader of the House has the call.
Mr Albanese: With regard to your ruling, Speaker, it is absolutely correct, because we have not objected to a range of questions that have been raised by the opposition, although we could have. On these last two questions they have gone too far. They are clearly not within the Prime Minister’s responsibilities, and your ruling is correct.
Julie Bishop represents “The Division of Curtin which is an Australian Electoral Division in Western Australia. The division was created in 1949 and is named for John Curtin, who was Prime Minister of Australia 1941-45. Before 1949, much of this area was part of the Division of Fremantle, which Curtin represented for most of the time from 1928 to 1945.” John Curtin died trying to save the ALP. What would he make of this shameful lot?
stackja
28 Nov 12 at 8:41 pm
Gillard had a client who turned out to be dodgy. Lawyers spend a lot of time advising the unpopular and the unpleasant on how to advance their interests within the limits of the law.
Thank god she was not a criminal defence lawyer. Opposition researchers would be going over every client and cross-examination. Looking for what? The judge runs the proceedings and keeps the parties within the rules of criminal procedure.
Jim Rose
28 Nov 12 at 8:42 pm
fixed that for you.
entropy
28 Nov 12 at 8:48 pm
fixed it even more.
entropy
28 Nov 12 at 8:52 pm
There’d be innocent people in jail.
At the very least all this as shown that she wasn’t very good as a lawyer. Not keeping records? Assuming that the people she was dealing with were properly authorised to act? At the very least you’d expect a written instruction on an official letterhead.
Sinclair Davidson
28 Nov 12 at 8:53 pm
Incompetent Lawyers spend a lot of time advising the unpopular and the unpleasant union shonks who they are bonking on how to advance their scams instead of their legitimate clients interests within the limits of the law.
Fixed it even more Entropy.
Carpe Jugulum
28 Nov 12 at 8:58 pm
Unrelated issue out of curiosity: if a woman regularly sleeping with a man who already has a wife and kids is a mistress, what do you call the man?
entropy
28 Nov 12 at 9:04 pm
Besides arsehole, I mean.
entropy
28 Nov 12 at 9:05 pm
Grub.
Sinclair Davidson
28 Nov 12 at 9:05 pm
“Since the general nature of Question Time has evolved over the years Speakers have tended to be somewhat lenient in applying the standing orders with the result that, for example, breaches of only minor procedural importance have not prevented questions on issues of special public interest. The extent of such leniency varies from Speaker to Speaker. In addition, some latitude is generally extended to Opposition Leaders in asking oral questions and to the Prime Minister in answering them.”
Laymans guide to question time:
http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/House_of_Representatives/Powers_practice_and_procedure/00_-_Infosheets/Infosheet_1_-_Questions
3d1k
28 Nov 12 at 9:05 pm
what do you call the man?
A matress
Carpe Jugulum
28 Nov 12 at 9:05 pm
Skanky Man-Ho?
A Snatch Catcher?
Alternate Sperm Donor?
Carpe Jugulum
28 Nov 12 at 9:08 pm
how old fashioned. I did not know he was married? Was he?
Jim Rose
28 Nov 12 at 9:10 pm
see http://listverse.com/2011/04/21/top-10-philandering-english-monarchs/ for a harmless aside on the correct English usage of the word mistress.
Jim Rose
28 Nov 12 at 9:12 pm
Would my question to the PM be ruled out of order?
PM in what capacity did you act for Mr Wilson? was it in a private capacity or as an in-house solicitor at Slater & Gordon?
Tintarella di Luna
28 Nov 12 at 9:16 pm
all true.
Gab
28 Nov 12 at 9:18 pm
Or were wyou merely being a common slattern advancing your own self interests?.
My little add on.
Carpe Jugulum
28 Nov 12 at 9:20 pm
Burke is a disgrace.
I would not be at all surprised if she was given a signal to rule the questions out of order.
jupes
28 Nov 12 at 9:21 pm
Jupes – exactly – hence my cut’n'paste above: latitude is generally extended…but not by this Speaker. No pressure from this Speaker on the PM to stay on issue, to answer the question, but plenty of latitude granted for Gillard to stonewall. Alas no latitude for allowing these two ‘out of order’ questions from Bishop. Something is so wrong.
3d1k
28 Nov 12 at 9:32 pm
A tosser.
Yup, a dad with two children. Our PM has made a habit of sleeping around with married men, so not exactly a model, moral citizen would you say. Also is on record for referring to wives as prostitutes. Such a wonderful example to young womanhood – Prime Homewrecker of Australia.
A Lurker
28 Nov 12 at 9:35 pm
The choices are clear. Gillard is either a corrupt thief or one of the stupidest lawyers in history.
Infidel Tiger
28 Nov 12 at 9:42 pm
Is there an “all of the above” box I can tick?
nilk
28 Nov 12 at 9:47 pm
That would depend on which of her liaisons you are referring to. It certainly applies in more than one of them.
Zatara
28 Nov 12 at 9:48 pm
It’s good to be the king.
entropy
28 Nov 12 at 9:51 pm
I’d call him a Bounder, a Blackguard, a Cad, Scoundrel.
I like old fashioned terms like these. I would call her a Harpy:a cruel grasping woman.
1. Greek Mythology One of several loathsome, voracious monsters with the head and trunk of a woman and the tail, wings, and talons of a bird.
2. harpy A predatory person.
3. harpy A shrewish woman.
Splatacrobat
28 Nov 12 at 9:54 pm
A Lurker
Given that he had a wife in Perth, a lawyer mistress in Melbourne, and the scuttlebutt is that he was a very busy bee about the AWU offices, all at the same time, Mr Wilson might be many things but I doubt he had the time or the energy to also be a tosser.
entropy
28 Nov 12 at 9:54 pm
Once again for the slow learners, rules regarding questions:
(c) A Minister can only be questioned on the following matters, for which he or she is responsible or officially connected:
(i) public affairs;
(ii) administration; or
(iii) proceedings pending in the House.
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 9:56 pm
Stronzo is an Italian word I use to describe that sort of man
min
28 Nov 12 at 9:58 pm
There are always toilet breaks…
A Lurker
28 Nov 12 at 9:58 pm
Steve C: Public affairs (also extended in the modern era as public interest, and has been interpreted thus by Speakers in the the past) should suffice.
3d1k
28 Nov 12 at 10:02 pm
I think Bishop’s questions fall under ‘public affairs’. After all the PM gave a lengthy press conference on those ‘public affairs’ immediately prior to question time.
Sinclair Davidson
28 Nov 12 at 10:05 pm
But the speaker (rightly in my mind) disagreed. Bummer , Eh?
