Assange’s Sixteenth Day at the Old Bailey: Special…

September 29. Central Criminal Court, London.Julian Assange’s defence team spent the day…

Murdoch: forever brutal

There is much to read and know about Rupert Murdoch but there…

A 'Fair Go' is now a Myth

Perhaps I have not lived in Australia for long enough to know…

Assange’s Fifteenth Day at the Old Bailey: Solitary…

September 28. Central Criminal Court, London.Throughout the sham process formally known as…

The best laid schemes

The best laid schemes o’ Mice an’ Men Gang aft agley, An’ lea’e us…

So, How Will You Do It Better?

By 2353NMIn the next 12 to 18 months there are a number…

A personal view of a failed democracy

I sometimes wonder if it is in becoming a parent, responsible for…

Assange’s Fourteenth Day at the Old Bailey: Elections,…

September 25. Central Criminal Court, London.On this Friday, the Assange trial moved…

«
»
Facebook

Who Should I Vote For?

abbott-and-rudd

Abbott or Rudd – who should I vote for?

Who Should I Vote For?

Actually that headline is misleading. I know exactly who I will vote for and why. Labor is indelible within me and I am proud of it. At an early age I inherited (or it was born in me) an unshakable belief in social justice. In equality of opportunity and a belief that every person has an indisputable right to an equitable share of the country’s wealth. Labor is the only party that can deliver on these values.

I believe in government action to achieve equal opportunity and equality for all. That it is the duty of the government to alleviate social ills and to protect civil liberties and individual and human rights. I further believe that the role of the government should be to guarantee that no one is in need. That progressive policies are needed for government to solve problems.

If that sounds idealistic then so be it.

I have never understood the conservative reluctance for change. Why conservatives dislike and resist change in the foolish assumption that they can make permanent that which makes them feel secure. Yet change is in fact part of the very fabric of our existence. I think I have probably seen more change in my lifetime time that any other period in history. Often worthwhile change comes with short term controversy but the pain is worth it for long term prosperity. And change sometimes disregards opinion and becomes a phenomenon of its own making with its own inevitability. Change is in fact one of the only constants in life. Conservatives often become so trapped in the longevity of sameness that they never see better ways of doing things. Change is the tool that serves the common good.

All of this I believe without discounting the rights of the individual to pursue worthwhile ambition. Be it monetary or otherwise. And that in the absence of any another system capitalism is what we have. At the same time I believe that capitalism without regulation is a recipe for calamity both environmentally and economically.

With the ascension of Kevin Rudd voters (if one is to believe the opinion polls) it would seem that the punters now have a choice. This has been allowed by an opposition leader incapable of preventing himself from overreaching. He has been touted as being the most effective leader of the opposition we have ever had. Really. Having had the government on toast for the best part of three years and the polls suggesting a defeat of the government of monumental proportions he continued his attacks on Julia Gillard until the caucus was left with little choice but to change leader. The result being that Mr Abbott now faces a reinvigorated party with a leader of vast popularity with a self-belief in himself and the future of the country.

I would venture to suggest that Abbott has shown a total lack of political judgement that borders on the nonsensical. Had he approached the past 12 months in a more positive manner the electorate may have viewed him differently. They had made up their minds on the Prime Minister and their judgement was set in concrete. So why the hatchet job? This can be best explained by analysing the character of the opposition leader. As I have written previously Tony Abbott if nothing else is a very colourful character. He is aggressive both physically and in the use of language. His negativity is legendary and he has little consideration for any ideas other than his own and says NO to his opponents policies regardless of their worthiness. He is by evidence and his own admission a liar of some regularity. Added to that he has a political gutter mentality and little respect for the institution of parliament and its conventions.

I would contend that rather than being an effective opposition leader he is lacking in political judgement and that the ‘’best leader polls’’ are a true reflection of his unpopularity. It may well be that those who have always said that he is unelectable might be right. As a people Australians are a positive lot and his constant negativity and putting us down really grates us.

As it now stands now Kevin Rudd has all the running and Tony Abbott is looking shaken. His demeanour is nervous and he finds it impossible to shake off his negativity. The hesitation and stutters have begun. Mind you it must be hard if it’s so ingrained in you.

