OUT: Abbott IN: Turnbull

[MadAsHell 4,215]

Choke's right Robbie, your extreme bias has you talking in circles.

You critisized Choke for not voting for anyone and not making a decision, but then have a go at me because I voted Labor in the house of reps and Greens in the senate.

You had a go at Greens & Labor for preferencing Palmer United aheadof the Liberal party, yet not the Liberal Party for preferencing Palmer ahead of both of them. If the Fairfax race had of been between Palmer & the Labor member, where do you think the Liberal Member's preference would have gone?

You complain about people having a go at Abbott on a thread named Tony Abbott is an international embarrasment, yet then proceed to give derogatory names to several different Labor Members.

You say that Abbott has made comments in the past that he regrets, but then come out and talk about all these things Albanese & Shorten have done in the past. You have to practice what you preech Robbie.

As for the broad staements about The Greens, you've called their economic policies in to line and said anyone who supported them and saw their policieswould be embarrased. Well, what policies of The Greens are embarrasing?

You also then go on about Labor and Greens voters crying out bias about anyone who doesn't agree with them, yet have you read your own posts on this thread Robbie? I suggest you do.

Edited September 13, 2013 by Tall Defence

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

Choke's right Robbie, your extreme bias has you talking in circles.

You critisized Choke for not voting for anyone and not making a decision, but then have a go at me because I voted Labor in the house of reps and Greens in the senate.

You had a go at Greens & Labor for preferencing Palmer United aheadof the Liberal party, yet not the Liberal Party for preferencing Palmer ahead of both of them. If the Fairfax racehadofbeen between Palmer & the Labor member, where do you think the Liberal Member's preference would have gone?

You complain about people having a go at Abbott on a thread named Tony Abbott is an international embarrasment, yet then proceed to give derogatory names to several different Labor Members.

You say that Abbott has made comments in the past that he regrets, but then come out and talk about all these things Albanese & Shorten have done in the past. You have to practice what you preech Robbie.

As for the broad staements about The Greens, you've called their economic policies in to line and said anyone who supported them and saw their policieswould be embarrased. Well, what policies of The Greens are embarrasing?

You also then go on about Labor and Greens voters crying out bias about anyone who doesn't agree with them, yet have you read your own posts on this thread Robbie? I suggest you do.

Marry me.

[hardtack 10,626]

You always have to refer back to the past to come up with the religious fanatics don't you hardtack; the Vatican was, the fundamentalists do, I want to draw our attention to who is now, not who was when the World was a different place; some have moved on others can't and continue to slaughter today.

Yes they "have all killed at one point in time or another in the name of their God", it's just that some continue to do so and will keep on dong it.

The Deputy PM and his wife are on big money, they're both prominent people in the Marrickville area, on a Friday afternoon the now Deputy PM enters and remains for one hour in a business that is the subject of many hundred Parlour Pages and Australian XXX Reviews of the sexual prowess and services provided within that place.

Further the business is operating unlawfully, our forensic investigator attended and was offered sexual services or payment without him prompting. The manner of his attendance and the way he recorded evidence was designed for admissibility in a court of law. The premises are not licenced to provide sexual services.

At the least Albanese has made himself a laughing stock. Australian politicians who do stupid things like Albanese's visit to the Thai illegal brothel in his electorate one Friday afternoon (but only for a therapeutic massage) tend to get the mickey taken out of them for a long time. Lapses of judgement like this one would carry that sort of gleefully extracted price from every conservative politician. But the Press Gallery has made a collective decision to spare this man any embarrassment. Most unusual.

It always helpful if you cite the source of your quote RF. I notice that everyone likes to overlook the claim it was for a therapeutic massage and immediately assume it was for sexual favours. Still, no surprises there... as I stated, I live around the corner from that business (in Dulwich Hill) and to my eye and to the best of my knowledge, it is a legitimate business offering genuine massage services.

And for your information, I did mention the past (Vatican) yes, but if you had bothered to read on, then you would have noticed I also mentioned recent cases; there are numerous organisations that continue to operate in the name of god and use terrorism as their modus operandi... KKK, Hutaree and numerous other christian based groups are still active in the US, NLFT and MNCA in India, Iron Guard and Lancieri still operate in Romania, Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda and so on. And of course I mentioned fundamentalists.... because that is precisely who is responsible for all of the killings going on today... fundamentalist islamics, hindus, christians... the mainstream in all of those religions are no more likely to kill, than you or I.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

Choke's right Robbie, your extreme bias has you talking in circles.