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 10:11 pm
So Steve,
that explains the lack of questioning of the coalition over the AWB scandal in the house of reps.
‘wit
duncanm
28 Nov 12 at 10:11 pm
Thank you Carpe your contribution gives my question a certain “je ne sais quoi?”
I really want to know what her soliciting cost Slater & Gordon, we all know what it’s cost Australia
Tintarella di Luna
28 Nov 12 at 10:16 pm
I didn’t hear question time today. Did the opposition think of any questions about matters of actual policy importance?
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 10:18 pm
It’s the $5,000 that worries j.gillard, i think.
whatever way you look at it, a shonky/crim married lover depositing what would be now $8000 in your account via a third person does not have pleasant overtones.
candy
28 Nov 12 at 10:18 pm
Unusual to a goose so well done this far out from Christmas.
Leigh Lowe
28 Nov 12 at 10:19 pm
“Did the opposition think of any questions about matters of actual policy importance?”
They do so regularly. Just because on this occasion they decided to concentrate on impugning the PM’s character rather than her policies doesn’t mean they aren’t trying to get answers on policy at other times.
Jarrah
28 Nov 12 at 10:22 pm
Doesn’t worry me. There is an election coming.
Sinclair Davidson
28 Nov 12 at 10:23 pm
French.
Mother Hubbard's Dog
28 Nov 12 at 10:23 pm
Really, what does she have to hide? They are straightforward questions requiring a yes/no answer. It’s not complicated. Imagine if the situation was reversed. Would the Labor opposition give the government a pass on such shonky dealings in the PM’s past? No.
Gab
28 Nov 12 at 10:24 pm
She’s a dumb-arse, driven by pride and poorly advised by McTurdman I think.
The best answer to “did you benefit from this?” came from Blewitt.
He said something along te lines of “he might have paid for the odd meal or coffee or beer for me with stolen money. Who knows? But I didn’t get any direct financial benefit?”
Gillard coud have played that card but more so ……. “What woman questions where the money has come from when their partner buys them a small gift or a night out? In retrospect maybe he did buy me things with stolen. Money but I certainly didn’t know or suspect that until I found out much later that he had stolen money”
Leigh Lowe
28 Nov 12 at 10:24 pm
She meant that Gillard couldn’t wiggle out of it.
C.L.
28 Nov 12 at 10:25 pm
They never answer those anyway! Pay attention.
Gab
28 Nov 12 at 10:25 pm
A year away Sinclair. A complete waste of time by the opposition. Does anyone talk about Thompson any more?
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 10:26 pm
Stop whingeing about the ref.
Having said that, it’s all going swimmingly in my view. LSC is investigating the professional angle. Faris QC and Bargaric are flipping through the docs as they come to hand. All the players are cutting each others throats. They all have credibility issues.
PM has comprehensively shat on former Best Mate Blewie. Mrs Blewie has hit back from Bali. Ranting in Parliament at fever pitch.
And no one made any munny cause the worms et it.
I have urged laughter at this circus for a long time. Better than rage.
These may be our nations darkest days since 1942. Or not. But they’re certainly the funniest.
Pickles
28 Nov 12 at 10:28 pm
In order for consumation to take place, the house in Fitzroy must have had some high-end block out blinds looking at both of them now.
Leigh Lowe
28 Nov 12 at 10:28 pm
I agree min, that is indeed an excellent word min, so onomatpoeaic reminds me of the source of a stronzo like Wilson – Underbelly Union-Labor in so many ways.
Tintarella di Luna
28 Nov 12 at 10:28 pm
How many letters do you think she wrote as a lawyer. Do you remember every business letter you wrote 17 years ago about inconsequential matters?
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 10:28 pm
A year isn’t a long time. In the meantime facts are being established on the ground. Thomson and even Slipper, not to mention electricity prices, are all bubbling along nicely. This adds to the whiff that surrounds the Gillard government.
Sinclair Davidson
28 Nov 12 at 10:29 pm
Gab, get yourself an aeropress. Then you can use the commonly available (in Coles) fine ground Illy.
Mother Hubbard's Dog
28 Nov 12 at 10:30 pm
That’s a good description Splat – but there’s something about “termagant” that immediately conjures up Gillard for me.
Tintarella di Luna
28 Nov 12 at 10:31 pm
Question Time is a joke.
Dorothy Dixers must be banned and so must the reading of questions. If a member is too stupid to recall a question without notes they shouldn’t be allowed to stand up.
Infidel Tiger
28 Nov 12 at 10:31 pm
I suspect electricity prices will start to be defused when we have a sensible approach to short term peak demand management. Most people will realise carbon pricing has f’all to do with the massive increase in electricity prices over the last 5 years.
The trend line in polling does not augur well for an opposition with no articulated policies.
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 10:33 pm
I recall similar sentiments on this blog about Obama. That worked out well for the anti-Obama camp didn’t it?
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 10:34 pm
At least give yourself a refractory period before you pull it that hard again, son.
Infidel Tiger
28 Nov 12 at 10:35 pm
This whole thing is running in several parallel universes.
Dickheads like Faine are demanding that ther be no reporting until a “smoking gun” can be found and saying that “lawyers do dodgy things for dodgy clients all the time”.
A breathtaking way the illustrate that you don’t comprehend the only two professions you have ever had ….. law and journalism.
But this has nothing to do with the law or journalism …. It is about whether voters will think she is fit to hold office the next time they vote.
I detect a real reluctance to bag her publicly after her mysoginy rant, but, in the privacy of the polling booth justice will prevail …….
Leigh Lowe
28 Nov 12 at 10:35 pm
http://centrebet.com/#Sports/2062830
Infidel Tiger
28 Nov 12 at 10:35 pm
Imagine of Gillard was a tax or family law lawyer. lots of push to the limits of the law work there too.
Jim Rose
28 Nov 12 at 10:35 pm
I’d like to see the entire coalition, one by one, be evicted from the lower house. After an abuse of power by the speaker like that above. Each of them stand up, one by one, call the PM corrupt and the speaker a joke, and get expelled one by one. With Tony Abbott last to go.
I’m pretty sure it would be the end of the parliament. Something would snap and we’d be off to an election. But either way, it would be the story.
Tim
28 Nov 12 at 10:35 pm
Thanks, Dog however I have my Bialetti coffee maker – all the good wogs have them – which is placed on the stovetop. Using Lavazza ground coffee which is excellent, but the Illy is far better.
Gab
28 Nov 12 at 10:36 pm
So I guess we have established that there is no known term for the male partner of a mistress? It can’t be master, could it?
entropy
28 Nov 12 at 10:37 pm
Some fun markets here:
http://www.sportsbet.com.au/betting/politics
You can even back Swanny to pull of a surplus.
