Guest Post: Peter O’Brien on Tony Abbott’s second coming

I’m rapidly coming to the conclusion that the knifing of Tony Abbott could be the best thing that has happened, politically, in recent years.  After all, what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger and, hopefully in Abbott’s case, wiser as well.  And he will need both those qualities when he resumes the Liberal leadership.

Let’s be honest, in his term as PM, Abbott achieved some very good things but he also jettisoned some important conservative principles.

On the repeal of Section 18C, surely a conservative issue if ever there was one, Abbott was conspicuously missing in action, fallen at the first hurdle.

On climate change, I accept that political reality dictated that Abbott toe the warmist line to some extent, and he gets credit for scrapping the carbon tax, renegotiating the RET and scrapping the Climate Commission.  But on the negative side he allowed himself to be rolled on the critical question of an audit of the BoM temperature record and, just as importantly, he failed to seize the opportunity, in the face of mounting evidence that the whole CAGW scam is just that, to start to shift the narrative.   This boondoggle should be a stake in the ground to all true conservatives, yet how many in the Liberal party room have come out and vigorously prosecuted the case against?

On the economic front, given the mixed messages, it’s hard to know if Abbott is really a conservative or just another version of the old ‘tax and spend’ paradigm.   His pet paid parental leave scheme suggests the latter.

Abbott sidelined Cory Bernardi, the most prominent conservative in the government, presumably because he was embarrassed by Bernardi’s conservatism.

And, of course, Abbott is front and centre on the need to ‘recognize the first Australians in our Constitution’.   I am not a philosopher, much less a political scientist, but surely the essence of conservatism is that, while accepting that some change is inevitable, changes should be for the good or, at the very least, that they should not cause harm.  Arguably, Abbott let the genie out of the bottle on this one and it can only end in tears, regardless of whether a future referendum succeeds or fails.

Had Abbott continued in office it’s probable that this drift to the Left would have continued, albeit slower than under Turnbull.

So having played the Devil’s Advocate, now let me explain why I think Abbott can and should return to the leadership.

At the time of Turnbull’s coup it was argued that any Coalition government, regardless of who leads it, is better than a Labor one.  Those conservatives who espoused a different view viz that a serious bloodletting was needed, were excoriated and dubbed ‘delcons’, a term that since seems to have fallen out of favour except in the hands of Niki Savva who clings to it like a talisman.

Well, we now know that the difference between Labor and a Coalition government in Turnbull’s image is negligible and the delcons are having the last laugh – albeit a pretty hollow one.

And Tony Abbott has had an opportunity, if not to re-invent himself (God forbid!), at least to hit the reset button and rediscover his true conservatism.

Now the battlelines have again been drawn on ‘climate change’.  This is where the next election will be fought and, with the Finkel Report, Turnbull has effectively thrown in his only winning hand.  Abbott has triumphed this arena twice before and he can do so again.  This time he will need to jettison some of his ‘liberal’ baggage – take a hard line on such things as repealing18C, abolishing the HRC and reining in ABC bias.  He must also go back to his ‘climate change is crap’ days.  The best way to get energy policy back on track is to expose the underlying CAGW myth for the sham that it is.  It is not enough to repeat that Australia only emits 1.4% of global emissions and anything we do is meaningless.  That argument applies to almost every country that has signed up to Paris and if CAGW were real then there would be a moral argument for us to do our bit, however symbolic  – this is just the sort of thinking that Greens promote.

Today, Barnaby Joyce is reported as saying that Tony Abbott ‘could be doing more to help the government’s cause’.  Damn right he could – they just have to ask him.  One of the objections to Abbott’s return that some, like Niki Savva,  have proposed is that he has now made himself unpopular with many in the Party room.  Well, we have seen how much that counts for among the rank and file when their seats are at risk.

And the deal clincher is that there is no one else.

 

This entry was posted in Federal Politics, Guest Post. Bookmark the permalink.

177 Responses to Guest Post: Peter O’Brien on Tony Abbott’s second coming

  1. Allen

    And he might resurrect and use the findings of the Royal Commission into the Unions

  2. Chris

    Yeah well Howard came back from being a “How Green was my Cactus”joke. Much as I used to approve of Tony Abbott personally, I no longer believe the Liberal Party have what it takes to be a team or defend a principle.

  3. A Lurker

    Tony Abbott may well have learned from his mistakes and if allowed a second go at leadership, would likely make a better job of it.

    That being said, the termites within the Liberals won’t allow him back as leader because they have made the decision to take their party to the Socialist Left in order to chase Green votes. Nor will the ABC or the fifth-column that is the media in Australia allow Abbott to be leader again. For all intents and purposes Abbott has had his moment and sadly failed at being a true and principled Conservative Prime Minister that could have steered Australia into calm and prosperous waters.

  4. kc

    Personally, while I don’t disagree with the basis of getting Abbott back on the horse. I am more in favour of Dutten with Abbott back to the front bench in a very senior portfolio, maybe even treasury. I do not think he has ever had enough mongrel in him and don’t think the media will ever give him any peace. It also reeks of the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd scenario. One thing for sure, either Turnbull goes or he will lead the Libs over a cliff and the LNP will never recover.

  5. And he might resurrect and use the findings of the Royal Commission into the Unions

    And he might walk upon the water.
    And he might turn water into wine.
    And he might . . . .

    Abbott got elected in the second-biggest landslide victory in federal political history, delivering him a 36 seat majority, and he proceeded to do absolutely SFA in the cause of “conservative” politics. Quite the opposite, in fact.

    Yet there are people out there delusional enough to believe if he was now returned to the leadership, with a majority of one, he would miraculously become some kind of “conservative” PM?

    Lord deliver us from the delusions of the Textorites.

  6. incoherent rambler

    Whatever happens Mal has ensured that the Libs will be smashed at the next election.

    Why would Tony want the job after Mal has poisoned the well?

    There is nothing in it for him (except a short period on a higher salary).

  7. stackja

    TA might limit the damage.

  8. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    Abbott got elected in the second-biggest landslide victory in federal political history, delivering him a 36 seat majority, and he proceeded to do absolutely SFA in the cause of “conservative” politics

    Following the illustrious examples set by Malcolm Fraser and John Howard – all seeming curiously incapable of using that mandate.

  9. Andrew

    If he returns it will be as LOTO, a job he does well. They’re 6pts behind on 2PP with a leader getting a meeja cheer squad worth 10 points. There is no way he can win. In fact, if St Malcolm is rolled, he will resign from parliament and they will lose the by-election bigly.

    With no majority, “conservative regional indept” St Cathy will “consult with the community” (who will be bussed in from Adam Bendt’s electorate for a series of meetings). She will announce that she will support a vote of no confidence because GetUp.

    His job will be to destroy the SLF / Blabbersac / Thai Brothels / CFMEU / trans govt’s majority in a term, then retire and hand someone else a term to prove themselves “presidential” with a winnable election to follow.

  10. Senile Old Guy

    Abbott got elected in the second-biggest landslide victory in federal political history, delivering him a 36 seat majority, and he proceeded to do absolutely SFA in the cause of “conservative” politics. Quite the opposite, in fact.

    MV beat me to it.

  11. Driftforge

    Abbott makes a great opposition leader.

    Also, if you are just going to address 18C, you’ve already lost. The whole act – and the premises it is based upon – are straight up anti-civilisational leftism. You can’t accept those premises and then expect to make a popularly supported case out of getting rid of the wrinkles in the details. No wonder it got dropped.

  12. Whatever his faults and failures, Abbott has always come across as a good man, a person genuinely interested and concerned with the well-being of every Australian. No one can do as much charity and community work if that were not true.

    You never know, maybe Abbott’s time in the wilderness has been a lesson and perhaps he could come back as a far tougher politician, especially given what is happening now in the world. However you cut it, even the termites in the Liberal Party must privately think that Turnbull has been an abysmal failure and a pox on the party.

    Everyone, other than perhaps Turnbull, must by now realise that the Liberal Party is a rapidly sinking Ship of Fools as long as Turnbull remains. And given how the Left and their compliant media so hate Abbott, there could not be a better thing to do than bring him back. Win or lose, the frothing and head explosions from the Left would be a joy to watch.

    But you never know, it could be a win.

  13. Gibbo

    Why would he want to come back? Given the way he was treated by the media and his own Party for that matter, why would he go through that crap again? “He ate an ONION for God’s sake!!!”, “He winked at a Woman!!!”.
    It’s not like the Party has learned anything. There isn’t a cigarette paper’s difference between the Libs and the ALP in general. Why would anyone want to lead a “Conservative” Party that just isn’t? Stuff the Libs. He wasn’t perfect, but he was a shit load better than the current idiot and more than they deserve these days. They don’t need to be saved, they need to be gone.

  14. stackja

    Zulu – MF lacked it. JH was ‘conservative’.

  15. Anonandon

    I say again. Burn it to the ground.

  16. Neil

    Abbott got elected in the second-biggest landslide victory in federal political history, delivering him a 36 seat majority, and he proceeded to do absolutely SFA in the cause of “conservative” politics

    He tried but was blocked by the Senate.

    He did stop the boats within one month of getting into power something the ALP could not do for 6 years

  17. A Lurker

    He did stop the boats within one month of getting into power something the ALP could not do for 6 years

    Let me fix that…

    He did stop the boats within one month of getting into power something the ALP would not do for 6 years

  18. Chris

    There isn’t a cigarette paper’s difference between the Libs and the ALP in general. Why would anyone want to lead a “Conservative” Party that just isn’t?

    Well, the difference is who bought them and whether they kept the receipt.

    The fact is that all of us come from the same ‘New Class’ or ‘Cosmopolitans’ or ‘Uni educated’ values. That’s why the leftists have to be more PC every day, because their opposition have the same underlying ‘classical liberal’ values.

    Stuff the Libs. … They don’t need to be saved, they need to be gone.

    NOW yer talking.

  19. Mother Lode

    It may be (just maybe) that the rest of the Libs are nervous enough that they will rally around someone who will boost their fortunes and lend them some security.

    At present the Libs are like Channel 10 or Fairfax, desperately trying to appeal to a left wing demographic Labor has stitched up like the ABC has. Trumble’s ‘victory’ in the last election was a gift of one seat from the Nats. As far as his contribution is concerned he lost the election.

    If Abbott gets back in he has to ‘lurch right’ (as the left always says with panic stricken voices). A clear break with the miasma that was Maol.

    And he has to earn that reputation he had as a headkicker. There will be a lot in the party thinking they can bide their time – politicking prima donnas like Maolcolm was. Abbott would have to take them out before they got anywhere near cobbling a vanity-project faction.

    That is a lot to do.

    I don’t reckon he has it in him.

  20. Everyone, other than perhaps Turnbull, must by now realise that the Liberal Party is a rapidly sinking Ship of Fools as long as Turnbull remains.

    A typical example of Textorite delusion. The other day the Finkel Report was released. It has Turnbull’s support, but 22 Liberal MP’s expressed concern about it at tthe Party Room meeting, mainly because it did not signal a swing away from ruinable subsidies, back to coal.

    Do the math. There are 45 Liberals, and 15 “Liberal” LNP MP’s in the Parliament. That’s a total of 60 at a Party Room meeting. Of that, 22 spoke out against the Finkel Report and Turnbull’s support of it. That means 38 are behind Turnbull and his crazy support of Greenie-inspired policies.

  21. lily

    As well as a hostile media and it was the worse that I can ever remember, plus a Deputy and Turnbull undermining him, Tony Abbott had to deal with a plane shot down , a plane that went missing, both with Australians on board, make peace with Indonesia after the damage Labor had caused. The list could go on.
    How was he to get 18c through the hostile Senate, and as for paid parental leave it looks as though a few think it is OK for the Public Service but not the rest of the workforce.