You critisized Choke for not voting for anyone and not making a decision, but then have a go at me because I voted Labor in the house of reps and Greens in the senate.

You had a go at Greens & Labor for preferencing Palmer United aheadof the Liberal party, yet not the Liberal Party for preferencing Palmer ahead of both of them. If the Fairfax racehadofbeen between Palmer & the Labor member, where do you think the Liberal Member's preference would have gone?

You complain about people having a go at Abbott on a thread named Tony Abbott is an international embarrasment, yet then proceed to give derogatory names to several different Labor Members.

You say that Abbott has made comments in the past that he regrets, but then come out and talk about all these things Albanese & Shorten have done in the past. You have to practice what you preech Robbie.

As for the broad staements about The Greens, you've called their economic policies in to line and said anyone who supported them and saw their policieswould be embarrased. Well, what policies of The Greens are embarrasing?

You also then go on about Labor and Greens voters crying out bias about anyone who doesn't agree with them, yet have you read your own posts on this thread Robbie? I suggest you do.

You can vote for whomever you like, i criticised you for because you preference'd Palmer, just because the how to vote card tells you what to do doesn't mean you have to, are you a sheep?

I criticised Choke because he wasted the opportunity to cast a vote; there is a difference you know.

I don't agree with the Liberals giving their preferences to the Palmer Party any more than I do with the Labor Party doing it, I certainly didn't. We have had one psychopath in Rudd as leader of this Country and I don't want anymore crazy Queenslanders like Palmer and Katter in Parliament.

Yes this is a thread about Abbott, and it is all about denigrating him, I just thought it needed a bit of balance.

Yes I did say that Abbott has made comments in the past which he now regrets, these were comments.

Of course I'm biased, I hate the Labor Party and all the crooks that infest it, but I'm not part of the mainstream media, you do know that don't you?

The Labor Party have given heaps to Murdoch because they/he didn't back them but not a word was said about the Age newspaper by the Liberals even though the bias was there, some of the articles I read in that paper were vile and disgusting; Clementine (whoever) wrote one of the most disgusting articles I've ever seen printed in mainstream media. although the Age is hardly mainstream any more it's just a rag that very few read and getting fewer.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

It always helpful if you cite the source of your quote RF. I notice that everyone likes to overlook the claim it was for a therapeutic massage and immediately assume it was for sexual favours. Still, no surprises there... as I stated, I live around the corner from that business (in Dulwich Hill) and to my eye and to the best of my knowledge, it is a legitimate business offering genuine massage services.

And for your information, I did mention the past (Vatican) yes, but if you had bothered to read on, then you would have noticed I also mentioned recent cases; there are numerous organisations that continue to operate in the name of god and use terrorism as their modus operandi... KKK, Hutaree and numerous other christian based groups are still active in the US, NLFT and MNCA in India, Iron Guard and Lancieri still operate in Romania, Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda and so on. And of course I mentioned fundamentalists.... because that is precisely who is responsible for all of the killings going on today... fundamentalist islamics, hindus, christians... the mainstream in all of those religions are no more likely to kill, than you or I.

So you don't really know your just assuming; is that correct?

We all know who it is that's doing the killing don't we Hardtack; you can hide it behind some indiscriminate groups of Christians if that makes you feel better but let's look at who is killing the vast majority in the name of their God; want to have a guess?

Anyway I'm off to have a walk down the beach, I'm on holidays and the last thing I need is to sit at a computer arguing with someone that I will never agree with.

[MadAsHell 4,215]

Marry me.

Taken sorry Choke.

And Robbie I never received a how to vote card from The Greens, but I'm happy to allow their preferences to go to who they think fit. Only how to vote cards I received were Labor (at the booth and in the mail), Liberal (mail only which I burned after having a read and rolling my eyes. I avoided them at the booth), Sex Party (mail, actually have some very good policies and nearly voted for them in the senate), DLP (at the booth and disregarded after a quick read) and Family First (booth, but I never actually received it as I told the guy not to bother).