Infidel Tiger
28 Nov 12 at 10:37 pm
Absolutely. QT should only be the opposition asking questions of the government. QED.
Gab
28 Nov 12 at 10:38 pm
May favourite market.
Next member of Lilley:
Wayne Swan: $2.10
Rod McGarvie: $1.50
Infidel Tiger
28 Nov 12 at 10:39 pm
I prefer merlo. Private Blend for a long black, Riviera in a latte.
entropy
28 Nov 12 at 10:40 pm
I’m not game to open the link for the “Craig Thomson Specials”, IT.
Gab
28 Nov 12 at 10:40 pm
But then how could a backbencher ask questions about constituent matters that aren’t being addressed? Like McClelland?
entropy
28 Nov 12 at 10:41 pm
That’s not the point SteveC, you’re just being a tool.
It’s not the number of business letters Ms Gillard wrote– it’s the number of ‘funny business’ business letters she wrote for a stronzo with whom she was having an affair.
Those ‘funny business’ business letters of which, I’d venture, Ms Gillard remembers each and every word. Those troublesome words from those ‘funny business’ business letters haunt her by night notwithstanding the relaxing baths drawn by the ever attentive Timmie.
Tintarella di Luna
28 Nov 12 at 10:42 pm
?
On the contrary my friend. The opposition has a never ending loop of shit to throw at Gillard with minimal effort. Remember that Plod is still looking at Thommo, Slippery has stuff still to deal with and the AWU thing still has legs.
I would love to be running the Coalition advertising campaign next time around ……. it will be a target rich environment.
Leigh Lowe
28 Nov 12 at 10:42 pm
Gillard’s policy: make major dogooder announcements promising feel good objectives then turn to the States to demand they make them happen. She’s utterly hopeless.
Lloyd
28 Nov 12 at 10:42 pm
SteveC,maybe you missed the bit about the PM being a lying,cheating worthless witch, some things are all about a policy that comes from her lying lips, so yes these are to do with policy.
I thought the dudd was a complete arsehole, but fk me drunk, I did not think it would get this bad.
gnasher
28 Nov 12 at 10:47 pm
I recall eerily similar statements about Obama, and look how that turned out.
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 10:48 pm
Yes Tim that would be a fitting end to an English farce. If Italian, the opposition would all yell and wave their erms about and storm out out at once. A Tiawanese farce would conclude with Everyone punching everyone else.
But an Aussie farce? Something akin to the scene from that famous training fillum where Bazza gets on the piss with some fellows from the local agricultural college. They shotgun dozens of Fosters cans then piss on a fire to put it out. Something like that for the final day would be noice.
Pickles
28 Nov 12 at 10:50 pm
Some thoughts on the creation of the AWU Slush Fund.
The (real) AWU’s purpose was to look after “workplace health and safety.” and keeping up with the training etc. It was their job! There was absolutely no need to start a separate “Association” for the very same purpose as the AWU already had in place.!
In the AWU – WA there already was an “election fund” account and there was no reason to start a new one!
Gillard had 22 other unions in her role in SLAG and she did not open a slush fund for any of them!
Just saying!
Winnedge
28 Nov 12 at 10:52 pm
Based on your supposition that she was knowingly in on the scam. If it was just an every day run of the mill letter, then of course she wouldn’t remember it. Your incorrect assumption leads to your incorrect conclusion.
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 10:53 pm
They’ve all gone to water after that. It’s like they were winded.
FFS libs, she attacked your leader as a way to divert attention from what was going on that day. The lardarse was doing all she could to protect a real misogynist (Musselman Slipper) and what do you do? You all go into hiding.
Go after her inside and outside parliament. All of you get thrown out and make the Speaker the issue.
Call her a crook outside parliament and challenge her to take legal action.
Don’t just stand there.
JC
28 Nov 12 at 10:54 pm
How do you know that?
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 10:54 pm
Yes, Tintarella, he is always like this. Arguing with stevec is like going down the rabbit hole.
Gab
28 Nov 12 at 10:55 pm
SteveC
Are there any barriers, anything at all, any line you wouldn’t cross over ethics, or do you just kneel there and take it right in the gob, as long as it’s someone helping moocherville mooch more?
Honest question.
JC
28 Nov 12 at 10:57 pm
How appropriate she had a role in SLAG.
And how exactly do you know she didn’t do anything shifty for them?
JC
28 Nov 12 at 10:58 pm
A simple barrier JC. Any credible evidence.
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 10:58 pm
Brandis has just accused of professional misconduct and criminal conduct. It’s on now. Properly.
Pickles
28 Nov 12 at 10:59 pm
LOl.
SteveC on your knees.
JC
28 Nov 12 at 10:59 pm
Steve C. She Knows. She has not forgotten. These very concerns were inhibitors to Gillard’s pre-selection attempts. She needs to be honest to Parliament. All settled then, so easy – what is the inhibitor now?
3d1k
28 Nov 12 at 10:59 pm
I heard that earlier. Good for him. Brandis is actually quite articulate and would be able to demonstrate how and why he arrived at that conclusion.
JC
28 Nov 12 at 11:01 pm
Accused Gillard, that is.
Pickles
28 Nov 12 at 11:02 pm
So your defence of Gillard is that she was always setting up dodgy accounts and can’t be accepted to remember the details?
That’s novel.
Infidel tiger
28 Nov 12 at 11:02 pm
IT, Gillard herself said setting up re-election funds was run of the mill business at S&G. So, no, not novel.
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 11:04 pm
Tim @ 10.35pm
While watching the farce that is Question Time in the House of Reps, I have a number of times suggested much the same thing to my wife.
Septimus
28 Nov 12 at 11:04 pm
At this time Brandis would be good in the house. Bishop was a solicitor. Brandi’s is silk.
Can some one link or post the vision pls?
Pickles
28 Nov 12 at 11:05 pm
The fact that Gillard is being so doggedly stubborn about directly answering questions put on this matter means she not only has a clear recollection of the salient points but recognizes the legal and political dangers.
Christ why is this even being questioned? It’s so goddam obvious.
Lloyd
28 Nov 12 at 11:05 pm
Steve C. I’ll take the opportunity to say ‘good job’. It’s very hard being devil’s advocate – I know from being just that at another site (Macrobusiness) from which as of yesterday I have been banned – so much for classical liberal ideals!
For my money, the devil’s advocate keeps the rest on their toes – and occasionally scores a goal. Cheers. But ya wrong!!
3d1k
28 Nov 12 at 11:06 pm
So Slater and Gordon set up thousands of illegal slush funds without opening files or telling the various unions? They are despicable low rent outfit staffed by the detritus who couldn’t get real jobs in the law, but that sounds tawdry even for them.