  22. Jo Smyth

    Peter Dutton – PM. He is the only one who is prepared to answer back to the ABC and MSM
    Tony Abbott – Foreign Minister
    Christian Porter – Treasurer
    Scott Morrison – back in immigration
    Andre Hastie – Defence

    Turnbull and Bishop gone forever.

  23. iampeter

    Thanks for the post Guest Author, but as will come to no surprise to my fan club here I’m going to disagree on pretty much everything and also offer an alternative no one is going to like.

    After all, what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger and, hopefully in Abbott’s case, wiser as well. And he will need both those qualities when he resumes the Liberal leadership.

    Tony Abbott is a big government leftist, the fact him and Howard and all the others haven’t been drummed out of the Conservative movement suggests that Conservatives are not serious about support for individualism and capitalism. Returning Abbott to the leadership role would further support that Conservatives are not an alternative to the left.

    Let’s be honest, in his term as PM, Abbott achieved some very good things but he also jettisoned some important conservative principles.

    Can anyone name one good thing? And one good thing that isn’t completely overshadowed by all the bad?

    On the repeal of Section 18C, surely a conservative issue if ever there was one, Abbott was conspicuously missing in action, fallen at the first hurdle.

    I never understood why Conservatives oppose 18C. They are pretty much calling for the same thing when it comes to immigration and they already passed laws regulating who people can marry. Why on earth would you then oppose the government regulating what people can say? If you don’t support individual rights on some issues, why randomly support them on others?

    On climate change, I accept that political reality dictated that Abbott toe the warmist line to some extent, and he gets credit for scrapping the carbon tax, renegotiating the RET and scrapping the Climate Commission.

    But Abbott was part of the government that cooked up the RET in the first place and he didn’t just scrap the carbon tax, he replaced it with Direct Action. He is as left wing as any greenie on environmentalism as are the majority of key Conservative figures now and over the last three decades.

    On the economic front, given the mixed messages, it’s hard to know if Abbott is really a conservative or just another version of the old ‘tax and spend’ paradigm.

    Tax and spend paradigm IS Conservatism and has been my entire life time. Thirty years and the two biggest tax and spending governments were Howard and Abbott.

    Well, we now know that the difference between Labor and a Coalition government in Turnbull’s image is negligible

    It’s been negligible since the Howard era. It’s not about Turnbull, he never pretended to be a right winger, it’s about Conservatism itself.

    When will people finally realize that Conservatives are not individualists or capitalists in anything but name (even then not really) and that they are not an alternative to the left but just a religious/traditionalist version of it.

    I could keep going, but I think I’ve made my point: Conservatives, Labor, Greens, these are all big government, left wing political movement of one type or another. If Conservatives want to make a difference they don’t need Abbott, they need to discover an actual right wing ideology for a change.

    OK unleash the internet hate!

  24. cui bono

    Why save the Libs in their current form? They are heavy with lefties….why save them?. Let them own the coming wreck.

  25. He tried but was blocked by the Senate.

    How long are you people going to wallow in your own self-delusion? Senator David Leyonhjelm spelled it out for you just a week or so ago. The 2014 Budget included $14 billion in expenditure-cutting. However, only about $1 billion was ever presented to the Senate, and most of that was passed. The other $13 billion was never even put to a vote.

    You can’t go on blaming the Senate for not passing legislation that was never even vote on.

  26. Filbert

    You are neglecting the power the Trump factor.
    Abbott can see how well that has worked for the US.
    It is no great leap to try and copy it here.

    Sure, he’s no Trump, but thankfully he’s no fecking Malcolm Turdball either.
    Personally, I’d like to have Dutton as PM.
    Tony as Deputy, if he promised to be a pugilistic culture warrior, with a ‘take no prisoners’ attitude.

    Alas, but it’s a dream.

  27. iampeter

    Also I have to add:

    surely the essence of conservatism is that, while accepting that some change is inevitable, changes should be for the good or, at the very least, that they should not cause harm.

    If this is the essence of conservatism then conservatism is for all intents and purposes not even a political ideology. Politics is NOT about “inevitability of change” or some other random, non-essential characteristic of life on planet earth, lol. Politics is about freedom vs force. That’s it. If you are not on the side of freedom by being an individualist and a capitalist you are not right wing.

    Conservatives have never been on the side of freedom, certainly not at any point in my lifetime.

  28. A typical example of Textorite delusion.

    Do the math.

    While 22 voiced their opposition, how many of the 38 silently oppose the ? Did those 38 actually voice their whole-hearted support or was that unstated support simply an act of cowardice?

    You do the math.

  29. Stimpson J. Cat

    Tony Abbott must start a new party with Mark Latham.

    It is time for the Stay At Home Dads Outsiders Party.

  30. Y

    This is delusional. There aren’t any conservatives left. Pie Man is headed to the Lodge.

  31. Senile Old Guy

    Do the math. There are 45 Liberals, and 15 “Liberal” LNP MP’s in the Parliament. That’s a total of 60 at a Party Room meeting. Of that, 22 spoke out against the Finkel Report and Turnbull’s support of it. That means 38 are behind Turnbull and his crazy support of Greenie-inspired policies.

    Exactly. I was too lazy to find the figures but I do remember hearing that only about 20 spoke against. Most of the Liberals believe in AGW. When Turnbull was opposition leader and going to vote for the ALP emissions scheme, Abbott prevailed in the leadership battle by 1 vote. Hockey was an AGW believer.

    Senator David Leyonhjelm spelled it out for you just a week or so ago. The 2014 Budget included $14 billion in expenditure-cutting. However, only about $1 billion was ever presented to the Senate, and most of that was passed. The other $13 billion was never even put to a vote.

    Yes. If I recall correctly, they did not even try any trading to get revised bits through; they just tossed in the towel and said ‘too hard’.

  32. Filbert

    Why save the Libs in their current form? They are heavy with lefties….why save them?. Let them own the coming wreck.

    The careening wreck will rundown the long suffering taxpayer you realise.

  33. Art Vandelay

    Tony Abbott is a big government leftist, the fact him and Howard and all the others haven’t been drummed out of the Conservative movement suggests that Conservatives are not serious about support for individualism and capitalism.

    Spot on.

    You’ve got to hand it to Turnbull: he’s actually so bad that he makes Abbott look good.

  34. kc

    I like Jo’s suggested ministerial line up. I’d vote for that, but, sadly, don’t think I will get the chance.

  35. Senile Old Guy

    The supposed ‘conservative’ party in this country have just outspent the ALP. And not a vaguely restrained ALP, like Hawke-Keating, but union man Shorten.

  36. gbees

    I consider myself a DEFCON, defiant conservative, I’ve never been delusional and I’m wary of a return to Abbott. What is needed is someone who will:

    1. Scrap any and everything to do with climate change, global warming or whatever other terminology used. That includes scrapping RET, CET, carbon tax in any form. Dismantle immediately all climate change depts., remove Clean Energy Future Fund, stop all incentives currently being paid, withdraw from all UN climate agreements, conferences. Renege on any payments to UN committed to immediately. No soft withdrawals.
    2. Secure borders further and stop immigration from countries which are known supporters/financiers or terrorism or harbour terrorists.
    3. Re cast the budget. Start from zero and have every single dept. build a budget from scratch. Go through every line item with a fine tooth comb and reject all unnecessary spending. Flatten the organization structure so there are only a few levels from the PM hierarchy to the people. retrench waste so headcount is reduce. Implement productivity KPIs and manage to them.
    4. Stop all govt. foreign aid. Re budget from scratch. Where countries which receive aid have a major spend on defence & weapons cut the aid completely . e.g. Indonesia comes to mind.
    4. Stop all non-essential welfare. Only support the elderly, frail, disabled. Provide a small job hunting fee for those who are out of work but able to work. This fee is only for 6 months. After that you’re on your own.
    5. Remove all other welfare subsidies like childcare, first home grants, paid parental leave etc.
    6. Freeze public sector wages for 3 years.
    7. Make law and order a priority. Unshackle the police, back them up, give them far more resources. Beef up anti-terrorism resources.
    8. Inform universities that if they don’t stop preaching left wing drivel, and don’t remove the PC BS and get back to the basics their funding will be gone. We need tough action.
    9. Remove all quotas on the basis gender, race, age, etc.
    10. Implement the SSM plebiscite to give Australians a say.
    11. Repeal 18c in its entirety.
    12. Don’t support any changes to the constitution with regards to racial apartheid.
    13. Implement immediate financial management strategies and policies to make significant cuts to debt and build in alarms to ensure spending is reduced and surpluses are ensured.
    14. Budget education funding from scratch. Require performance and quality standards as a requirement of funding. Gonksi should be Goneski! Remove the rubbish from the curriculum. Give the power of discipline back to teachers.
    15. Budget each year from zero base. No % increases on last year. Complete justification every year of every expense.
    16. Cancel $50Bn+ submarine deal. If we need submarines purchase nuclear powered ones from US.
    17. Open up fracking, build a pilot nuclear power station. Encourage R&D investment in power generation. No subsidies. Let the free market decide what is financial viable.
    18. Scrap multiculturalism. Rebuild pride in our culture and country.

    I’m not sure if Abbott is our man to do this but above is what is needed.

  37. Neil

    How long are you people going to wallow in your own self-delusion? Senator David Leyonhjelm spelled it out for you just a week or so ago. The 2014 Budget included $14 billion in expenditure-cutting. However, only about $1 billion was ever presented to the Senate, and most of that was passed. The other $13 billion was never even put to a vote.

    I have no idea if what you are saying is true or not. I am not in govt. My understanding is that the budget is sent to the Senate and then the Senate voted against the 2014 budget

  38. Driftforge

    You can’t go on blaming the Senate for not passing legislation that was never even voted on.

    And it wasn’t like Abbott didn’t have the capacity to go down the DD route himself to secure the changes that had been proposed.

    No, the temporary government of that day squibbed, and squibbed hard. Meanwhile, the permanent government continues to etch away at what ever success was had.

    Democracies aren’t designed to move rightward.

    I never understood why Conservatives oppose 18C. They are pretty much calling for the same thing when it comes to immigration and they already passed laws regulating who people can marry. Why on earth would you then oppose the government regulating what people can say? If you don’t support individual rights on some issues, why randomly support them on others?

    I suspect you are having difficulty here because ‘regulation of what people say/do’ is not the required prism here. If you want to successfully discriminate between the two, you have to look at it as preservation of our existing order vs destruction of our existing order. It’s actually a nationalist sentiment rather than a conservative one.

    No order persists except that it is continually maintained at cost. Part of that cost is found in the necessary restrictions on activity harmful to that order. Thus lese majeste, blasphemy and sedition laws in times gone by, and anti-discrimination laws today.

  39. min

    From memory the audit on BoM was shut down after Abbott was knifed. Likewise nothing has been done on TURC recommendations have disappeared into the ether.
    For goodness sakes Cats get you language correct there is Climate Change , warming has occurred since the end of mini ice age and humans have made some contribution . What the Science tells us is that sun activity has very high correlation with Climate Change, geology and archeology demonstrates that previous eras have been warmer than now with fewer inhabitants and no fossil fuels. Abbott did refer to the Science that was telling us that Carbon or Carbon dioxide were the culprits , they cannot make their minds ,and this the crap he was talking about.

  40. Oh come on

    Ok, I’ll enter this wacky hallucinogen-fuelled alternate universe where Abbott somehow returns as PM. Take this to the bank – he isn’t coming back before a Turnbull election loss. Abbott wouldn’t be so stupid to roll Turnbull and then go to an election he’s guaranteed to lose. The only way Abbott returns is after a disastrous stint of PM Shorten – so that enough time has passed and ALP incompetence displayed for the electorate to forget how much they dislike Abbott.

    Even then, not gunna happen. Stick a fork in the Libs – they’re done.

  41. gbees

    Trouble is “a disastrous stint of PM Shorten” would be the death knell, if not already, of our country. It would never recover financially. It’s not possible.