I'm actually interested to hear who you'd suggest I vote for in the senate that isn't strongly linked to Labor or Liberal, but would give their preference to one of them before Palmer? I'm not sure if such a party exists? As far as I was concerned my only real options in the senate were The Greens, Democrats and Sex Party. Democrats are dead and buried, Sex Party probably not strong enough yet, so that left me with a pretty simple choice.

As for everything else I'm glad you've admitted that you hate Labor as it explains your logic behind your arguments. I for one don't hate The Liberal Party, i simply disagree with many of their policies. I don't like Tony Abbott, neither do I like Sophie Mirabella, Mal Brough or Christopher Pine, but I have a lot of time for Malcolm Turnbull, Joe Hockey, Bruce Billson and at times Barnaby Joyce. Under the right circumstances I would vote for The Liberal Party if I thought they would do a better job, but I don't believe they will under Abbott's leadership. I came very close to voting for them at the last State election and if it weren't for me living in Tim Holding's electorate who did a fantastic job I would have voted Liberal.

There's a state election next year and my votes up for grabs. Will most likely vote Labor, but never say never and I think that should be the mentality to voting that people should take. By all means have a party that suits your views more then the other absolutely, but if you think they need a spell or if you think the other party has better policies to bring in then give them a go!

[hardtack 10,626]

So you don't really know your just assuming; is that correct?

And you are doing what exactly? At least my observations are first hand.

We all know who it is that's doing the killing don't we Hardtack; you can hide it behind some indiscriminate groups of Christians if that makes you feel better but let's look at who is killing the vast majority in the name of their God; want to have a guess?

Oh I see, it's all about the numbers, not the act of killing itself? Silly me!

Anyway I'm off to have a walk down the beach, I'm on holidays and the last thing I need is to sit at a computer arguing with someone that I will never agree with.

I would never expect you to agree with anyone RF unless you voted for them.

Oh, and I am not hiding behind a bunch of indiscriminate christian groups any more than you are hiding behind fundamentalists in order to tar the entire islamic mid-east with the same brush. One of your "indiscriminate christian groups", the Ugandan LRA has done almost as much damage as islamic fundamentalists in the mid-east (perhaps more?). To give a little perspective:

"The UN Secretary-General released a report on 20 May asserting that between 1987 and 2012 the LRA was "responsible for more than 100,000 deaths, that from 60,000 to 100,000 children are believed to have been abducted by the rebel group and that 2.5 million civilians have been displaced as a result of its incursions.""

I'd say they give your favourite whipping post a pretty good run for their money, wouldn't you?

[Whispering_Jack 30,640]

There's only going to be one man in Australia feeling worse than Kevin Rudd tonight and that's Peter Costello, the man who who didn't have the bottle to become Prime Minister.

What bottle was that grapeviney?

Johhny Walker Blue Label?

[Dee Fan 3,247]

I know which side of the fence I'd rather be sitting on. The Greens seem to have a hand in these vile websites; good luck to those that vote for, and donate money to them.

http://www.theage.com.au/comment/welcome-to-the-abbottoir-20130915-2tsrm.html

Tony Abbott is a misogynist, sexist, homophobic [censored], a bully, a racist, a liar and is the worst PM in Australian history.

I'm quoting here. These are the words which introduce a Facebook page entitled ''Tony Abbott - Worst PM in Australian History''. The page was created even before Abbott has even been sworn into office. Within days the page received more than 166,000 ''likes''.

The comments on the page are as predictable as they as personal: ''Soon, Australia will faced be the spectre of [Abbott] … John Wayne walks his way around the corridors of foreign powers whilst representing Australia overseas.''

Abbott was pilloried because his daughters were active on the campaign trail. One comment had him ''pimping his daughters'' as if the three young women, who never caused a moment of controversy, were willing street-walkers. They weren't even allowed to be attractive. Another commentator: ''I don't care about his daughters, they are not hot at all.''

Advertisement

The community of people that hived around the ''Worst PM in Australian History'' website is a celebration of closed minds. The general tenor of the prefabricated outrage is a contempt for the democratic process itself. As one comment put it: ''This is an illegitimate government. It is an illegal government. And it will get no co-operation from us. Everything it sends to the Senate will be sent back, or put on hold, until it resigns or is removed.''

Completely absent from all the petulance is any sense of irony about its own intolerance.