Infidel tiger
28 Nov 12 at 11:07 pm
So how will Caterer’s Blend go in the Aeropress?
(Pick the tea bloke)
Mk50 of Brisbane
28 Nov 12 at 11:08 pm
3d1k. Your argument is circular. You know she is lying now only because you assume she was lying 20 years ago. If she wasn’t lying 20 years ago then her answers now make perfect sense. Don’t you think if there was any credible evidence since Phil Gude first raised the issue in 1995 it would have been found by now?
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 11:08 pm
Tea? Tea is for when one is ill.
Gab
28 Nov 12 at 11:08 pm
Whoa. Pickles:
really?
oh my…
links??
Mk50 of Brisbane
28 Nov 12 at 11:09 pm
Steve C. According to KangarooCourt, Emily’s List was set-up by Gillard at a similar time to the AWU association. Emily’s List was dedicated to funding female aspirants to political office…
3d1k
28 Nov 12 at 11:09 pm
How Catallaxy got Gillard:
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 11:10 pm
3d1k
Please cease and desist from paying this imbecile compliments as it will go to his head and troll even more. He’s a first rate idiot who should have been booted outta here a long time ago.
And why eggsactly do you need leftwing comments? You don’t know what these morons are going to say?
JC
28 Nov 12 at 11:10 pm
Well, I have been called a sick puppy on occasion. But the occasion was… one where gallows humour was all we had left.
And the ever mellifluent Jarrah insists I am a weirdo. Does that count, Gab?
Mk50 of Brisbane
28 Nov 12 at 11:11 pm
Got off your knees steveC or if choose not to please post at porn sites where that sort of thing is tolerated in public.
JC
28 Nov 12 at 11:12 pm
Steve C. I will be well satisfied when Ms Gillard answers direct questions in Parliament in a non-diversionary manner, frank and open exploration, with honesty at the core.
Simple.
3d1k
28 Nov 12 at 11:12 pm
Sure but I was only jesting, you tea drinker. *smirk*
Gab
28 Nov 12 at 11:13 pm
3d1k, not sure why that is relevant but according to Emily’s List, “EMILY’s List Australia was established 1996 by a passionate and committed group of women, many of whom are current and past leaders in Australia.”
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 11:13 pm
JC – ethos of classical liberalism – tolerance. Persuade via solid debate!
3d1k
28 Nov 12 at 11:14 pm
yeah I’ve noticed that a bit about SteveC, does the “C” stand for Cantankerous d’y think? Just asking?
Tintarella di Luna
28 Nov 12 at 11:15 pm
“I will be well satisfied when Ms Gillard answers direct questions in Parliament in a non-diversionary manner, frank and open exploration, with honesty at the core.”
When has a politician EVER done that?
Jarrah
28 Nov 12 at 11:15 pm
You’re a stupid bastard; “sensible approach”; that would mean having no power at all.
All this bullshit about baseload and gold-platting are typical slogans by the pro-Gillard, AGW morons who have not got a clue.
Baseload is an actual physical requirement. If it is not met society stops; no public transport, no hospitals, no airconditioned buildings over 2 storeys; nothing; society stops.
Now, is that what you want steve: society to stop? Are you one of those gamers who play apocalyptic video games and who think it would be exciting to live in a dystopic world; perhaps you imagine you would have super powers to deal with the exciting times?
Is that your motive you puerile arrogant jerk? It must be; noone remotely sane could believe that renewables will power anything; you obviously don’t, because you concede some “sensible approach” will be necessary.
This is not a discussion any more; you pricks are the enemy.
cohenite
28 Nov 12 at 11:16 pm
that makes it okay then. It’s them. It’s different. Just shut up.
You are a seriously retarded spoon SteveC. Claiming it was for one thing knowing that it would be used for another is dishonest. That’s best case scenario for the slapper. Do you take idiot pills. There’s a village looking for you.
Tiny Dancer
28 Nov 12 at 11:16 pm
Steve C: Emily’s List
http://kangaroocourtofaustralia.com/2012/10/18/julia-gillard-set-up-a-slush-fund-in-1996-for-female-politicians-while-police-investigated-another-slush-fund-she-set-up/
3d1k
28 Nov 12 at 11:17 pm
Martin Ferguson is the only one who can save anything for them. Do it Marn..
Pickles
28 Nov 12 at 11:19 pm
“Is that your motive you puerile arrogant jerk?”
Oh, the irony.
Jarrah
28 Nov 12 at 11:19 pm
Cafone?
Gab
28 Nov 12 at 11:19 pm
cohenite, i talked about short term peak demand, not base load.
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 11:20 pm
How dare you, you, you misogynisitic sexist accuse me of suppositories when I used none whatsoever in relation to Ms Gillard’s soliciting on behalf of her married lover for the incorporation of an association in WA. You have applied to me your standards you, you, you … awful person you.
I will not be lectured about suppositories by a stronzo like you, Mr C
Tintarella di Luna
28 Nov 12 at 11:21 pm
Mar’n should have drilled a hole in this boat’s hull ages ago.
Infidel tiger
28 Nov 12 at 11:22 pm
Bravo cohenite!
Lloyd
28 Nov 12 at 11:22 pm
I concur cohenite.
Pickles
28 Nov 12 at 11:25 pm
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-11-28/brandis-claims-in-senate-that-pm-breached-criminal-laws/4397254
Sinclair Davidson
28 Nov 12 at 11:26 pm
Senator Brandis today in the Senate:
Gab
28 Nov 12 at 11:27 pm
Why do I need to persuade the kneepadder that the Lying Slapper is a crook? Why the effort?
And how many leftwingers have you helped to persuade to classic liberalism?
Leftism is a mental illness which is a canopy of dishonesty, willful delusion, deceit, spite, vengeance, envy and greed.
Each one of these mental illnesses is difficult to treat on its own. Taken together and not even the best psychiatrist in the world would be able to untangle this mess. Give up the attempt at persuasion.
They can only help themselves and come out on their own.
Our job, if we choose to accept it, is abuse and relentlessly going after them until they quit. Otherwise it’s mission impossible.
JC
28 Nov 12 at 11:27 pm
Snap! Doomlord.
Gab
28 Nov 12 at 11:27 pm
Steve C: my argument is circular – possibly – but this whole fiasco ties one in knots. My gut feel, rumours are true. Canberra Press Gallery, on occasion uselessness personified and generally sympathetic to moderate left views, choose their spin. I suggest the legal firm involved acted as it did in the 90s for good reason. Further, there have long been ‘whispers’ here in WA – and not that long ago a gentlemen was photographed outside a storage terminal saying he had collated/collected all relevant documents because he thought something was ‘sus’. Ain’t heard no more about that gentlemen…
Seriously, and most unfortunately, we all know Labor now is not what it once was. Look around Steve, no longer the values of my Dad or Grandad. Poisoned.