  42. Oh come on

    Yes that is troublesome but it’s already baked into the pie, gbees. Sorry. As I said yesterday, Abbott was the Libs’ last chance and he blew it. He’s not going to return to lead the Libs (and his own career) over the cliff. He just isn’t. He’ll make sure Malcolm owns any future coalition failure, lock stock and barrel. Wouldn’t you? I would.

    So do you want to deal in reality or fantasy outcomes?

  43. Fisky

    Abbott needs to go away.

  44. Did those 38 actually voice their whole-hearted support or was that unstated support simply an act of cowardice?

    So – they’re either closet Greenies hell-bent on destroying the country, or cowards too gutless to do anything about it. And you want to pretend it makes a difference?

  45. Fisky

    I never understood why Conservatives oppose 18C. They are pretty much calling for the same thing when it comes to immigration and they already passed laws regulating who people can marry. Why on earth would you then oppose the government regulating what people can say? If you don’t support individual rights on some issues, why randomly support them on others?

    But the same can be said of libertarians. How come they claim to be against big government while supporting mass refugee resettlement and government redefinition of marriage?

  46. max

    If Abbott challenges Turnbull on implementing a climate tax he would lose the first round.

    The split in the Liberal party, however, would be out in the open and Turnbull would be fatally wounded.

    Round two would see Dutton take over.

  47. EB

    Give it up. It was clearly not his thing. It’s nothing to be ashamed of, most people aren’t leaders. Abbott’s a headkicker and a henchman, he needs to be assigned jobs and given direction. A leader he ain’t.

  48. If Abbott challenges Turnbull on implementing
    a climate tax he would lose the first round.

    We already have a “climate tax”. It was one of the last things approved by Abbott before he got axed.

  49. Mother Lode

    I have a fair bit of sympathy for the problems he had with a party that room filled with craven fops (points for remembering the 80’s band), who soiled themselves whenever the ABC or Fairfax looked cross-eyed at them, but it is not really enough.

    Those bastards should be scared of the voters. Abbott was not entirely alone – Trumble’s taking over was not unanimous. Those who supported Abbott, had they prosecuted their cases more openly, would have found support in the electorate. They would also have exposed the weasels pursuing a leftist agenda.

    Who knows – if the Libs engaged with their base instead of the left, perhaps some elements of the media might realise there is a right wing demographic out there who will watch and read them.

  50. iampeter

    Drift, I read your post and I have to say it sounds like something I expect to read in Mein Kampf.

    The function of government is NOT the “preservation of our existing order vs destruction of our existing order”. This a completely arbitrary criterion, is authoritarian, collectivist and therefore left wing.

    I repeat: politics at its most basic is about freedom vs force. To be on the side of freedom (right wing) means to support individualism and capitalism. Anything else falls into the “personal belief” category and while you are entitled to have whatever beliefs you want the moment you think the state can enforce those on others you are not on the side of freedom.

    So, anyone who believes the states job is to enforce a preservation of order or some such is not on the side of freedom and is therefore not right wing.

    But the same can be said of libertarians. How come they claim to be against big government while supporting mass refugee resettlement and government redefinition of marriage?

    I’m a classic liberal not a libertarian but no one on the “right” advocates mass refugee resettlement or government redefinition of marriage. Those are straw men you’ve created.

  51. max

    Abbott needs to go away.

    Barnaby and Bishop and Pine agree, Fisky.

  52. .

    gbees – every conservative and libertarian here can probably go along with that. Much more sensible than what the Parliamentary LNP are doing or talking about.

  53. Fisky

    I’m a classic liberal not a libertarian but no one on the “right” advocates mass refugee resettlement or government redefinition of marriage. Those are straw men you’ve created.

    But you do actually favour opening the borders to an unlimited number of refugees, without any dismantling of the welfare state prior to waving them in. That is the position of the overwhelming majority of libertarians.

  54. Mark A

    iampeter
    #2413378, posted on June 15, 2017 at 2:43 pm
    OK unleash the internet hate!

    Hate on what?
    You filled a page with meaningless blabber.

  55. gbees

    Oh come on
    #2413423, posted on June 15, 2017 at 3:26 pm
    So do you want to deal in reality or fantasy outcomes?

    I’m not a DELCON. I’m not looking for an Abbott comeback. I won’t be voting LNP, ALP or Greens. Not sure who I would vote for. Maybe we’ll see someone else step up to the plate maybe not. I’m not holding my breath. I’m hunkering down. Besides I’ve already shifted by business offshore in anticipation of more of the same.

  56. That is the position of the overwhelming majority of libertarians.

    Yeah!!!

    And they killed Jesus too!!!

  57. So – they’re either closet Greenies hell-bent on destroying the country, or cowards too gutless to do anything about it. And you want to pretend it makes a difference?

    I very much suspect that it’s the latter. Some just want to follow and others need their nuts squeezed to make them see the light. Whether Abbott II would have it in him do that, I have no idea, but Turnbull has to go, else we’ll have Federally the equivalent of the Victorian Labor party ruining the country.

  58. .

    But you do actually favour opening the borders to an unlimited number of refugees, without any dismantling of the welfare state prior to waving them in. That is the position of the overwhelming majority of libertarians.

    Can you stop this “clever trolling” shtick? You know this isn’t the position at all, and it might be a funny in joke, you’re deceiving people new to political theories.

  59. Driftforge

    Mein Kampf is not the right reference, except in its use as an incantation. Think more what was lost in WWI than WWII.

    I repeat: politics at its most basic is about freedom vs force.

    Politics by nature is always force vs force. ‘Freedom’ as you have used it here, is just a word used to marshal force towards the destruction of civilisation. Or as it is called normally, leftism, or chaos. At it’s best, it’s the tendency to break down that which already exists so that something better can be built in its place. In a democracy however, it tends quickly to breaking down that order which exists in order to feed itself, until nothing is left.

    That aside, it still remains that you couldn’t see why restraint upon the actions and sometimes presence of those who are not part of a culture is quite distinct from restraint upon the actions who are. Its not a matter of freedom or restraint, its a matter of ingroup or outgroup. An ingroup that restrains its own capacity to maintain its own hard-won eucivic institutions will quickly lose the benefits they provide.

    Which is pretty much the story of the last 50 years.

  60. Motelier

    Abbott, Maolcom, Brandis etal are not the problem, they are just the sympton of what us wrong with conservatism worldwide.

    My guess is that a big event, think economic depression/world war, will see the rise of conservatism.

    Until then we should all expect to see politicians inch ever left.

    The next true conservative PM may not even be in politics yet.

  61. Driftforge

    Can you stop this “clever trolling” shtick? You know this isn’t the position at all, and it might be a funny in joke, you’re deceiving people new to political theories.

    The libertarian position in principle is A and B.
    The conservative position in principle is A if and only if B.
    The leftist position is A not B.
    The reactionary position is neither A nor B.

    So A not B is the position in practice, because that’s the bit that the left will allow you to pass.

  62. iampeter

    But you do actually favour opening the borders to an unlimited number of refugees, without any dismantling of the welfare state prior to waving them in.

    I only favor the dismantling of the welfare and regulatory state, this in turn will address any issues there might be with immigration or refugee programs (two separate things). I.e. if you get rid of welfare you discourage the freeloaders from coming here and if you get rid of the regulatory state you encourage the right people to come here instead and not leave in the first place.

    Immigration in and of itself is not the cause or solution of any problems but problems with immigrants are symptoms of the bigger issues caused by big government.

  63. Faye

    I want Tony Abbott to come back wearing his Boxing Hat instead of his Priest Hat.
    He would be so much wiser now, no doubt. A second go means “come out fighting” and wiping the floor of the retards who are purposefully holding back Australia’s prosperity – Labor and the Greens. Get runs on the board quickly. Let everyone know his plans for the future. It doesn’t have to be wide ranging – just spot on.
    A big start would be to debunk climate change and everything connected to it and cut the rest of government’s wasteful spending.
    My other thoughts are forget the Liberal Party because its executive etc are Left and concentrate on making Cory Bernardi’s party available to all Australians. Tony as PM.
    He could take a few lessons from Trump – stick to your guns and stand up to the bastards. (You know Tony, shirtfront them).

  64. A Lurker

    Politics by nature is always force vs force. ‘Freedom’ as you have used it here, is just a word used to marshal force towards the destruction of civilisation. Or as it is called normally, leftism, or chaos. At it’s best, it’s the tendency to break down that which already exists so that something better can be built in its place.

    Which reminds me of that famous quote:

    “Hard times create strong men.
    Strong men create good times.
    Good times create weak men.
    Weak men create hard times.”

    We’re currently moving out of line three, and into line four – aided and abetted by the Traitor Class.

  65. Fisky

    So A not B is the position in practice, because that’s the bit that the left will allow you to pass.

    That is the position in practice, because the Libertarian movement is very much an auxiliary of the Left.

  66. Driftforge

    That is the position in practice, because the Libertarian movement is very much an auxiliary of the Left.

    Correction accepted.

  67. .

    Beyond parody. Enjoy playing your demented parlour games, Fisk.

  68. OldOzzie

    And Lord Waffles of Wentworth and Lady Turdbull strike again:-

    Malcolm Turnbull’s speech imitating Donald Trump could fall flat

    Malcolm Turnbull turned comic last night, and his enemies might have the last laugh. The Prime Minister’s off-the-record performance as Donald Trump is likely to become a major talking point.

    My golden rule for Liberal and National party politicians is that if they are pleasing the press gallery — especially Fairfax and ABC journalists — they will invariably be doing the wrong thing by their party and constituency.

    It is a well-worn path — especially for moderate Liberals — to appeal to the sensibilities of the so-called progressive media: speak with alarmism on climate and feel the love; speak with compassion on border security and be swept up in their embrace; or mock conservatives and have them eating out of your hand.

    The trouble is every time Coalition MPs do this they are falling for the siren song of the media/political class instead of remembering the mainstream voters they represent. This is the trap that Turnbull has fallen for — in a big way at a bad time.

    At last night’s Midwinter Ball, the Prime Minister gave his traditional off-the-record and lighthearted address to an elite gathering of journalists, businesspeople, media executives and political operatives. The way to handle these events is to use self-deprecation. Mock yourself and tease the media. It rarely fails and is safe ground.

    But Turnbull decided to mock Trump — he mimicked the President of our greatest trading partner and security ally. There were lines about fake news, a “Rusian guy” and defying the reality of the polls, and it was delivered replete with hand gestures. Cheap laughs, to be sure, for a crowd largely made up of viscerally anti-Trump journalists.

    Yet this was deeply unwise for a Prime Minister. No matter what Trump or his diplomats say publicly, it won’t have gone down well in the US. America does us a crucial favour on refugee resettlements and our PM mocks their President.

    I wasn’t at the ball — that is why I am not bound by the confidential nature of the occasion — so I am not aware of all of the content. There clearly was an element of self-deprecation involved and most of the crowd enjoyed it.

    But as soon as I heard about the Trump impersonation it struck me as a major story waiting to break. Channel Nine’s Laurie Oakes — also not at the ball — was leaked some footage of the event, recognised its significance and put it into the public domain.

    At a troublesome time for the Prime Minister, just when he is trying to unite his party on climate policy, this will generate internal concerns about judgment. The Left will love the fallout even more than they loved the jokes.

    And from the Comments

    We all know about Turnbull’s lack of judgement. This just reinforces how out of touch he is. He and Lucy were spruiking on Facebook last night about the speech but not the content.

  69. A Lurker

    That is the position in practice, because the Libertarian movement is very much an auxiliary of the Left.

    I’d agree with that. They seem to be a sub-sect of the ‘Academic Left’ and not the ‘Militant Left’.
    The Academic Left = bow-tie wearers transfixed by a naive idealism of a perfect libertarian society that has no basis in reality.