The internet is so accommodating to the culture of abuse and group stalking that by the standards of political discourse on social media the ''Tony Abbott is the Worst PM in History'' site is mainstream. It wasn't tough enough for some. Another Facebook page sprung up, ''F--- Tony Abbott'', which has had 16,000 ''likes''.

Numerous chat sites and blogs operate as open sewers, such as the Facebook page, ''Tony Abbott is a s--- c---'', which had 26,800 ''likes'' the last time I checked. Typical of the contributions on this site was: ''Its only a matter of time till facebook bans this page so swear it up while we have the chance. Oh and ASIO will be reading all this so f--- you c---- too, get a proper job faggots.''

Much more insidious than the personality disorders of individual ranters and stalkers, the army of trolls, are the organisations that function like trolls, hiding their true agendas as they manufacture dissent. A classic example is GetUp!, which operates on behalf of big unions, the Greens and the hard-left while presenting itself as a community-based organisation.

Some trolls create trolling movements, with the aim of not just engaging in debate but in destroying the careers of chosen targets. The most famous were the two social media campaigns aimed at the broadcaster Alan Jones by targeting his advertisers.

A supposedly impartial organisation, Change.org (another American import like GetUp!), actively courted Jones' obliteration, sending out media releases about the number of companies which had joined the boycott. At its peak, the boycott petition gained 103,000 supporters. The organiser turned out to be a Greens supporter. At the height of the frenzy, the retail magnate Gerry Harvey, after ordering his company, Harvey Norman, to pull its advertising from the Jones show, put the question: ''You have to ask are you part of a lynch mob?''

On a much broader scale, for six years we have seen an unremitting campaign of caricaturing Abbott as a man of unworthy ineptitude, the Speedo-wearing misogynist.

Now, with Abbott as prime minister, those who have patronised him in the name of tolerance cannot even acknowledge his grand gesture of working on behalf of the most disadvantaged Australians by taking on the indigenous affairs portfolio. His ally in this, Warren Mundine, a member of the Bundjalung people and former national president of the Labor Party, has been disdained via trolling hives as a sell-out for daring to argue that Aboriginal people can think outside a one-party state imposed on them by highly moral white people.

[jnrmac 20,185]

The commos can all pizz off to North Korea or Cuba if they like the system so much.

bye bye.

[Bitter but optimistic 22,246]

The commos can all pizz off to North Korea or Cuba if they like the system so much.

bye bye.

Or the Gat!

[DemonFrog 1,356]

The commos can all pizz off to North Korea or Cuba if they like the system so much.

bye bye.

Are you sure about that Comrade?

[MadAsHell 4,215]

1 Female member on The Liberal Party front bench who'll be out of the country for the majority of the time.

I must say I'm shocked! I was always under the impression that Tony Abbott and The Liberal Party were such a progessive party and weren't trying to take us back to another era???

As has been mentioned in the media. Even Afghanistan's front bench has more females in their cabinet!

[DemonFrog 1,356]

1 Female member on The Liberal Party front bench who'll be out of the country for the majority of the time.

I must say I'm shocked! I was always under the impression that Tony Abbott and The Liberal Party were such a progessive party and weren't trying to take us back to another era???

As has been mentioned in the media. Even Afghanistan's front bench has more females in their cabinet!

Now when you got the impression that Tony Abbott was progressive did you ask him if was a prepared speech or an off the cuff comment?

As this does have a bearing on if he told you the truth or not.

If you have any spare cash my recommendation is to invest in comedy businesses, their about to make a fortune taking the micky out of Tony and his Merry Men.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

Whitlam's first Cabinet not one Female

Hawke's first Cabinet one Female

Keating's first Cabinet one Female

[P-man 13,366]

Robbie, it's no longer 1991.

Vanstone should be ashamed of her comments defending it, labelling all the female Labor Ministers as hopeless. Aside from the fact that the likes of Wong and Plibersek were extremely competent in their portfolios, It is irrelevant. To have one female Minister in 2013 is indefensible.

Meanwhile, no Minister for Science, Aged Care, Disabilities, Tourism..the list goes on. Governance issues are going to become a right mess.

Fair to say, this is only the beginning.

[MadAsHell 4,215]

Whitlam's first Cabinet not one Female

Hawke's first Cabinet one Female

Keating's first Cabinet one Female

Robbie, it's no longer 1991.