3d1k
28 Nov 12 at 11:28 pm
Oh, mine’s the full Hansard transcript, Doomlord
Gab
28 Nov 12 at 11:28 pm
Brandis should say it on the steps on Parliament. The Slap wouldn’t dream of suing.
Infidel tiger
28 Nov 12 at 11:30 pm
Geez you’re good at that gab.
Pickles
28 Nov 12 at 11:31 pm
Some background reading for you cohenite – Chapter 9 in particular.
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 11:32 pm
My eggsact sentiments. There’s no meeting of minds or agree to disagree. Fuck’em.
They impose the carbin tax with the aid of two acidic independents, our side will remove it with maximum prejudice and with all the malice with intent to cause mental pain and anguish.
JC
28 Nov 12 at 11:32 pm
lol. JC. Fair enough. I gave it my best at ‘that other site’. Hard nuts to crack. I would have kept going but in true left fashion was censored!
For mine, I adhere to the values I espouse – and enjoy a good rustle on the way.
3d1k
28 Nov 12 at 11:32 pm
That is the killer for Ms Gillard –
Ms Gillard’s cavalary and footsoldiers can palarver all they want about it being the WA Corporate Affairs Commission’s responsibility to ensure entities are legitimately established.
However,if Ms Gillard,as an Officer on the Rolls of Solicitors in the Supreme Court of Victoria deceived a Statutory Authority by providing false and misleading information then the responsibility lies entirely with Ms Gillard and that’ll be the crack-a-pollie moment for the ‘young and naive’ Ms Gillard.
Tintarella di Luna
28 Nov 12 at 11:33 pm
Meanwhile back at the House:
Julie Bishop: My question is directed to the Prime Minister.
Anna Burke: Your question is out of order! Sit down.
Julie Bishop: But I haven’t even asked a question.
Anna Burke: I will take no more of this. Any question the deputy leader of the Opposition asks is automatically out of order. Got that?
Samuel J
28 Nov 12 at 11:35 pm
sounds like a feasible plan Samuel J
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 11:37 pm
Nice vid
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSqDExOvUdM&feature=plcp
Viva
28 Nov 12 at 11:37 pm
Tintarella – I will be keen to see what comes of Bishop’s repeated requested for an answer from Gillard as to correspondence with the WACAC. One can only hope the past few days have been slow burn, tomorrow the fire – that Bishop has the relevant evidential documentation.
3d1k
28 Nov 12 at 11:37 pm
Fuckface, it has had a material impact for a number of reasons. The Carbin tax was just one of the many things on the road to Hell. Energy firms began to discount carbin pwicing and took action. The renew ball quota has had an adverse impact. Coal plants spent less on plant maintenance.
To suggest that gold plating was the cause, would in a just world mean your immediate execution with no possibility of appeal.
JC
28 Nov 12 at 11:38 pm
Oh wow…
Brandis is a flipping silk.
This just got much more serious. The Slapper must be sweating mercury vapour and warthog bile right about now.
Mk50 of Brisbane
28 Nov 12 at 11:38 pm
Tintarella @ 11.21, do you really mean suppositories or would suppositions be a better word?
nilk
28 Nov 12 at 11:39 pm
Steve C. You honestly believe that?
3d1k
28 Nov 12 at 11:39 pm
MK50, check your email.
Gab
28 Nov 12 at 11:40 pm
sorry 3d1k, believe which?
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 11:40 pm
a feasible plan (response to Samuel J)
3d1k
28 Nov 12 at 11:41 pm
And the name of this creature that sweats mercury vapour and warthog bile is? …… TLS
Tintarella di Luna
28 Nov 12 at 11:42 pm
TLS: Times Literary Supplement? Joking.
3d1k
28 Nov 12 at 11:44 pm
The Great Retardo:
FFS.
look at the book value of coal-fired stations before this moronic policy, then after.
you might notice a 50-60% value decline, idiot.
Then, you worthless blithering frog-buggering cretin, tell me just effing how the bloody owners were supposed to be able to get finance for major f*cking maintenance expenditures and system upgrades!
ye Gods these worthless incompetent brain-dead window-licking snaggle-toothed fabulist bastards are stupid.
Mk50 of Brisbane
28 Nov 12 at 11:44 pm
Sportsbet has a buck sixty on the budget being in deficit. I’ll take those odds!
SteveC: You’ve got to remember that while it was 17 years ago, the work was done for her lover, so it would kind of be hard to forget things like a mortgage arranged through your firm, an association you helped to incorporate, a power of attorney you drafted – for your lover’s benefit, $5k dropped into your account (approx 6-7 weeks take home pay for Brucie based on his legitimate salary of about $50kpa). Saying she had witnessed thousands of powers of attorney is a gross exaggeration anyway. Maybe tens.
It’s also kind of implausible that she didn’t know that a mortgage had been arranged (did Wilson go to another S&G partner behind his lover’s back to arrange it?), and that she didn’t realise that he was living a lifestyle based on about 5 to 10 times his legitimate salary (depending on how much he precisely ripped off – anywhere up to $2M over 4 years I believe). Not that I’m calling her a liar – oh wait, yea I am – a confirmed liar.
Alx
28 Nov 12 at 11:44 pm
Depends what the polls say. If the polls don’t register much concern in voterland, then this is over. Then the surrogates have to carry the heavy load.
There is a risk voterland is bored by all this and will punish the Libs if they hand onto it for too long. It’s really complex for anyone not too interested to understand.
Don’t forget that Clinton was wounded over the impeachment thing but the voters also punished the GOP for going after him. Voterland is a funny universe.
JC
28 Nov 12 at 11:44 pm
Jc, you would benefit from the same background reading I suggested to cohenite.
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 11:44 pm
.
.
Spot on!
Watch Albo while the questions are being asked.
He is like a fuckin line coach for the LA Dodgers
Leigh Lowe
28 Nov 12 at 11:45 pm
Got it, gab. Reply sent.
Mk50 of Brisbane
28 Nov 12 at 11:46 pm
ooooh such embarrassment — I must have mis-read Mr C’s Suppository response — actually I think suppositories will do perfectly because SteveC’s insufferable misogyny gives me the shits!!!! He’s just soooo negative – but maybe that’s just a supposition.
Tintarella di Luna
28 Nov 12 at 11:47 pm
Given the mortgage file was handled by Styant-Browne, yes that would appear to be the case.
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 11:47 pm
Mark Baker has an important update.