  70. mareeS

    Being a straight-out conservative will work, TA, if you say “Here it is, this is where we are going, and this is why.”

    If he gets back as PM, he has to ditch the wafflers, the fence-sitters, the bedwetters, and just go full conservative with coherent policy and a coherent explanation to voterland.

    Their ABC and their MSM will obstruct in all ways possible, of course, but it may be that their time has passed and Abbott’s time has come. Especially when your household and business power bills exceed your earnings.

  71. OldOzzie

    And Lord Waffles of Wentworth and Lady Turdbull strike again:- No 2

    Oakes shows leak of Turnbull mocking Trump

    Veteran Channel Nine journalist Laurie Oakes has released a potentially damaging video of Malcolm Turnbull, revealing details of an “off-the-record” speech in which the Prime Minister imitated US President Donald Trump.

    Despite the parody speech being delivered at the parliamentary Mid-Winter Ball, where politicians traditionally deliver speeches “off the record”, Mr Oakes said he did not attend last night’s event and had been leaked video of the speech.

    He indicated he was not bound by the Chatham House rules that would govern journalists at the event.

    “The PM presumably thought that Mr Trump would never find out because journalists attending the ball agree not to report what happened,” he said on a video posted on the 9 News website.

    “But I don’t go to the ball and audio just happened to leak plus a sample was posted on Instagram.”

    In the speech, Mr Turnbull jokingly made fun of opinion polls for both Mr Trump and himself and made reference to Mr Trump’s troubles with Russia.

    “The Donald and I, we are winning and winning in the polls. We are winning like we have never won before!”

    “We are, not the fake polls, not the fake polls, they’re the ones we’re not winning in. We’re winning in the real ones. The online polls, they are so easy to win! I have this Russian guy, believe me it’s true,” he told the audience in the tape Mr Oakes published.

    Leaked Video plus Leaked audio reveals Malcolm Turnbull roasting Donald Trump over ‘fake polls’ and Russia

    9NEWS By 9NEWS

    Read more at http://www.9news.com.au/national/2017/06/15/14/18/malcolm-turnbull-impersonates-donald-trump-in-leaked-audio#lSmDO3bbE98eduJr.99

  72. incoherent rambler

    This post would be better titled:

    What to do about Mick Trumble?

    I predict that things will warm up in the party room after the first round of winter power bills are delivered and the LNP newspoll figures go through the floor.

  73. .

    The Academic Left = bow-tie wearers transfixed by a naive idealism of a perfect libertarian society

    This is industrial grade drug fucked. You need to go into rehab.

    The academic left are commies who defend people like Pol Pot.

  74. Fisky

    I’d agree with that. They seem to be a sub-sect of the ‘Academic Left’ and not the ‘Militant Left’.
    The Academic Left = bow-tie wearers transfixed by a naive idealism of a perfect libertarian society that has no basis in reality.

    I’m not sure if they are actually a sub-sect of Leftism. It’s better to conceptualise the libertarian movement as playing Finland to the Left’s USSR. Technically independent but never allowed to obstruct the strategic objectives of the Left.

  75. .

    I’m not sure if they are actually a sub-sect of Leftism. It’s better to conceptualise the libertarian movement as playing Finland to the Left’s USSR. Technically independent but never allowed to obstruct the strategic objectives of the Left.

    Are serious Fisk? You’re seriously fucked in the head if you genuinely believe this utter crap.

  76. OldOzzie

    And Lord Waffles of Wentworth and Lady Turdbull strike again:- No 3

    From Daily Mail

    ‘I have this Russian guy’: Extraordinary moment Malcolm Turnbull is caught on tape MOCKING President Donald Trump – making fun of their infamous phone call, the Russian hacking scandal and his awkward speeches

    Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull mocks, impersonates US President Donald Trump in extraordinary comic riff

    Mr Turnbull was delivering a speedh at Canberra’s deeply ‘off-the-record’ Midwinter Ball
    But audio leaked to press gallery veteran Laurie Oakes, who doesn’t attend

    ‘The Donald and I, we are winning and winning in the polls… We are winning SO MUCH!’
    Mr Trump reportedly told Mr Turnbull earlier this year: ‘This is the worst phone call so far’

    In his routine, Mr Turnbull poked fun at the two leaders’ approval ratings.

    ‘The Donald and I, we are winning and winning in the polls… We are winning so much! We are winning like we have never won before! We are winning in the polls – we are! We are!

    ‘Not the fake polls! Not the fake polls! They’re the ones we’re not winning in. We’re winning in the REAL polls, you know, the ONLINE polls! They are so easy to win!

    ‘I know that. I know that. Did you know that? They are so easy to win… I have this Russian guy… Believe me, it’s true, it is true.’

    The prime minister appeared to be mimicking many of the US president’s verbal tics.

    Warning for Young People and Older People with Possible Hearts Problems – Photos of Stick Figures appear which may give you Nightmares

  77. Deplorable

    Peter Dutton – PM. He is the only one who is prepared to answer back to the ABC and MSM
    Tony Abbott – Foreign Minister
    Christian Porter – Treasurer
    Scott Morrison – back in immigration
    Andre Hastie – Defence

    Turnbull and Bishop gone forever.

    Plus an advisory panel of 50 Cats and Quadrant contributors to keep them on the right path.

  78. Fisky

    I note, by the way, that the CATO Institute have been taking partial credit for the 9th Circuit’s latest judicial activist venture in blocking the Trumpian travel ban. That should open a few eyes to the real nature of the mainstream libertarian movement.

  79. A Lurker

    I’m not sure if they are actually a sub-sect of Leftism. It’s better to conceptualise the libertarian movement as playing Finland to the Left’s USSR. Technically independent but never allowed to obstruct the strategic objectives of the Left.

    That is probably a better comparison, thanks Fisky.
    It’s like their stance on Freedom of Speech – lots of words supporting it, not many actions to actually protect it.
    It’s like their stance on Same Sex Marriage – lots of words against the growth of the State, yet their actions in supporting SSM would actually grow the State.

    As I said – “bow-tie wearers transfixed by a naive idealism of a perfect libertarian society”.

    In order to attain that perfect libertarian society you first have to remove the welfare state and the regulatory state, once that is done you open your borders and supposedly the best of the world comes to Australia and we’re in a golden age of freedom, wealth and liberty. However, removing the welfare state and regulatory state would be impossible to achieve unless you destroy the joint.

    Who else wants to destroy the joint in order to remake it in their image – well, no prizes for guessing the Regressive Left.

    Trouble is, when you destroy the joint the political conquerors won’t be the naive and idealistic libertarians, but rather something stronger, nastier and far, far more aggressive than the bow-tie wearers.

  80. .

    However, removing the welfare state and regulatory state would be impossible to achieve unless you destroy the joint.

    So the basis of you accusing libertarians being left wing is in itself a left wing sacred cow, that welfare and regulation make the place better off.

    Complete and utter nonsense.

  81. Fisky

    Another way to conceptualise the libertarian movement is, they are standing on the Left’s side of the pitch, but they don’t get to carry the ball – just block the other side from tackling the Left.

    The American football analogy of blocking and interference running is a good way to look at it.

  82. incoherent rambler

    Malcolm Turnbull mocks Donald Trump at press event, leaked audio shows

    Methinks Mal has committed political suicide,

  83. Rococo Liberal

    The irony is that the RGR government of 2010 to 2013 had to fight to get things through the HoR, but not too hard. They never had anytrouble in the Senate as the Greenfilth agreed to pass anything.

    The Abbott government had overwhelming numbers in the HoR, but a minority in the Senate. This meant that even though it had a huge mandate it was less able to get its measure through than the RGR government, even though that government was totally dysfunctional.

  84. It’s better to conceptualise the libertarian movement as playing Finland to the Left’s USSR.

    What do you actually know of Finland?

  85. A Lurker

    So the basis of you accusing libertarians being left wing is in itself a left wing sacred cow, that welfare and regulation make the place better off.

    Some welfare and some regulation is useful, but currently both are employed to gross excess. However, trying to wholly remove both is pie-in-the-sky fantasy and won’t happen without destroying the joint – and even if it did happen, the next incoming Leftist Government would just reinstate it.

  86. .

    Trying to totally remove welfare and regulation is undoubtedly good. Removing most of it too is a worthy goal.

    won’t happen without destroying the joint

    Welfare doesn’t create wealth. Regulation can and for decades was done by common law negligence.

    The idea that eliminating welfare (which is mostly pissed away) or regulation (like making teachers were safety vests on lunch duties) will “destroy Australia” is beyond laughable.

    even if it did happen, the next incoming Leftist Government would just reinstate it.

    The pathetic and brain dead catchall argument from conservatives here to any libertarian proposal. Somehow “conservative” (you know, with 42% of GDP as debt) proposals can never be repealed.

    This coming from people that think abolishing welfare will destroy society is just beyond the pale.

  87. Oh come on

    They did pretty well against the Red Army when the Red Army sucked. Later on, not so much and they had to cede a lot of territory to avoid annexation. Post WW2 – timid society-wide self censorship.

    I don’t blame the Finns, of course. I wouldn’t have poked the bear if I were in their shoes, either.

    Fisky’s analogy isn’t unreasonable. It’s not flawless (but then again all analogies break down eventually) – the left isn’t a constant existential threat to the libertarian movement, but the outcomes both seek have an uncanny habit of dovetailing – or at least being compatible.

  88. A Lurker

    So Dot, how would you achieve the perfect libertarian society without first destroying the joint?

  89. .

    You’ve got to cut out this left wing obsession with welfare and regulation being pillars of society. They’re not.

    You just repeal laws from the most destructive first and ignore caterwauling.

  90. tgs

    I think a libertarian must have touched Fisky when he was young or something.

    No other explanation for his unhinged obsession with strawmanning them at every opportunity to make them sound like Adolf Che Guevara Stalin or whatever bullshit boogeyman he has rattling around in that head of his.

  91. Tel

    I’m a classic liberal not a libertarian but no one on the “right” advocates mass refugee resettlement or government redefinition of marriage. Those are straw men you’ve created.

    Cato tend to be big supporters of mass immigration. That’s probably the main area I disagree with them.

    https://www.cato.org/blog/appeals-court-relies-heavily-cato-work-against-immigration-ban

  92. Fisky

    I can’t believe the CATO Institute are BRAGGING about their role in blocking the travel ban. This is the most powerful libertarian group in the world, and they are basically a Leftist sock-puppet.

    https://www.cato.org/blog/appeals-court-relies-heavily-cato-work-against-immigration-ban

    Appeals Court Relies Heavily on Cato Work Against the Immigration Ban

    Yesterday, in IRAP v. Trump, the Federal Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit—which handles appeals from district courts in Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina—upheld a preliminary injunction against portions of President Trump’s Executive Order banning entry of individuals from six African and Middle Eastern countries. On critical points, the court’s opinion and the concurring opinions cite or rely upon Cato’s work about the order.

  93. Fisky

    It’s worth noting that Iampeter supports the judiciary in forcing the borders open to countries like Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, etc. He even said it was “racist” not to bring immigrants in from those countries.

  94. No other explanation for his unhinged obsession with strawmanning them at every opportunity to make them sound like Adolf Che Guevara Stalin or whatever bullshit boogeyman he has rattling around in that head of his.

    Meanwhile, Bastiat looks down from above and quietly weeps.

  95. Tel

    … the left isn’t a constant existential threat to the libertarian movement, but the outcomes both seek have an uncanny habit of dovetailing – or at least being compatible.

    The thing about mass immigration:
    * The so called “left wing” like it because they see the potential for vote herding and handing out other people’s money to this new “deserving” political identity group.
    * The so called “right wing” like it because flooding the market with unskilled labour kicks shit out of the union movement and cuts wages (illegal immigrants are even better from this perspective because they can’t complain to the cops and they ignore minimum wage constraints).
    * The so called “libertarians” like it because there’s this theory they have about how free trade benefits everyone, and that must mean immigration. For sure it means immigration. Property rights only means you have the right to consume, not the right to exclude anyone, nor choose who you do business with. Every libertarian knows that.

