nutbean

I never understood this from day one - he is going to Mara a lago every second weekend. He would go with a whole retinue of staff - surely the hotel is billing the government for that ? how on earth does that work ? Trump Administration paying Trump the businessman for accommodation ???

Good read - all points made were well considered. All but one point is "operational" and valid. There is one point that should be listed above all. Before considering any operational solutions why not address the core issue as the first priority. Address the problem - Sensible gun legislation.

or conversely, you could figure which students are good and give them guns to kill the bad students. Why stop at arming teachers and good students - They could arm the janitors and the administration staff at schools too. They could have a good old shoot out at the OK corral. Hey - here's a thought - why not try and get the guns off everyone so no one was shooting anyone ? That is way too difficult to comprehend. Yes solving the gun problem by arming more people with guns...sensible.....

Thanks Jara - could you please direct me to the closest tall building so i can throw myself off....

you can do better than that. It mustn't be so because it is says so in a John Birch Society publication....

i haven't had sextus in a long time

having said that I will quote the ancient philosopher Plato on his wisdom regarding sorting fact from fiction And I quote... "if it walks like a duck, smells like a duck and quacks like a duck - it is probably a duck"

Hmmm.. you did leave out years of research and study in their given fields, unless you believe that advances in say, medicine and technology are more down to good luck than any expertise in their given fields. I am not saying that scientist’s are infallible but the sheer weight of qualified people worried about overall direction of climate change may leave me sceptical about the world ending tomorrow but does have me paying attention to what they are saying.

I have quite a distaste for Abbott's politics but I always found him fairly transparent and mostly consistent. To me, the measure of a good politician is that you know where he/she stands on issue and how far he/she will compromise to get his agenda legislated - after all - isn't that why we vote a certain way ? I detest implementing by stealth and flip flopping on issues. Whilst not wanting to generalise ( which i am about to do) I find it interesting that the further left or right a members politics are , the more clear it is on where they stand on any given issue. I know with a lot of certainty where the Greens and on the other side, the Bernardi's Hanson's and Abbott's are going to stand on any given issue where i am always less certain of what Turnbull and Shorten stand for.

I thought he was more transparent than most pollies. I think it was obvious what you were getting before he was elected .All pollies break promises but I think he was certainly more straight in what he said he was going to do. As opposed to Howard and his famous "core and non core promises". Abbott isn't gone - but I wish he was.

my problem with Trump is I believe he is committed to Trump and Trump only. Now all politicians have their share of "self serving" and "ego" but Trump has taken it to a new level. I am not a fan of the Abbott's and Bernardi's of this world and they ( like their counterparts on the left) do like the sound of their own voices - but I believe they are committed to making a difference. Trump is narcissist and his first instinct on anything he does is "how does this affect me". His incoherent ramblings and his shoot first and ask questions approach is mind numbing. I have said this before - there have been Prime Ministers in Australia that i have vehemently disagreed with but not one has ever made me believe that they were unfit to hold high office - Trump is unfit to hold the office to which he was elected.

I consider myself a moderate as well but sticking to your guns is just not enough. Telling people who disagree with you to F' O" is not enough. I have always said about Tony Abbott - the one thing I admire about him is there was no subterfuge and little waivering. You were under no illusion as to what you going to get - he made no secret of what his policies were and what he wanted to do. But at the end of the day single mindedness was not enough - his policies were unpopular. So what did Obama do ? You mentioned jobs for trump - Obama administration in 2016 created 2.34 million jobs, Trump administration in 2017 created 2.17M jobs (source US labor dep't). I will also applaud the dialogue with Nth Korea when it actually achieves anything. If I am to like the approach of "take no prisoners" politics I would point to the early years of Jeff Kennett. Whilst I did not like a lot of what he did, what i did admire about what he did do is not much of what he did was a secret or by stealth. He was very focused and carried through on exactly what he said he would do. Again - some (me included) may not have liked his policies but i liked his forcefulness and get the job done approach. It may have been a different time but Kennett seized on what the electorate wanted and implemented it. Yes there were massive protests because he did rather smash the mould but he did have a mandate to do what he did. ( he did go troppo in his last couple of years though)

I don't claim to be anywhere near an expert but a bob each way or group think smacks to me of an issue or debate where there has been little research or intellectual/scientific input to reach conclusions. Do you you believe the vast majority of highly qualified experts in this field reaching the conclusions they have is a bob each way or group think ?

agree with this but it is not just about him getting the footy - added my bit above

tree of life - horrible - 2 hours of my life i will never get back (OK - ill stop now)

Tree of life - Brad Pitt . I said this film earlier in the thread but the film was so bad it bears repeating.

opportune post - i saw a promo on Fox for all the sports they are showing and it is basically a lady picking up and dropping off sports stars ( Slater, Steve Smith, Darius Boyd are three i can recall). The funniest is when Dusty Martin tries to get in the front seat and she tells him to get into the back seat - holds out her arm - stiff arm style and says "don't argue" - well made me laugh.

Considering myself fairly moderate, I will agree that there have been some outrageous comments made by the" climate change is real" side that could well be labeled fear mongering. I consider the litmus test of genuine concerns vs fear mongering where the opinions and research of the vast majority of scientists well versed in this area are sitting. Just because there is not 100% consensus ( or a looney tune says the because of climate change the polar ice caps are going to be melted by tomorrow and we are all going to drown), does not mean that the genuine concern of the vast majority of qualified people in the field becomes fear mongering. I use the same the litmus test on most issues. Should there be a thoughtful debate on immigration ? Of course. Are we being "swamped" by Asians and Muslims ? hmmm...

Ahh.. that argument will see you get pilloried on this thread. I don't profess to know the answers as to the validity of all the data and opinions on this issue. However this has always been my belief. What is the consequences of global warming being a hoax and action being taken unnecessarily to prevent a non existent problem as opposed to the consequences of global warming being real but doing zero nothing because there is no irrefutable evidence as to the existence of a problem. I know what side I want to be on. You get intellectually knee-capped for holding views like this.

Another populist movement. She did only receive a small percentage but she is in the same vein and received a disproportionate amount of media attention. The likes of Hanson., Trump play on the fears of the electorate. We were to be swamped by Asians and apparently now we are to be swamped by Muslims. Trump (and his minions) absolutely tuned into what ailed the electorate so credit where credit is due. A mixture of fear mongering and distaste for establishment coupled with a poor alternative got him elected. Genius is a stretch though.

ewww

if you'll pardon the pun......

Truly I can't see it. Again I point to Pauline Hanson - her party received 4.3% of the vote - is she a genius ? I would point more to the fact that you don't get to be President without smart people around you. Whilst I don't like Steve Bannon's politics he smelled and felt what the electorate wanted and made sure that Trump espoused those views. He knew what the electorate were sick of. I believe that Trump's election victory was in equal measure about what the voters didn't want and they were sick of establishment, playing politics type politicians. Every time Trump takes to a career congressman/senator with a baseball bate, be it Republican or Democrat, his fans cheer. I am not sure that Trump is a genius - I don' t think he knows any other way.

My girlfriend told me yesterday to “grow a pair” - does that answer your question ?

he can read and write so that probably puts him leaps and bounds ahead in the intelligence stakes as well.