Harold
28 Nov 12 at 11:48 pm
She actually said “thousands and thousands and thousands”
Just being punctilious. Carry on.
Gab
28 Nov 12 at 11:48 pm
I am not a crook.
….. But she probably is.
Richard Millhous Nixon
28 Nov 12 at 11:50 pm
no 3d1k, that was my wry response to Samuel J’s joke.
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 11:51 pm
There is another way to skin a cat, or a pig. If voterland gets bored with it then get off that highway and get back on when it’s time. Time is when the Libs win the next election and establish a Royal Commission into union rorting and destroy some of them with the Slapper in full focus (but of course not the only one)
That’s what’s happening in NSW at the moment with Eddie getting his private part chopped off while connecting the entire NSW ALP with full on corruption. There’s no way they can win an election for the next 20 years there.
This is a hard road for the libs. The speaker is against them and nearly all of the press gallery too.
JC
28 Nov 12 at 11:51 pm
“because SteveC’s insufferable misogyny gives me the shits”
What?
Jarrah
28 Nov 12 at 11:52 pm
I don’ t want caucus to topple her.
Dead Crayfish Walking is just too tasty.
Leigh Lowe
28 Nov 12 at 11:53 pm
From harold’s link:
Gab
28 Nov 12 at 11:54 pm
She actually said “I witnessed thousands and thousands of documents”
Just being super punctilious. Carry on.
SteveC
28 Nov 12 at 11:55 pm
oops!
Gab
28 Nov 12 at 11:55 pm
Mark Baker has a
important updatesmoking gun. Quick someone tell Jon Faine.Tintarella di Luna
28 Nov 12 at 11:56 pm
Ah SteveC, my name’s Julia, I’ve got some really great oil to sell you – it comes from snakes.
Really? You believe that a bloke organised a mortgage through a law firm (not a bank) that his lover was a partner of, her name is all over the file, the documents show she queried the circumstances in which penalty interest would apply, but she had no part in that at all, and no knowledge that a mortgage had been arranged?
Mate, your credibility is about as low as that of a certain PM at the moment.
Alx
28 Nov 12 at 11:58 pm
Which is code for imposing “smart” meters and then putting up the price so only rich people can afford air conditioning on hot days.
What a miserable fascist approach to advocate. “Demand management” is weasel words at their worst. It’s a crock.
Cato the Elder
28 Nov 12 at 11:59 pm
@ Harlold 11:48pm
If not the smoking gun, then this at least suggests that one exists. Given the voracious questioning with no knock-out punch this week I’ve been wondering whether the Opposition’s intention was to give the PM enough rope to hang herself. Is there any strategic advantage in waiting until the last sitting day of the year before producing the PM’s letter to the WA Corporate Affairs Commission?
Naed
29 Nov 12 at 12:00 am
Gab my better half has been a solicitor for 40 years, doing the same kind of work that TLS did for 8 years and wouldn’t have prepared more than a dozen Powers of Attorney in 40 years, I know these thinks because when he draws my bath and we turn down the lights I make him tell me and besides I’m what you’d call – his typist.
Tintarella di Luna
29 Nov 12 at 12:00 am
Oh, I don’t believe her for one nanosecond, Tintarella.
Gab
29 Nov 12 at 12:02 am
Sneaky bugger that Waiver.
Pickles
29 Nov 12 at 12:02 am
Don’t worry Jarrah you had to be there.
Tintarella di Luna
29 Nov 12 at 12:03 am
Alx, her name is not “all over the file”. Styant-Browne was the partner in charge of the mortgage, that is not in question. Do some homework :
http://www.pm.gov.au/press-office/transcript-press-conference-36
SteveC
29 Nov 12 at 12:03 am
documents folks, not POA’s
SteveC
29 Nov 12 at 12:05 am
“Don’t worry Jarrah you had to be there.”
Forgive me if I don’t accept your characterisation. SteveC has never shown an ounce of misogyny, AFAICT.
Jarrah
29 Nov 12 at 12:06 am
Steve C: but so many documents appear to have gone missing…
3d1k
29 Nov 12 at 12:09 am
Yeah nice bit of muddying there eh Mr C? Yeah thousands and thousand of documents but the Powers of Attorney would be very few and far between and you do remember those because they can be tricky and can come back and bite you on various private parts.
I prepared a Power of Attorney in 1996 and I remember it very very clearly, that the person was not my lover, my friend, just a client. Now if it’d been a PoA for my married lover to buy a little love nest well I guess I’d remember each and every word of that too. But then that’s just me.
I find it best to be precise about these things – careless,slovenly or sloppy is not a good look for legal paperwork.
Tintarella di Luna
29 Nov 12 at 12:10 am
The ultimate smoking gun would be proof she knew money was going walkabout, which may not exist. Whether she acted appropriately is another matter.
Harold
29 Nov 12 at 12:11 am
Tinteralla – Gillardian subterfuge.
3d1k
29 Nov 12 at 12:13 am
Neither has Tony Abbott but that didn’t stop Ms Gillard calling him a misogynist. Hurts doesn’t it? Because it is so egregiously insulting and unfair? Right?
oooooh you are such a one aren’t you?, you and Steve, I’ve been watching you two on here on the Cat. I was just having a little pisstake that’s all, a jocular thing, just a total over the top reaction to some suppositions attributed to me by Mr C.
And OK I forgive you.
Tintarella di Luna
29 Nov 12 at 12:18 am
Brandis in the Senate (Sinclair mentioned ABC item on twitter)
Brandis was right – this is gold. Gillard used Socialist forum rules to fudge the AWU articles. You remember the Socialist Forum for which she was a ‘typist’ until she was 40 was it?
CC
29 Nov 12 at 12:18 am
No. SteveC, YOU do your homework.
Name all over files.
http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2012/11/the-prime-minister-tells-lies-she-always-has-she-did-to-her-partners.html
Alx
29 Nov 12 at 12:20 am
Harold, according to Blewitt on Sky – they were the good ‘ol days. Wine, feast, associates and money in surfeit.
If you were the legal representative and had drafted various articles of association designed to attract funds expendable via signatory authority of two individuals you choose to engage in social activities with…would it ever cross your mind?
3d1k
29 Nov 12 at 12:20 am
Ah sorry I should have scrolled up. Gab has already posted the links.
CC
29 Nov 12 at 12:20 am
Mr Styant-Browne seems to have done in the PM. How is she going to get out of this? Smear and slime won’t work against a man who has his bona fides out there for anyone to see.
mareeS
29 Nov 12 at 12:22 am
Me neither. From the moment Ms Gillard and Mr Rudd came out from rolling Beazley in early December 2006 I knew Rudd had been stitched up. It was then I branded that smirk on her dial as essence of snake and I’ve not been wrong about Ms Gillard on anything measure, and when it’s seems the depths have been plumbed down it goes again.