    The only people who don’t like mass immigration are the uneducated plebs, and that’s always because “racism”. Always “racism” and there’s no need to ask anyone what they think. Treating dumb redneck waaaacists as if they had an opinion would be far too good for them, so give em a kick and tell em to STFU, because waaaaaacism.

  96. Muddy

    Why the frick-frack are we STILL discussing this? It is not just an issue with leadership: so-called conservative politics in this country no longer exists. Again and again and fecking again, I state: THE LIBERAL PARTY IS DEAD. BURY THE CORPSE!

    But no, people who you think would desire actual results (instead of mere symbolism), continue to fondle the same putrid, reeking remains. Obviously their sense of smell, vision and touch have been affected. Let’s not talk about taste.
    I might need to revise my list of enablers and fifth columnists.

    Here’s a question: A fridge walks up to you in a public place and asks “Do you want to be shot in the head, or stabbed in the heart?”
    Do you choose one of the two options offered, or do you consider there may be a third option?

  97. Tel

    I can’t believe the CATO Institute are BRAGGING about their role in blocking the travel ban.

    I was a tiny bit disappointed by that but not entirely surprised. Hans Hermann Hoppe was badly mistreated when he pointed out that culture is a kind of shared property right amongst a mutually consensual group who are entitled to exclude outsiders for no other reason than cultural incompatibility. Which is kind of strange when that’s what humans have been doing ever since basic tribal societies and when you consider that’s what nation states were doing as well up until fairly recently.

    Suppose you start a club for people who play Chess and drink whiskey, and then someone comes along who drinks white rum and plays Draughts… well that guy probably isn’t going to fit into the club all that well is he?

  98. Tel

    This is the most powerful libertarian group in the world, and they are basically a Leftist sock-puppet.

    Just wait one moment before you rip off your trousers and run through the streets howling.

    The Heritage Foundation are significantly more influential than Cato.

  99. Do you choose one of the two options offered,
    or do you consider there may be a third option?

    Near as I can tell, Muddy, most Textorites would prefer to be buggered to death.
    And blame it on Bastiat.

  100. Fisky

    The Heritage Foundation are significantly more influential than Cato.

    But the Heritage Foundation are not a libertarian think tank. No libertarian group would ever have “heritage” in their name, it sounds very racist and anachronistic to all right-on pop left libertarians.

  101. M Ryutin

    I have never said that Abbott should be returned to office, saying in various places that he should be a mentor to somebody else, an Angus Taylor, Porter, Dutton whatever. His campaigning skills would be something they have completely lost with the Dear Leader, who is a colossal dud with no political instinct.

    Any speculation on changing this ongoing plane crash that is the Turnbull government, has to realise that there will always be left the stinking, corrupt pile that is the United Australia Party ….er…. “Liberal Party”.Unless that Tammany Hall corrupt mob go, any change will be cosmetic only.

    That said, it may be that only Abbott would have the slightest hope of leading them out of the mess they are currently in. Unless someone else has the guts to cut to the chase with demands that the RET/CET be scrapped and emissions levels be sacrificed when restricting energy supply and cost. Only Abbott and Abbot alone can do this. Everyone knows it, even the Abbott-hating media.

    We shall see whether they just give up, or satisfy themselves with resignation to their fate./

  102. .

    I am not a member of the Liberal party but I will give a new PM an even chance.

    Who are the “top” 20 or so LNP members of Parliament?

    The inner and outer Ministry consists of an absurdly large cohort after all.

  103. Fisky

    I think a libertarian must have touched Fisky when he was young or something.

    No other explanation for his unhinged obsession with strawmanning them at every opportunity to make them sound like Adolf Che Guevara Stalin or whatever bullshit boogeyman he has rattling around in that head of his.

    But the problem is that leading libertarian organisations, such as the CATO Institute, the IPA, the US Libertarian Party, Reason magazine, etc, actually DO take these positions. I’m not strawmanning anything. They all love open borders, refugee resettlement, and government-enforced gay marriage.

  104. Dr Faustus

    Being a straight-out conservative will work, TA, if you say “Here it is, this is where we are going, and this is why.”

    If he gets back as PM, he has to ditch the wafflers, the fence-sitters, the bedwetters, and just go full conservative with coherent policy and a coherent explanation to voterland.

    Agree with the prescription as a general principal. Sadly, coherence is Abbott’s Archilles Heel – his previous attempt at PM failed exactly because he had no coherent policy. Not all his fault, of course, Hockey takes a lot of the blame – as do most of the B Team now infesting Turnbull’s front bench.

    Before conservatism comes back into political fashion, it seems that Australia is going to have to learn by practical experience what it is like to live in the 1980’s Ireland, or modern era Greece.

    Shorten and DiNatale will be excellent teachers.

  105. M Ryutin

    A final piece on those who whine about Abbott As PM when they ignore that their idol and Dear Leader has failed utterly.

    His Senate was far worse than the current one and if you don’t agree with that, give yourselves an uppercut. He got in September 2013 and by December when I wrote here that they should be looking for a DD, nothing major had been voted on in the Senate, but a strike by Greens and ALP was underway in that Senate, deliberately avoiding votes. Then with the disaster by the AEC when the whole WA Senate vote had to be redone in April 2014 and because the Libs had scraped into the last seat in the WA Senate race to give them three, they were on a knife edge in the recount and were under pressure on feeding the already hostile media

    Maybe the Catallaxy Tigers would have demanded that the Shepherd Report be released and announced to be implemented before that re-vote took place, but I can see why the Libs waited and that delay then rushed the pre-selling of the infamous 2014 budget and so on.

    There were mistakes in it. Yes. Doing a Costello and trying to introduce a measure, a temporary tax surcharge on the wealthy to encourage the passage of the other measures was a mistake, especially when it should have been fully conditional on passing the rest. That massive medical/science fund was ludicrous and not many have put their hands up to claim the credit/blame for it but, as usual, Abbott can get no praise and takes all blame for the actual decision. The most reasonable patient co-payment was fair and unfairly attacked by the usual suspects including the AMA trade union.

    Budget was gone in a welter of massive negative press, nothing the like of which has been seen for decades (since 1975 I would say) yet still the three trade agreements, Op Sovereign Borders, and everything else was carried out until he was overthrown. But by January 2015, a mere 8 months after his WA Senate seats were finally confirmed, the Wickr team of backsliders and saboteurs started the well-reported open warfare from the time of the Prince Phillip knighthood mistake. Thus the serial leaker Turnbull started aided by Bishop and the scandalous smears of the media toadies; Savva started her series of 78 or so anti-Abbott articles for the man who employs her husband to open his car door for him.

    Virtually everything else ever achieved by that government prior to the election in 2016 was done by the time Abbott was assassinated. He most probably will never come back to anything, but I still think he can hold his head high. The media and Turnbull “team” know it too and they have started into Angus Taylor now I see.

  106. john constantine

    Their turnfailure will hang on until the rolling blackouts hit this summer.

    Then shorten, with zero shame, will dismantle the turnfailure debacle coalition over the failure of the australian gas and electricity market.

    Unfortunately, this will end the electoral cycle.
    The old days of a term or two of one side then a term or two of the others will end.

    Their shorten will weaponise his autism and simply rig enough electorates to lock his reich in for a thousand year totalitarian rule of hell on earth.

    The left will pay any price to destroy the electoral cycle, to destroy the proles democratic right to vote on things that matter to them.

  107. .

    I agree M Ruytin. He should have went for the DD, at the time he could have won both Houses. At worst, he’d be in roughly the same position as before (after he won the actual 2013 election). Worth a shot. Fortune favours the bold.

  108. Beachside

    @ memoryvault

    We already have a “climate tax”. It was one of the last things approved by Abbott before he got axed.

    Clive Palmer puts conditions on backing repeal of the carbon tax

    CLIVE Palmer has roped in the world’s most prominent climate activist, Al Gore, to stand beside him as he announced the abolition of Julia Gillard’s world-leading carbon price.

    The former US vice-president, joining Mr Palmer in Parliament House’s Great Hall, this evening congratulated the Fairfax MP’s “outstanding statement” that Labor’s carbon tax would be replaced by “zero” carbon price.

    Mr Palmer, who owns substantial coal interests and a north Queensland nickel refinery, said his senators would vote to retain the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, Climate Change Authority and the Renewable Energy Target.

    Mr Palmer’s announcement makes the repeal of Labor’s carbon tax almost certain, given the Coalition will need only three further crossbench votes to repeal the scheme.

    Mr Palmer said he would insist on an amendment legally requiring companies “to pass on all consumers of energy the savings they will enjoy from the repeal of the carbon tax”.

    CLIVE Palmer has roped in the world’s most prominent climate activist, Al Gore, to stand beside him as he announced the abolition of Julia Gillard’s world-leading carbon price.

    The former US vice-president, joining Mr Palmer in Parliament House’s Great Hall, this evening congratulated the Fairfax MP’s “outstanding statement” that Labor’s carbon tax would be replaced by “zero” carbon price.

    Mr Palmer, who owns substantial coal interests and a north Queensland nickel refinery, said his senators would vote to retain the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, Climate Change Authority and the Renewable Energy Target.

    Mr Palmer’s announcement makes the repeal of Labor’s carbon tax almost certain, given the Coalition will need only three further crossbench votes to repeal the scheme.

    Mr Palmer said he would insist on an amendment legally requiring companies “to pass on all consumers of energy the savings they will enjoy from the repeal of the carbon tax”.

    Mr Palmer, who owns substantial coal interests and a north Queensland nickel refinery, said his senators would vote to retain the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, Climate Change Authority and the Renewable Energy Target.

    Mr Palmer said he would insist on an amendment legally requiring companies “to pass on all consumers of energy the savings they will enjoy from the repeal of the carbon tax”.

    They will also press for a new emissions trading scheme that would “only become effective once Australia’s main trading partners also take action to establish such a scheme”.

    “This is designed to establish and encourage a fair global scheme quickly. So this measure cannot be defined as a financial measure, this scheme will have a carbon price zero rated,” he said.

    FWIW, It appears Abbott and Hunt obviously agreed to Palmer’s carbon tax repeal condition demands, however with the removal of Abbott, fellow green travelers, Hunt and Turnbull, obviously saw an opportunity to quietly enact that which Abbott had initially agreed to, though never intended to act upon, as erratic Palmer lasting beyond that parliamentary term would have been highly optimistic, in any circumstance.

    IMO, I suspect when the time was right, and Palmer was out of the way, that ETS condition would have been quietly disappeared – as it makes no sense whatsoever for Abbott to have campaigned from 2010 until 2013 to repeal the dreaded Gillard carbon tax, only to then bring in an ETS without first taking it to an election.

  109. Beachside

    Oops, apologies – first 5 sentences – text pasted twice. Don’t know how that happened?

  110. Senile Old Guy

    A final piece on those who whine about Abbott As PM when they ignore that their idol and Dear Leader has failed utterly.

    Many of us here detest Lord Waffle but do not think a return to Abbott will help. Detesting one does not mean admiring the other. Some people seem to have trouble with this.

    I agree M Ruytin. He should have went for the DD, at the time he could have won both Houses. At worst, he’d be in roughly the same position as before (after he won the actual 2013 election). Worth a shot. Fortune favours the bold.

    Rather pointless now to discuss what should have been done years ago. It is also questionable whether the spineless who dumped him would have supported this move anyway.

  111. iampeter

    Politics by nature is always force vs force.

    So the political spectrum is freedom vs force because they are polar opposites.
    Force vs force is not a spectrum it’s just the same thing.
    I do agree with you though that this is how most Conservatives view politics, simply a matter of pushing their own authoritarianism down everyone’s throats. This is why I do not regard them as different to any other leftists.