Vanstone should be ashamed of her comments defending it, labelling all the female Labor Ministers as hopeless. Aside from the fact that the likes of Wong and Plibersek were extremely competent in their portfolios, It is irrelevant. To have one female Minister in 2013 is indefensible.

Meanwhile, no Minister for Science, Aged Care, Disabilities, Tourism..the list goes on. Governance issues are going to become a right mess.

Fair to say, this is only the beginning.

As P-Man said Robbie, it's no longer 1991, in fact it's now 22 years past.

Just don't think it's a good look at a time where women still getting paid less then in several senior roles is an issue.

Just the start of many reasons why as the title suggests "Tony Abbott is an international embarrasment" when Afghanistan have more women in their cabinet.

[DemonFrog 1,356]

As P-Man said Robbie, it's no longer 1991, in fact it's now 22 years past.

Just don't think it's a good look at a time where women still getting paid less then in several senior roles is an issue.

Just the start of many reasons why as the title suggests "Tony Abbott is an international embarrasment" when Afghanistan have more women in their cabinet.

In defence of Abbott only having one female cabinet minister I would just like to say, would you want to work with a fool as leader?

One can only assume they are waiting to the real Liberal Leader to come forward, I know I would.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

As P-Man said Robbie, it's no longer 1991, in fact it's now 22 years past.

Just don't think it's a good look at a time where women still getting paid less then in several senior roles is an issue.

Just the start of many reasons why as the title suggests "Tony Abbott is an international embarrasment" when Afghanistan have more women in their cabinet.

Ever consider the possibility that Abbott put the best people in his Cabinet, despite their race or gender?

If anyone of them doesn't perform he will be replaced and if that happens to be by a female then so be it, I'd be happy with that, if not it's because she wasn't the best person for the job. I'd rather the country be run by the best available, but I guess you don't care as long as there's half a dozen of each.

Let's see what the Cabinet looks like at the end of the first term, not at the start of it.

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

Ever consider the possibility that Abbott put the best people in his Cabinet, despite their race or gender?

If anyone of them doesn't perform he will be replaced and if that happens to be by a female then so be it, I'd be happy with that, if not it's because she wasn't the best person for the job. I'd rather the country be run by the best available, but I guess you don't care as long as there's half a dozen of each.

Let's see what the Cabinet looks like at the end of the first term, not at the start of it.

The problem with that line of thinking is that it means that, somehow, there is only one woman in the whole Liberal party capable of administering a cabinet-level portfolio. I find this very difficult to believe. If it is the case, and Juilie Bishop is the only woman in the entire Liberal party who's equally or better qualified than her male counterparts to be a cabinet minister, then the Liberal party has some serious recruitment and development issues.

That a woman is capable of performing this job is not up for debate.

The debate as I see it is why there is only one of these women working for the Liberal party.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

The problem with that line of thinking is that it means that, somehow, there is only one woman in the whole Liberal party capable of administering a cabinet-level portfolio. I find this very difficult to believe. If it is the case, and Juilie Bishop is the only woman in the entire Liberal party who's equally or better qualified than her male counterparts to be a cabinet minister, then the Liberal party has some serious recruitment and development issues.

That a woman is capable of performing this job is not up for debate.

The debate as I see it is why there is only one of these women working for the Liberal party.

The problem with you line of thinking is you really don't know and you are just assuming.

If there are any in the Ministry that show they have the capabilities they will be promoted, let's wait and see.

The simple fact is if it had not been reported in the papers you probably wouldn't have even noticed; the 24 hour news cycle. There will be plenty more in the Age and the ABC trying to bring down a popularly elected Government who essentially stayed with the majority of Cabinet Ministers that they went to the Election with.

It wasn't news before the Election but it is now and I don't see any mention of it from you in any of your prior posts.

[daisycutter 29,734]

I can't believe the no. of women in the lib cabinet is a top political concern in this country

It must mean that all the important things are going ok (not that i believe this)

It is just part of the boring PC misogynist anti Abbott campaign (and I'm not defending Abbott as a politician)

If you are so outraged then -

Name how many women in the cabinet you would be satisfied with (and why you chose this number)

Name the women by portfolio

Name why each woman is better qualified than the man currently in the portfolio

If you can't, then put up with it and find a genuine issue

FMD

[Dee Fan 3,247]

Bill Shorten in the Australian.

Perhaps someone should remind Bill about the first Hawke and Keating cabinets, unless they were somehow in the 50's and 60's.