Tintarella di Luna
29 Nov 12 at 12:24 am
Why yes, CC and further to that:
Gab
29 Nov 12 at 12:26 am
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/investigations/proof-pm-told-firm-what-she-wont-tell-parliament/story-fng5kxvh-1226526159739
I have to say I didn’t think Bishop was persisting in a direction aimlessly. Gillard refused to answer directly in Parliament. We now know why.
3d1k
29 Nov 12 at 12:28 am
I think she is in a bit of poo.
So now we have her reason for not telling the AWU “The people I was dealing with were elected officials of the AWU”
At odds with what she told the Corporate Affairs Commissioner:
…the association is not a union…
Alx
29 Nov 12 at 12:30 am
and there’s more:
http://afr.com/p/national/gillard_cut_and_pasted_slush_fund_xeS8RbK8FfuaCQv1xWccbJ
3d1k
29 Nov 12 at 12:30 am
You mean the Debating Society aka The Socialist Forum — I wonder did she draft and type those articles of association too following the model rules
Move over Krakatoa
Tintarella di Luna
29 Nov 12 at 12:31 am
At this point I have to say, if I were an employer of a journalist in the Press Gallery I would be seriously, very seriously, questioning the capacity of the journalists I employed for independent thought, investigative prowess and old fashioned balls. Most fail. Should be replaced. It has become too cosy a club.
3d1k
29 Nov 12 at 12:34 am
I do like Mark Baker’s headline:
Short, sharp and sweet.
Gab
29 Nov 12 at 12:34 am
“Neither has Tony Abbott”
That’s your opinion. Also my opinion. But why are you bringing up someone else’s behaviour when we’re discussing SteveC? That’s a logical fallacy.
“Hurts doesn’t it?”
No, because I’m not invested. You seem to be, and therefore we can discount your opinion. Oh dear, sucks to be you.
“Because it is so egregiously insulting and unfair? Right?”
Wait, are you admitting to being insulting and unfair? What a turn-up for the books.
“you and Steve, I’ve been watching you two on here on the Cat.”
Congratulations on passing a second-grade reading level. And what have you discovered from your watching?
“I was just having a little pisstake that’s all, a jocular thing, just a total over the top reaction”
You just admitted to being a troll. For all the accusations of trollery on this blog, it turns out the right-wingers are the egregious offenders.
“And OK I forgive you.”
A level of arrogance I never reached, despite my reputation.
Jarrah
29 Nov 12 at 12:39 am
A proper country wouldn’t let a dimwitted ginger minger who was the supposed unwittinging idiot who did all of the legals for her scam artist boyfriends million dollar scam get and hold on to the top job in the nation after it was all aired.
Would it?
twostix
29 Nov 12 at 12:40 am
Hypothetical: in the course of the day the letter by the PM to the WA Corporate Affairs Commission is corroborated by a second source, or a copy is found.
The PM would then have no option but to retreat to the next barrier, that being that she still did not now what Wilson and or Blewitt were going to do with the fund and did not discover it over the following years while acting pro bono for them. A hard sell in itself but perhaps irrelevant anyway as her (possibly illegal, IANAL) actions in getting the fund authorised purposefully bypassed the protections set in place to prevent the very type of fraud that occurred. That the fraud was perpetrated by her then boyfriend against his employer (amongst others), a company who just so happened to be one of her lawfirm’s major clients just adds a certain je ne sais quois to the theater.
The PM has been the Teflon Queen up til now so I am somewhat reluctant to say it, but if the letter is confirmed or found then I think this goose is cooked.
Naed
29 Nov 12 at 12:41 am
Haven’t caught up with all the threads…
All y’all see Emerson on Lateline having a mental crackup?
‘She did not set up a slush fund.’
LOL.
C.L.
29 Nov 12 at 12:42 am
Oh don’t sell yourself short.
Gab
29 Nov 12 at 12:43 am
Let us all recall that the specific purpose of the the Socialist Forum as advocated for by Gillard was for “the hard left” as she described it to take over key positions in the ALP and Unions and use them as a disposable shell to ram the country to the left.
twostix
29 Nov 12 at 12:44 am
Then you’ll be interested to know the latest news….gillard lied.
Gab
29 Nov 12 at 12:44 am
What’s the latest, Gab?
C.L.
29 Nov 12 at 12:45 am
Naed: agree in principle. but the backbench may not…
3d1k
29 Nov 12 at 12:45 am
“Oh don’t sell yourself short.”
Everyone discounts your accusations of others’ arrogance – usually it just means they’ve demonstrated a greater knowledge of the subject than you.
Jarrah
29 Nov 12 at 12:47 am
Oh.
The front page of The Australian.
Wow.
WOW.
C.L.
29 Nov 12 at 12:47 am
Erm didn’t just a few weeks ago she specifically and carefully say that she did set up a slushfund in order to get a retraction in the Australian as they called it a trustfund?
These idiots don’t even know know what her story is themselves!
twostix
29 Nov 12 at 12:47 am
If Ms Gillard had not chosen to mislead the WA Corporate Affairs Commission none of this would’ve happened. But she did and she was allowed to get away with it. I think Ms Gillard got away with many many things and was indulged in many many ways.
Slater and Gordon have seen fit to make a statement to the ASX, what does that tell you? They are absolutely cacking themselves– and for what? because the big boys made decisions with their johnsons and the number of johnsons involved along the way have culminated in a person of questionable ethics,morals,character and judgment being permitted to occupy the Office of the Prime Minister.
Instead of a person beyond reproach we have someone on whom there is so much dirt it could go a ways to filling the Super Pit at Boulder.
A case of ambition far outstripping competence.
Tintarella di Luna
29 Nov 12 at 12:47 am
Pyne to Emerson on Lateline: “You need to calm down.”
C.L.
29 Nov 12 at 12:49 am
Quite.
Gab
29 Nov 12 at 12:49 am
Man, I step out for the evening and come back to discover that Gillard is toast.
C.L.
29 Nov 12 at 12:52 am
I would call that serendipitous, CL.
Gab
29 Nov 12 at 12:53 am
Gab is Jarrah for real? How old do you think he is? I guess 12 but then I can’t really tell from here.
Tintarella di Luna
29 Nov 12 at 12:54 am
CL : “Pyne to Emerson on Lateline: “You need to calm down.”” well…it would cause agitation
Salacious I know, apologies and all that, but it’s late, the kids can handle it.