    Freedom’ as you have used it here, is just a word used to marshal force towards the destruction of civilisation.

    No freedom is the salvation of civilization not it’s destruction. And freedom only has ONE meaning NOT my meaning. Freedom means you can think and act in a social context for the purpose of living your life. This is also known as individual rights.
    Freedom is what distinguishes western civilization from all the others. It’s why our civilization is superior. It’s funny how many self proclaimed champions of western civilization are completely clueless about what it is all about.

    At it’s best, it’s the tendency to break down that which already exists so that something better can be built in its place.

    So? This is in fact a good thing if what we’re breaking down is some kind of authoritarian system and replacing it with freedom.

    Its not a matter of freedom or restraint, its a matter of ingroup or outgroup.

    No it’s just about freedom vs force, not anything else you want to spin up to avoid the fact that you are not on the side of freedom and therefore a leftie. And in your case a pretty authoritarian lefty. Your sort of thinking belongs in 1940’s germany.

  112. iampeter

    I think a libertarian must have touched Fisky when he was young or something.

    I think he thinks he’s trolling but it doesn’t work because he has no clue what he is talking about so the troll is on him all the time.

    For example:

    It’s worth noting that Iampeter supports the judiciary in forcing the borders open to countries like Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, etc. He even said it was “racist” not to bring immigrants in from those countries.

    Refusing people entry because of the country they are coming from IS racist you nitwit. And no one supports “open borders” that’s not a thing. You’ve confused the disastrous German refugee program for an immigration policy because you have no clue what you are talking about.

    Why does someone who knows nothing about politics spend any time on a political blog?

    Still its pretty funny.

  113. iampeter

    Cato tend to be big supporters of mass immigration. That’s probably the main area I disagree with them.

    But Tel who cares? As I said before immigration is not a cause or solution of any problems. Only big government causes problems because the only way to create issues in society is to violate individual rights. Immigration is not a rights violation.
    Welfare and regulatory states ARE rights violators.

    If you fight the welfare and regulatory state you’ll end up solving any problems with immigrants as side effect anyway.

    However, removing the welfare state and regulatory state would be impossible to achieve unless you destroy the joint.

    I’d argue it’s the only way to save the join. Our options are to either continue as we are and our future will be something like Venezuela or get rid of the welfare and regulatory state and have a prosperous and free future.

    Why are so many people opposed to the latter?

  114. Robber Baron

    Australia’s demographics are on Shorten’s side. Even after the devastation of RGR Shorten is going to be PM, that’s how vastly the demographics have changed with the immigration of so many labor voters.

    It will take a sustained national emergency for the working class to vote conservative. The next conservative PM will have to appeal to these people, just like Trump did.

  115. Tales from the Crypt

    Is see Laurie Oakes has stirred in the usual way to promote peace and harmony between Australia’s Liberals and the Republicans in the US/sarc.

    Time to close this illustrious chapter
    (imagine a lid closing)

  116. A Lurker

    I’d argue it’s the only way to save the join. Our options are to either continue as we are and our future will be something like Venezuela or get rid of the welfare and regulatory state and have a prosperous and free future.

    Why do the quotes – “You have to break a few eggs in order to cook an omelette” and “whatever it takes” spring to mind when reading iampeter’s proposals.

  117. FWIW, It appears Abbott and Hunt obviously agreed to Palmer’s carbon tax repeal condition demands, however with the removal of Abbott, fellow green travelers, Hunt and Turnbull, obviously saw an opportunity to quietly enact that which Abbott had initially agreed to, though never intended to act upon, as erratic Palmer lasting beyond that parliamentary term would have been highly optimistic, in any circumstance.

    Here we have a textbook example of Textorite history rewriting. The condition to trigger a new emissions trading scheme never occurred, and with Trump withdrawing America from the Paris Agreement, is never likely to.

    Nonetheless, the Regulation bringing about the changes necessary to implement our new Emissions Trading Scheme, was drafted by Greg Hunt, the Minister for the Environment in the Abbott government, circulated for comment on September 2, 2015, while Abbott was PM, and accepted by Cabinet a few days later, also during Abbott’s time as PM. It’s drafting and adoption had SFA to do with Turdbull. It was gazetted on September 22, 2015, a few days after Abbott was toppled.

  118. iampeter

    Why do the quotes – “You have to break a few eggs in order to cook an omelette” and “whatever it takes” spring to mind when reading iampeter’s proposals.

    Because you’re an idiot?

  119. iampeter

    I mean did you skip past Driftforges posts or something? There’s you’re egg breaking to make an omelette guy.

    If you’ve taken that from my posts than you have got it TOTALLY backwards.

  120. Fisky

    Refusing people entry because of the country they are coming from IS racist you nitwit.

    Very good, Peter! There’s a guaranteed slot for you at the next Bahnisch BBQ. They’ll love you!

  121. Peter

    The liberals are losing their base everyday, what i think is happening now, is that no one is talking to them anymore, what is the point, they seem to have no idea, what is going on, or how bad it is. They either recast with Abbott who will hit stride within days, or they go with an unknown. Abbott is probably the only one who can do the job, which is to set a course, and win the next election. Save their hides, and help Australia out of the hole that it is now in.

  122. Just Interested

    At last night’s Midwinter Ball, the Prime Minister gave his traditional off-the-record and lighthearted address to an elite gathering of journalists, businesspeople, media executives and political operatives. The way to handle these events is to use self-deprecation. Mock yourself and tease the media. It rarely fails and is safe ground.

    I have always thought that the idea that Parliament House being used as an ‘elite gathering of journalists, businesspeople, media executives and political operatives’ is fundamentally undemocratic – do you reckon these people aren’t pushing their own barrows whilst together?

    This is a terrible event, that really should be called out for the corporatism that it is.

  123. Beachside

    @ memoryvault

    It’s drafting and adoption had SFA to do with Turdbull. It was gazetted on September 22, 2015, a few days after Abbott was toppled.

    Though not legislated until December 2015, and came into force on July 1, 2016.

    JoNova

    Kohler claims this Cap N Trade idea has been part of Coalition policy since before the 2013 election. That is a spin doctor story it appears Hunt is providing. Abbott won on a blood oath to get rid of carbon taxes. He wanted to rule out emissions trading. Gore and Palmer forced him to add in a proviso to not rule it out entirely, but to allow a “review” for an ETS. When Direct Action was removed the ETS was sold as a deal that would only happen if and when all the major players signed up. So Hunt and Turnbull said straight after the coup that trading “might” start from mid 2016. Turnbull can say he’s sticking to the Abbott plan, but Hunt can get an ETS thanks to the Palmer clause that Al Gore flew here to get. In other words, this is a GoreTax. (What did he offer Palmer?)

  124. as it makes no sense whatsoever for Abbott to have campaigned from 2010 until 2013 to repeal the dreaded Gillard carbon tax, only to then bring in an ETS without first taking it to an election.

    It doesn’t make sense, Beachside, because it isn’t what happened. Howard introduced the enabling legislation for an Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) in 2007, but was ousted before he could finish the job. However, before departing he set up the department to oversee its implementation.

    KRudd got elected on the promise of finishing the job, and had bipartison support from Turdbull, the Leader of the Opposition. At that time LNP policy was an ETS with a government-mandated floor price of $15.00 a tonne for CO2. This remained LNP policy right up to the 2013 election campaign.

    In 2009 KRudd was ousted by Gillard, and Turdbull was ousted by Abbott. Both went into the 2010 backing an ETS, with only superficial differences. Gillard said it wouldn’t be a tax, then promptly introduced it as a tax in 2010, to get the Greens onside. However, it was still meant to morph into an ETS as of July 1, 2015.

    At the time, Liberal policy remained an ETS with a floor price of $15.00 a tonne. True, Abbott campaigned against a “carbon tax”, but only on the basis of bringing forward the date it became an ETS from July 1, 2015. This remained the position until the after the election campaign started in 2013, when KRudd had replaced Gillard. KRudd also promised to remove the carbon tax by going straight to an ETS. This made the two parties’ positions identical. Then, and only then, did Abbott and the Liberals drop the carbon tax/ETS altogether, maybe four weeks out from the election.

    Abbott won the election, and repealed the carbon tax, but in a way so as to leave the door open for an ETS. Twelve months later he quietly approved the Regulation to bring the ETS into effect from July 1, 2016, exactly a year later than originally envisaged by Howard in 2007, and legislated for by Gillard in 2010. Apart from a short period during the 2013 election campaign, Abbott and the Liberals always supported the introduction of an ETS.

  125. Though not legislated until December 2015, and came into force on July 1, 2016.

    This Beachside, is a textbook example of “fake news”. Nothing was voted on in December, Alan Kohler made the whole story up, presumably to help cover up the truth, at the behest of both major political parties. The Regulation was circulated in draft form on 2 September 2015 – here is a link. Then it was gazetted as law on 7 October 2015 – here is a link (sorry I quoted 22 September earlier).

    When I first read the story I wrote to Cory Bernardi’s office asking how come it could be voted on in the Senate without anybody mentioning it. His office replied, explaining to me what had really happened, without anybody voting on the issue in either House.

    Just for the record, I emailed the story, plus links, to JoNova. She thanked me, but for reasons unknown chose not to correct her original post.

  126. Tel

    iampeter #2413691, posted on June 15, 2017 at 6:50 pm

    But Tel who cares? As I said before immigration is not a cause or solution of any problems.

    Just to facilitate my internal reindexing, do you support open borders and mass migration or not?

    Pick one or the other, and we can pick it up from that point.

  127. iampeter

    If by “open borders” you mean people can just stroll in then no I don’t support it.
    If by “open borders” you mean a secured border where immigrants are assessed for criminal records and infectious diseases but otherwise not denied access based on personal beliefs than yes I do support it.

    Which is it?

    If by “mass migration” you mean do I support “migration” then yes.
    If by “mass migration” you mean something like Germany’s refugee program then no.

    Which is it?

    I think with Conservatives having lost on every single issue and so removed from actual politics, you guys are spending a lot of time cooking up straw men to argue about with yourselves to keep pretending your talking about politics as big gov continues to advance.

  128. rickw

    He would want to be shitloads better second time round.

  129. Fisky

    not denied access based on personal beliefs than yes I do support it.

    So Iampeter is happy with an unlimited number of ISIS supporters entering the country. #freedom

  130. OldOzzie

    Peter
    #2413719, posted on June 15, 2017 at 7:08 pm
    The liberals are losing their base everyday, what i think is happening now, is that no one is talking to them anymore, what is the point, they seem to have no idea, what is going on, or how bad it is. They either recast with Abbott who will hit stride within days, or they go with an unknown. Abbott is probably the only one who can do the job, which is to set a course, and win the next election. Save their hides, and help Australia out of the hole that it is now in.

    Peter,

    I never get a response from any Liberals on the Northern Beaches – they are a total waste of space and could not give the Proverbial for their former Liberal Supporters..

    My Youngest and her mates are going hammer and tongs against Northern Beaches Liberals both State and Federal MPs on Gonski Reforms, and basically the Liberals cannot give a Stuff.

    I have been impressed with how the young peoples are organising against Northern Beaches Liberals Gonski Reforms with TV/Media Crews today.

    Turnbull and his North Shore Acolyte Photios picks, Julian Lesser, Trent Zimmerman, James Griffin, Jason Falinski, Felicity Wilson will go down the drain, along with existing Liberal members.

  131. JC

    Tel.

    Hate to break it to you but Mexico , Indonesia and
    China are not low wage countries.

    If want to argue lowest wages Malawi would be a good place to start.

  132. Beachside

    @ memoryvault

    Thanks for that mv. Appreciate your patience 😊

    Wow!

    How on earth could they gazette something into law without presenting it to the house, and the senate, and get away with it?