This is all part of the Labor Mantra to paint Abbott as a 50's person, whatever that is. Say it long enough and often and idiots will believe it.

LABOR leadership aspirant Bill Shorten has stepped up his campaign to become Opposition Leader, joining the chorus of those criticising Tony Abbott's decision not to appoint more women.

Speaking at the Western Autistic School in Melbourne's west today, Mr Shorten questioned Mr Abbott's recent comments about the lack of women in his ministry.

"I think Mr Abbott is crying crocodile tears when he complains that he's disappointed that there's only one woman in cabinet," he said.

"If he's disappointed there's only one woman out of 20 Coalition cabinets ministers, he needs to buy a mirror to find out where the problem lies.

"I, like most Australians, couldn't believe the Abbott government could find place for only one woman minister out of their 20 cabinet ministers.

"This is a throwback to the 1950s and 60s."

- See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/election-2013/amanda-vanstone-defends-tony-abbott-on-number-of-women-in-cabinet/story-fn9qr68y-1226720967805#sthash.6cZbWknV.dpuf

.

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

It wasn't an issue before because Abbott wasn't forming government before. I don't see how this is an argument.

Also not raising an issue in a demonland thread is not evidence that that issue does not exist. Very spurious reasoning IMO.

For example, last year I commented to my parents (both Liberal voters) that I don't know how Penny Wong reconciles her sexuality with her party's obvious political anglings to suffocate the gay marriage debate. If you remember, the Labour spin machine managed to position the issue as a 'conscience vote', knowing that the Liberals would never agree to one and therefore the motion would be defeated. But I didn't post it on demonland, so I guess it didn't happen.

I'm not sure how much clearer I can be:

That a woman is capable of performing this job is not up for debate.

The debate as I see it is why there is only one of these women working for the Liberal party.

If Abbott has appointed his cabinet based on merit, then the question must be asked - where are the meritorious women of the Liberal party?

If you insist on bringing history into this debate - the modern Labour party did not have this problem. Off the top of my head they had Tanya Plibersek, Penny Wong, Nicola Roxon and Julia Gillard in the first Rudd cabinet. Their subsequent performance is not relevant to this debate, as we cannot say that they performed better or worse than a theoretical male counterpart that didn't get the job. They were better at the time of promotion and that's all we can say. However, I don't think history is a good illustrative tool in this argument. No party in history has the exact pool of players Abbott has. It is not useful to go back an examine what other leaders did with their pools of political talent.

What IS relevant is why Abbott's particular pool seems so shallow on the female end. Women who can run a cabinet portfolio clearly exist. Judging by Abbott's appointments, they do not seem to exist within the current Liberal government. That is the issue and that is the problem. I never made out that it was the greatest moral challenge of our time. I just think that it's relevant that women are under-represented. Racial groups also seem to be under-represented.

The problem IMO lies in the undiverse talent pool Abbott has at his disposal, and the circumstances that allowed that to occur (whatever they are - I honestly don't know what they are).

Robbie, I am not sure what the Bill Shorten quote is in aid of. You... want us to see the Labour party spinning this into political capitol? Thanks for pointing out the bleeding obvious.

Like Ben-Hur, I think you have fallen into the trap of "X person disagrees with Abbott, therefore X person must agree with Labour".

Also for daisycutter - I am not "outraged". I simply think this is an issue that requires exploration. Furthermore, as I have said, I do not think this is an Abbott problem, at least not in its entirety. It seems to be a Liberal party problem with institutionalised homogenisation which is now relevant because they are in power. If there is a better explanation, I would genuinely love to hear it. But the argument that Abbott appointed his cabinet based on merit in fact supports my argument that the Liberal party has some issues with female talent because they were simply not there for him to choose.

[daisycutter 29,734]

I never personally said the cabinet was picked correctly and entirely on merit

I wouldn't know frankly

But those that make such an issue of it have the onus to prove that it was not picked on merit and females were discriminated against

or alternatively state that they believe in affirmative action for some of the most important jobs in the country

also the argument that therefore there is not enough female talent in the party because of this is a pretty lame argument. It is possible to have multiple qualified people for a portfolio but one is seen as better than the other. This doesn't mean the one to miss out (M or F) are lacking in talent

as I said, FMD, find a real issue and stop the witch hunting