Scan down to the Craig Emerson para
http://pickeringpost.com/article/why-single-women-prefer-married-men/597
3d1k
29 Nov 12 at 12:56 am
Take no notice, Tintarella. he is very short on humour…but he knows everything.
———————————————–
Nothing on the front page of the Age about gillard, something about pokies reform though.
Nothing on the front page of the SMH that’s more important than the people down at Port Fairy or something.
Gab
29 Nov 12 at 12:59 am
I just love the smell of toast so close to midnight – morning is nigh
Tintarella di Luna
29 Nov 12 at 12:59 am
I wish Lindsay Tanner’s tongue could be loosened on the subject of Gillard. He couldn’t get out the door fast enough when she replaced Rudd. Obviously despises her. They have similar pedigrees and should be good mates. That they’re not is a good indicataor that something stinks.
daggers
29 Nov 12 at 1:04 am
Powerful editorial in today’s Oz ridicules Craig Emerson, the government’s ‘look over there, a squirrel’ strategy and condemns the love media…
Snippet:
C.L.
29 Nov 12 at 1:05 am
Oh thank goodness there is a redeeming feature. Phew!!!!
Tintarella di Luna
29 Nov 12 at 1:08 am
It’s frigging awesome Gab. The dam is leaking big time. And it will soon burst. About bloody time.
CC
29 Nov 12 at 1:19 am
Spare a thought for Glen Milne and how he must be feeling now.
Gab
29 Nov 12 at 1:26 am
The bit I love most from the AFR report on Gillard’s cut and paste slush fund:
I said elsewhere, I thought Wilson cooked Gillard’s goose. Seems he burnt it to a crisp. Styant-Browne seems to have sent the new portions of the transcript to every media outlet. He’s doing her slowly.
CC
29 Nov 12 at 1:26 am
“the government’s ‘look over there, a squirrel’ strategy”
So that’s where you got it from.
Jarrah
29 Nov 12 at 1:38 am
@ CC
And not reported by Smith as yet, which will hopefully prevent the PM from maligning his character again in qt.
Naed
29 Nov 12 at 1:39 am
“Phew!!!!”
Excessive use of exclamation marks is a sign of immaturity. I’m guessing you’re around 14… or you’re Mk50 or possibly Eleanor of Aquitaine.
Jarrah
29 Nov 12 at 1:41 am
He should make sure he attends the Walkleys again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlzDHY9CRB8
twostix
29 Nov 12 at 1:46 am
@Naed Gillard using her position and the cover of parliament to to smear Smith (I noted the Coalition was quick on its feet on that and headed her off a bit) was probably the most disgusting abuse of office by Gillard so far. For a PM to attempt to smash a private citizen – former ADF and cop no less – only increased my contempt for that vile miscreant.
CC
29 Nov 12 at 1:46 am
“he is very short on humour…but he knows everything.”
Ah, yes. Unable to cope with honest confrontation and logical argument, you revert to passive aggressiveness. I consider it a mark of honour to reach this stage time and again.
Jarrah
29 Nov 12 at 1:47 am
“…look over there, a squirrel…”
C.L.
29 Nov 12 at 1:50 am
I think you missed an HTML tag there, CL. Or a whole sentence. Or perhaps you don’t have an argument at all?
Jarrah
29 Nov 12 at 1:51 am
Isn’t the back and forth bitching a leeeeeetle bit off-topic?
wreckage
29 Nov 12 at 2:03 am
You seem very upset, Jarrah.
I don’t know what about.
Gillard’s collapse, perhaps?
C.L.
29 Nov 12 at 2:21 am
There doesn’t seem to be a male gender-specific word so we have to fall back on the old stand by: “Adulterer”.
Now that Styant-Browne has revealed one of his trump cards, we’ll see whether Gillard cheerleaders like Faine acknowledge that the smoking gun exists and is on display. The Speaker willing (and it’s a big “if” ), Question Time today will be a popcorn and choc-top session.
Cold-Hands
29 Nov 12 at 2:23 am
When this is reported in the Age, a Labor leader must know… well, you’re fucked:
Document contradicts Gillard fund claims.
C.L.
29 Nov 12 at 2:31 am
“JULIA GILLARD enabled the incorporation of a union slush fund ………by formally denying to authorities that it was a trade union organisation.”…..SMH today
So the slush fund was known by Julia to have nothing to do with the AWU yet she still went ahead with the incorporation including the “AWU Association” name.
Must be nearly all over.
Alfonso
29 Nov 12 at 7:28 am
Wilson’s interview, enabling Styant-Browne to be released from client confidentiality was the important crack in the dam.
When idiots try to help each other – comedy ensues.
Remember Jules, Bruce was only trying to help you. I hope you thank him appropriately.
Keith
29 Nov 12 at 7:54 am
Dover beat Jarrah like a red-headed step child the other day. He’s still getting over it.
Keith
29 Nov 12 at 7:55 am
I am one of little faith in that transpiring.
Rudiau
29 Nov 12 at 8:23 am
I do regret not being here last night watching that sanctimonious cockhead StevC and Jarrah contort themselves.
Tiny Dancer
29 Nov 12 at 8:57 am
Steve says:
And then directs me to chapter 9 of this government crap.
It is crap because baseload is the average minumum which power demand NEVER falls below; within that base there are regular peaks which correspond to people getting out of bed at the same time, returning home, having showers, getting ready for the day and ending the day according to the social routines, job, school and buiness exigencies.
There is a slight seasonal difference to this peak within base demand structure as this summer graph and winter graph show.
As TonyOz explains:
It is NOT a matter of economy or fucking propaganda about changing “habitual consumption behaviours,” as your bit of government bullshit blithely describes.
Society is built around this consumption of electricity; what the greens and people like you are advocating, consciously or otherwise, is a fundamental change in social behaviour; this goes beyond the homilies about switching off lights in fucking empty rooms; it’s about NOT using power at all.
I have discussed this with people like you ad nauseam; I have given the benefit of the doubt too many times; your radicalism is too persistent to be anything other than premeditated; ergo, you are the enemy.
Jarrah; irony; let me plain; you are a supercilious buffoon.
cohenite
29 Nov 12 at 9:07 am
Habits like cooling when the weather hits 35+, heating when it’s below 15, and using a washing machine rather than a bucket and washboard. Habits like good lighting and refrigeration in the kitchen. Habits like hot water, the cornerstone of basic hygeine, computers, routers and internet which give a kid with a smartphone in 2011 better access to knowledge than the POTUS had in 1995.
wreckage
29 Nov 12 at 1:56 pm
What do you call a man who is screwing his mistress or several ladies whilst married with a couple of kids? A philanderer (spell?) Apart from some other unrepeatable names.
delfino
29 Nov 12 at 3:21 pm