    Question is, how many other things do they gazette into law, without anyone being any the wiser?

    Incredible!

  133. Tel

    If by “open borders” you mean a secured border where immigrants are assessed for criminal records and infectious diseases but otherwise not denied access based on personal beliefs than yes I do support it.

    I would argue that’s insufficient. Culture makes a difference, otherwise Africa and the Middle East would be prosperous by now. There’s a limit to the rate that any nation can accept new people and still have productive integration. Besides that, some cultures are incompatible, so we need to be somewhat selective.

    For example, if a large number of people come believing in wealth redistribution and thinking that others should work for them, then these people will vote for wealth redistribution, and they will sit and expect to get something handed to them. Over time the country as a whole begins to lean further in that direction. That’s just an example, many other cultural shifts are possible… but there’s no point trying to stop the welfare state, or even reduce it, while vast numbers of new welfare state advocates are streaming in.

  134. Tel

    Hate to break it to you but Mexico , Indonesia and
    China are not low wage countries.

    goo.gl/f3VLhS

    Indonesian wages started well behind Australia but are catching up. For quite a while they were making shoes, while Australia pretty much lost our shoe industry maybe 20 years ago, or perhaps a bit longer. I’m pretty sure that for basic manual labour Indonesia is much cheaper, I just checked the minimum wage in Indonesia and it varies amongst the regions but something approx $250 Australian per month.

  135. Luke

    So there is a tape of Turnbull mocking Trump in, it would seem, an effort to show journalists he is one of them.

  136. Leigh Lowe

    So there is a tape of Turnbull mocking Trump in, it would seem, an effort to show journalists he is one of them.

    Any tape of Trumble mocking Frau Merkel?
    What a deadshit.
    Trump will be President for six years after Trumble gets the arse, but he won’t forget how the
    pompous xunt tried to blindside him on the refugee deal then tried to personally humiliate him to fellate the local branch of Fake News Inc.
    Thanks dickhead.

  137. How on earth could they gazette something into law without presenting it to the house, and the senate, and get away with it?

    Apparently it depends entirely on how the original, enabling legislation is written. They can create loopholes they can expand on further down the track. The loopholes used in this case had to be incorporated into the laws passed by Gillard in 2010 and “conveniently” left in place when Abbott repealed most, but obviously not all, of her original legislation. It is quite possible they were written into the original 2007 legislation introduced by Howard.

    Question is, how many other things do they gazette into law, without anyone being any the wiser?

    This is the first time I have ever encountered it. However, it is common enough to have an official name which was included in the reply I received from Bernardi’s office. Regrettably, I can’t locate that email at the moment. Damned if I know why.

  138. Art Vandelay

    Question is, how many other things do they gazette into law, without anyone being any the wiser?

    This is the first time I have ever encountered it. However, it is common enough to have an official name which was included in the reply I received from Bernardi’s office.

    Delegated legislation

  139. Delegated legislation

    Thank you Art. From memory that sounds about right.

  140. Thank you Art. From memory that sounds about right.

    I’m off to bed now, but any chance of an explanation of how it works?
    Love to read it in the morning.

  141. Art Vandelay

    I’m off to bed now, but any chance of an explanation of how it works?
    Love to read it in the morning.

    This was the most useful explanation I could find: Delegated legislation and disallowance

  142. Yohan

    Abbott made sure the Liberal party room will never elect another conservative leader for 20 years. He poisoned the well for any real conservative coming after him.

    It doesn’t matter if the Liberals get smashed each election going forward from today. The party is full of people more concerned about getting acceptance (or at least peace) from the media and not being called racist or nativist. That’s what matters most to them, not winning elections. This is also the case with the average GOP rep in the US, and the Tories in UK.

  143. Senile Old Guy

    not denied access based on personal beliefs than yes I do support it.

    So Iampeter is happy with an unlimited number of ISIS supporters entering the country. #freedom

    Yes, it’s open borders.

    Refusing people entry because of the country they are coming from IS racist you nitwit.

    Ridiculous. A country is not a race.

  144. john constantine

    People that rely on simply yelling “Racist” at anybody not cowering in docility and going along with open borders will win for a while.

    After a while though, those accused of racism stop and think, “well, i have been denounced as a racist a hundred times now, and the world hasn’t ended”.

    “Does the word really mean what they think it means?.”

    Open the Borders, Comrades.

  145. Texas Jack

    Those hoping for Abbott MkII and/or dreaming up org-charts for the supposedly conservative front bench are a laugh. The problem is the Liberal Party itself, now so deeply awash with Labot-Lite progressives you can’t see the gunwales and unlikely to change.

    Think about it. People like Abbott and Howard are compelled to support the mess it has become because of their years of support and historic ties, but would a young bespectacled solicitor Howard join it today? That’s the test. He’d tell you he would for the cameras, but really?

    The whole Broad Church concept means that conservative principles and policies only ever make it from the partyroom deformed, or so challenged by internal dissent that those advocating them are already smeared before they have to tackle the ABC, ALP, supported by the Greens and the typical baggage train inside the Senate cross benches. Then there’s the problem of conservative voices silenced when the leader happens to be some apparently popular Wet as is the obvious case at present. Dutton somehow keeps trying, but even he can’t speak with full throat. This is an even bigger problem.

    The only answer is a break. Conservatives move to the right, sensibly with Cory and be given immediate respitory confidence training. The rest can try to make what they can of a party sandwiching itself somehow between the pendulum and the ALP, and good riddance.

  146. iampeter

    So Iampeter is happy with an unlimited number of ISIS supporters entering the country. #freedom

    If you oppose ISIS you should be calling for the destruction of state sponsors of terror not rights violating policies at home. Also you won’t stop the foreign policy issue of terrorism with domestic policies.
    Conservatives had the chance to end terrorism after 9/11 but instead GWB called Islam a religion of peace, they didn’t even identify who the enemy was and started a war on “military strategy” that failed to destroy a single state sponsor of terror. From then till today it’s Conservatives who still refer to Saudi Arabia, the worlds second biggest sponsor of terror as an “ally” and sign billion dollar arms deals with them and have so comprehensively failed to provide even a glimmer of a plan to deal with terrorism that they are reduced to pretending they are tough guys by calling for immigration controls. The Onion couldn’t come up with a parody as hilarious as this level of political failure and evasion of that failure.
    But yes please tell me more how I’m soft on terrorism by calling for a secure border.

    Ridiculous. A country is not a race.

    That’s correct if the only reason you are preventing someone from entering your country is because they are a criminal. If there are other reasons like the point blank bans suggested then if it’s not racism, it’s an equal level of bigotry and you’re just splitting hairs.

  147. iampeter

    I would argue that’s insufficient. Culture makes a difference, otherwise Africa and the Middle East would be prosperous by now.

    All those places would be prosperous by now if they had rights protecting governments.

    That’s the only culture that matters, that’s what separates western civilization from all the others and that sadly seems to be what most Conservatives (certainly many of the ones posting here) do not support.

    You guys don’t need Tony Abbott. You guys need to go back to basics and actually work out which side of the political spectrum you guys are even on. If you decide to join the right, you can abandon conversations of not really political issues like “immigration” and start worrying about what really matters: having a rights protecting government.

  148. Senile Old Guy

    Ridiculous. A country is not a race.

    That’s correct if the only reason you are preventing someone from entering your country is because they are a criminal. If there are other reasons like the point blank bans suggested then if it’s not racism, it’s an equal level of bigotry and you’re just splitting hairs.

    People from one country do not have a right to move to other countries at will. Countries have laws about who can, and who cannot, enter. Country shopping is illegal.

    The responses I read are ‘racist’ and ‘bigot’ which are not arguments; they are just emotional replies.

  149. Tel

    From then till today it’s Conservatives who still refer to Saudi Arabia, the worlds second biggest sponsor of terror as an “ally” and sign billion dollar arms deals with them and have so comprehensively failed to provide even a glimmer of a plan to deal with terrorism that they are reduced to pretending they are tough guys by calling for immigration controls.

    Who on this blog is a supporter of Saudi Arabia? Just cite one comment.

    Trump may be immoral selling guns to both Saudi and Qatar, making money in the knowledge they will probably misuse these machines, possibly against each other… but people are influenced by incentives, that’s what happens when you have freedom, if there’s profits to be made, someone will do it. How does your “rights protecting government” propose to prevent people selling guns?

    If you don’t like Trump, the other choice was a candidate who had taken millions in donations from those gulf states. Think about that for a moment.

  150. Mother Lode

    One reason I would like Porter to become PM is because it would force progressives to say the word Christian.

    I know they would spit it out like blood after gargling with broken glass, but it would be constantly jarring for them to say Christian without attaching any of their reflexive calumnies about Christians in general.

    And when they fail…

    “Prime Minister Christian, probably a p3d0phil3…”

  151. Beachside

    @ memoryvault

    Thanks for that, mv

    @ Art – thanks for the link

  152. .

    Well said peter. Make them eat crow. Walking hand in hand with the KSA is revolting.

  153. NewChum

    It’s fake news that trump sold weapons to Qatar. Obama inked and approved that deal.

    I agree that KSA should be cut off and rejected until they clean up, which will be never.

    But that isn’t trumps gig. He’s not an ideological Warrior. He just seems like one because he doesn’t speak lies about immigration.

    He’s about getting the economy going, and selling weapons systems means exports and good jobs. But he also seems to be doing what he can to get El Sisi – the closest thing to a moderate around – to taking a leading role.

    Id rather see KSA assets confiscated for terrorism support and human rights abuses, and then sanctions for the same. The only problem is what would spring up would be worse. It is pretty despicable given they are way worse than what apartheid South Africa was, yet no outrage, from either right or left.

    Even worse, instead of pursuit of true energy independence from ME oil and gas, we are chasing intermittents. Which plays right into Saudi hands, knowing the west is building piles of industrial trash which will never threaten their energy cartel.

  154. iampeter

    People from one country do not have a right to move to other countries at will. Countries have laws about who can, and who cannot, enter. Country shopping is illegal.

    The only thing that should be illegal in a free country, from a right wing point of view, is something that violates individual rights. Since moving to another country in and of itself does not violate anyones rights it shouldn’t be illegal. None of this means that people can just walk in with no security checks of any kind. No one is advocating this nonexistent “open borders” straw man position that has been cooked up to pretend to be talking politics.

    The responses I read are ‘racist’ and ‘bigot’ which are not arguments; they are just emotional replies.

    I know the word “racist” gets thrown around so much it’s lost all meaning but still Fisk IS a racist.

    Also I look forward to you lecturing Fisk re “not arguments” in his posts lol. Failing that, this is some epic level hypocrisy and one sidedness on your part.

  155. iampeter

    Who on this blog is a supporter of Saudi Arabia? Just cite one comment.

    It’s not that you support Saudi Arabia, it’s the pretense that immigration policy is going to do anything and that you are tough on terrorism while Conservatives have led the way in pretending Islam is a religion of peace and allying with state sponsors of terror.
    What would you call a political movement that after Pearl Harbor set as its priorities banning Japanese immigrants, while in parallel calling Imperial Japan an ally in the war against Imperial Japan and signed arms deals with them and walked hand in hand with the Emperor? That’s today’s mainstream Conservative approach to terrorism. The insanity of this and the inability of so many Conservatives to see how hard they are failing on the issue is the point I am trying to make.

    If you don’t like Trump, the other choice was a candidate who had taken millions in donations from those gulf states. Think about that for a moment.

    I have thought about that and what I think is that we need to work towards an actual alternative to the current terrible options. Step one of that is understanding the basics like what the political spectrum is, which side of it you are on and why. Which brings us back to the original article here which seems to think who leads the Liberal Party is going to do anything when Conservatism itself as a movement is completely ideological bankrupt and has no ideas to offer that differentiate them from any other leftists on any issue whatsoever. They are even further left on things like marriage and immigration.

  156. Habib

    Abbott is old school DLP, a mick socialist of the first order. That said, he’s streets ahead of Lord Wentworth and his lickspittle entourage, which speaks volumes about the parlous state of Australian politics. However it was always thus, a loathsome past-time that attracts ditch carp like shit attracts flies, which is why at bare minimum the senate needs serious revision and down-sizing, and term limits imposed on both houses, along with a recall provision. My personal preference is a Swiss-style canton setup, with draft rather than election. And likewise national service, with every house equipped with an automatic weapon.

  157. OldOzzie

    Tony Abbot responded to concerns of friends of my youngest daughter, to the problems below, with a hand written letter.

    And talk about Turnbull Coalition/Liberal? Party screwing it’s own voters with the Gonski reforms

    From the Manly Daily Today

    NORTHERN BEACHES

    Catholic parents fear
    Minister vows public schools will find room


    Up in arms … parents of St Cecilia’s Catholic school pupils protest outside Balgowlah Heights Primary School yesterday. Picture: Adam Yip

    EVERY child wanting a place at a public school will be catered for, according to Education Minister Rob Stokes, as fears mount that hundreds of children could be pulled out of Catholic schools if fees double.

    This week the Manly Daily has discovered hundreds of panicked Catholic parents have been calling local state schools about enrolments.

    It follows warnings from the Diocese of Broken Bay that peninsula school fees could double and Catholic schools could close if a new federal funding model is passed in the Senate next week.

    Mr Stokes, state MP for Pittwater, said even if “unprecedented” numbers of children suddenly applied for a spot in a public school, every child would get a place. However, he said, it would mean more demountable classrooms, many on already crowded sites. “If unprecedented numbers apply for a school place, we will cater for them and provide them with a great education,” he said.

    The crisis over the future of Catholic schools on the northern beaches ramped up a notch this week as parents from St Cecilia’s Catholic School protested against Gonski 2.0 outside Balgowlah Heights Public, waving their enrolment forms.

    One parent estimated Balgowlah Heights was the local state school for the majority of 260 children at St Cecilia’s.

    Parents at St Kieran’s Catholic School in Manly Vale said many would be forced to apply at Manly Vale Public – which already has 13 demountable classrooms – if fees rose.

    Warringah federal MP Tony Abbott spoke on the issue for the first time, saying fee rises of up to 78 per cent would hit families hard and “drive a lot of them into the public system, which would struggle to cope”.

    However, in a letter to an emergency meeting of Catholic school parents at Our Lady of Good Counsel in Forestville on Wednesday, he offered some hope, saying the federal education minister was planning on “sitting down with representatives of Catholic education to find a way of funding that enables the various Catholic systems to continue”.

    Mr Abbott told the Manly Daily it was a big issue for the peninsula and he wanted to ensure “this potential problem is averted”.

    Mackellar MP Jason Falinski (Turnbull/Photios Acolyte – added by Old Ozzie), who last week said the new deal would mean more funds for Catholic schools, said he hoped talks would produce “a better result”.

    The original Gonski agreement – put together after an independent review on education – promised an increase in education funds from federal and state governments over six years, with the bulk of the money to come in the next two years.

    Former PM Abbott refused to fund the last two years but, under Coalition plans, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s revised model, Gonski 2.0, will see increased funding over a 10-year period.
    However, Mr Stokes called for the Federal Government to stick to its original Gonski funding promise, so both state schools and other schools in the community received the funding they needed to operate.

  158. Luke

    Abbott would lose. Just not as badly as Turnbull.

    We need third party pressure, either Cory or Pauline it doesn’t matter.

  159. GregJ

    Abbott was voted in because he was espousing standard conservative positions before the election.

    After being elected with a very significant majority, he then went about trashing every conservative principle he had and betraying the conservative base which had voted for him.

    I voted LNP with Abbott at the helm the last time he ran and for years before that. Never again.

    For me it will be the LDP, Bernardi’s mob, or ALA, or even Hanson; but never again for those miserable LNP shits. I’d sooner vote ALP.

  160. Makka

    What would you call a political movement that after Pearl Harbor set as its priorities banning Japanese immigrants, while in parallel calling Imperial Japan an ally in the war against Imperial Japan and signed arms deals with them and walked hand in hand with the Emperor?

    Yet iampeter is resoundingly silent about a movement that stabbed our diggers in the back, undermined our war effort and actively aided sping on and inside our Govt. Low life leftist scum who somehow escape the observant eye of peter – because he’s a leftist POS . No wonder dotty is smitten.

  161. .

    Sure Makka, objectivist Ayn Rand fan “iampeter” is a fan of Stalinist communists…get off the booze, you can’t handle it. Some truly stupid drivel you are posting this evening.

  162. John constantine

    Their shorten with a green coalition in the reps, but tied up in the Senate might stretch our date of execution out a bit.

    The Abbotbeast may get some old labor voters in the Senate, where turnfailure apologists will simply vote green.

  163. Makka

    Don’t get all hurty feelings dotty.

    As a fanboi of iampeter , it could be a new look for you if you try real hard to cover your open borders tracks.

  164. .

    More drivel Makka. You’ve run out of bullshit tonight.

  165. Tel

    It’s not that you support Saudi Arabia, it’s the pretense that immigration policy is going to do anything and that you are tough on terrorism while Conservatives have led the way in pretending Islam is a religion of peace and allying with state sponsors of terror.

    Being able to control your own border is the first step towards having a property right, and this applies to a household, or a small business, or a corporation, or a city, or a nation.

    Let’s suppose you have a company, say Microsoft just as a random example; and at any time IBM employees, or Apple employees could stroll into any Microsoft office, sit down at any Microsoft terminal and start reading Microsoft code to take a look at what’s in there. Heck, suppose they could also edit the Microsoft source code, maybe they also get a vote at board meetings. In such a situation Microsoft would have lost control of it’s borders… that is, it would be unable to keep outsiders out… unable to differentiate between people who belong there and people who don’t belong there. As a consequence it would be unable to defend the rest of its property rights, unable to maintain self-determination, and pretty soon cease to exist.

    Hopefully you agree that at least in the case of a corporation, it is necessary for them to maintain an exclusive employees-only zone of access, and also necessary for them to screen their employees, try to find people who will be loyal, get them to sign contracts, and other stuff like that.

    So extending that out to a country… yes immigration policy does matter, and we have to get it right.

    Of course, that’s not the whole story… no one said it was the whole story. For a guy who doesn’t like straw men, you sure are enthusiastic about throwing them around. So yes, some people calling themselves “Conservative” have supported Saudi Arabia, mostly those are Neocons, not real conservatives at all but they are leftist statists who found it convenient to adopt some of the mannerisms of conservatives.

    At one stage the USA was very dependent on foreign oil, and made allies of convenience because they wanted to get the oil. And of course there’s money to be made, which is *ALWAYS* going to influence human behaviour, and if you find someone who doesn’t want the money, then someone else will pop right up and take it anyway.

    So who led the way with this “religion of peace” thingy? Well I don’t see you citing anyone, but I think it was mostly cultural Marxists who started putting about these ideas that all cultures are irrelevant and all religions are irrelevant and any person can be substituted for any other person, they are all just workers. At the same time some economists found this a conveniently simplified theory and (as is the way of economists) became determined that reality should be made to fit their theory. The cultural Marxists go one step further and say that if Africa is not prosperous, that cannot possibly be related to culture, nor religion, nor the people themselves (because we know all of those are irrelevant) so it could only be because of unfair exploitation. Then they find every little identity group and tell them the same thing: everything that they fail at is because of someone else’s fault (generally middle class white men are to blame). Tell each of them, “You are very unique, and your little group is so special but you need to think along the lines that we tell you, and follow our instructions. We don’t like people who think for themselves.”

    Some conservatives fell for it, some libertarians also fell for it. Everyone likes an idea that’s clean, easy to remember, simple, and wrong. Libertarians want to treat people as individuals, which is fine… now what if those individuals want to voluntarily form a group and make agreements amongst themselves to live a certain way and exclude other people who don’t live that way. If they have a right to their own minds and body as property then they also have a right to freedom of association, and thus the right to include or exclude anyone they choose to. They can pool their property (to a greater or lesser extent, whatever they decide) and they can construct a border as a mutual defense. Thus they get the right to create a culture, and the ability to live their lives in their own way, which is the only way to have genuine diversity at all.

    It’s as simple as that: to maintain diversity you must have strong borders. To maintain individual property you must have strong borders.

  166. .

    At one stage the USA was very dependent on foreign oil

    When?

  167. Tel

    Step one of that is understanding the basics like what the political spectrum is, which side of it you are on and why.

    I fully understand what the “political spectrum” is.

    It is a load of garbage, used by lazy journalists to cast shade on anyone they don’t like. For example, Pauline Hanson is “far right”, apparently so is Le Pen, “far right”, and strangely even the LA gay community who want to be able to get on with their gay pride parade and generally be left alone, you guessed it, “far right”.

    Every single time you hear the phrase, “far right” it is bullshit. Every time.

    When you hear the phrase, “far left”… oh wait, you never do hear that. Hmmm. Well anyway, even the definition of “socialist” has often been contested, I know how I define it… someone who believes that the individual exists for the purpose of serving society, rather than the other way around.

    Once you get into ideologies, there’s millions of them. Not a spectrum, they go in every direction: up down left right and a quarter turn clockwise. People believe all sorts of nutty stuff, because heads are small and pointy while the world is big, messy and confusing.

  168. .

    The US has never been “very dependent” on foreign oil, except from 1973 to 1982.

    Which was for the most part, after the 1973 price spike, which in turn was largely caused by Nixonian price controls.

  169. Tel
    #2414642, posted on June 16, 2017 at 8:09 pm

    +100.

    You’re on fire tonight, Tel.

  170. Mullumhillbilly

    It’s as simple as that

    Well said Tel, thanks for the clarity.

  171. iampeter

    It’s as simple as that: to maintain diversity you must have strong borders. To maintain individual property you must have strong borders.

    But you’re not calling for “strong borders” your calling for rights violating government. You’re saying something like “to maintain rights we must violate rights” and you’re oblivious to the contradiction.
    This is why Conservatives never shrink government in any other area of politics either. It’s hard to do if you fundamentally don’t agree with rights or believe that protecting them is the proper function of government.

    The Government is not a private business and comparing the two is apples and oranges. Microsoft can do what it wants but the state only has one specific function to those of us on the right: protect individual rights.

    Since merely migrating somewhere is not a rights violation, a legitimate government can not make it illegal.

    That’s actually how simple it is.

    Re losing the War on Terror, it was GWB that started the Islam is a religion of peace shtick and he is no Neocon (although that’s just an evasion anyway). This speech is where the WoT was lost by the Conservative movement and today you guys pretend talking tough on on immigration is the same as talking tough on terrorism, when it’s just an evasion of the culpability of your movement for the mess the world is in today.

    Re the political spectrum:

    I fully understand what the “political spectrum” is.
    It is a load of garbage, used by lazy journalists to cast shade on anyone they don’t like.

    So then you don’t understand the political spectrum.
    Politics is about how people deal with each other and there are only two fundamentally opposed options in doing so: through freedom(e.g. trading) or force(e.g. regulatory/welfare state or worse). So the political spectrum can clearly be defined as freedom vs force or individualism vs collectivism. This is also why Hanson and Le Pen are examples of far leftists to anyone who is actually clear about this, which the media obviously is not as they aren’t clear on anything else either.
    Understanding this is the very first step to even begin talking politics. Because most people here don’t seem to understand even this much, you get posts comparing capitalists to union supporters or “auxiliary of the left”.

    To be fair this parody of political discourse is everywhere today but it is sad to see it here too.

    This is why Conservatives don’t need to really be worried about specifics like who leads the Liberal party. You guys have waaaayyy bigger fish to fry when it comes to even the most basics of politics.

Comments are closed.