When the Prime Minister elects to go to an election is irrelevant. If he chooses to wait a little longer he can (because of Abbotts reluctance to talk policy) simply continue to paint him as the negative conservative he is. On the other hand should he decide on an early election he has the advantage of momentum.

In terms of policies again Labor has thanks to Julia Gillard pulled the rug out from under the feet of the conservatives. There are no big ticket items left. Better education, NDIS and the NBN are all popular whereas the opposition’s direct action plan for the environment is proving to be farcical. They don’t seem to have an education policy other than saying they will support the government if it can get all the states to sign up for Gonski. (I’m still calling it that) They have no alternative energy policy other than a white paper.

Is Tony Abbott still insisting that the election will be a referendum on the carbon tax and does he still intend a double dissolution on the matter? Despite the obvious facts Hockey and Abbott have been painting a bleak picture on the economy, debt and deficit. Will the electorate fall for it or will facts matter. And of course the coalition will have to be honest as to where they intend cutting to pay for their direct action policy and come clean on the true cost of its maternity leave scheme. Then of course we have his “stop the boats” mantra only now he cannot explain how.

Tony Abbott, as Kevin Rudd suggests might be a formidable negative politician but he is vulnerable on policy detail and this is the area that Mr Rudd should hone in on.

There is much water to flow under the political bridge and the Australian people hopefully have shrugged of the malaise they have embraced for too long. There is a matter of importance to confront.

And to think that a month ago it was a forgone conclusion.

50 comments

Login here Register here
  1. jagman48

    Very well written. I totally agree with John. Thanks

  2. Colin Thai

    Remember that old song “Run Rabbit Run Rabbit Run Run Run” Well it’s nearly time for the Rabbit to put up or shut up ! Well I do believe at the moment he has shut up ! In your article you have hit the nail on the head (or the rabbit) where are his policies. Anywhere in the western world he would be laughed out of Parliament !!!! I now ask a question are the Australian people so gullible to be brainwashed by the so called Press. I do not think so, at one time this year Yes, but now we have BIG leaks coming out about this man and his PARTY…..Thanking you…. Your article is wonderful..

  3. Pamela Rawlings

    Excellent piece of writing with the truth glaring out for everyone to see. Well done.
    Hopefully the public will finally wake up to Mr Abbott and his negativity, but there are still a lot of people out there that think he is talking facts unfortunately. I have come across many of them and you can not get them to say what this government has done to hurt the country, they can not provide any facts at all and to replace that they become abusive. I seriously doubt their minds are going to be changed. Hopefully I am wrong. Because this country in the hands of Abbott and the liberals will be deeply worrying.

  4. Pingback: Who Should I Vote For? | lmrh5

  5. lmrh5

    Reblogged this on lmrh5.

  6. Dasha

    Please vote for Kevin Rudd.

    He will be the PM for Rudd party and no one can remove him – the best way for the demise of Labor party.

  7. johnlord2013

    Sorry Dasha but that’s a silly argument. Of course he could still be voted out.

  8. Dasha

    Kevin Rudd is holding Labor party for ransom – being a millionaire himself, does he really care for ordinary workers?

    But he does know the party needs him to win the election and whatever he chooses to do, the party can’t do anything about him.

    Have a look at the party reform rules he proposed, he is making sure that he can’t be removed if these rules are passed.

    The Labor party is on its knees to Rudd for a chance to win, rather than being on its feet to fight to win.

  9. Jo

    Dasha, stop reading the lies Murdoch prints, they are a horrible waste of paper. The reason Murdoch and all the big industries are backing Abbott is because he serves their interests, which means maximising their proffits and screwing over the ordinary workers you are concerned about. He will sell off everything he can get his hands on and move as much money and power into the hands of these corporations as possible.

    How can you possibly say Labor isnt helping ordinary workers when they have pushed so much money into public schools, hospitals and infrastucture.

  10. johnlord2013

    Link didn’t work.

  11. Truth Seeker

    John, that’s weird, I just checked it and it worked for me 😯

    Cheers 😀

  12. johnlord2013

    Just says 403 forbidden. Will try on the PC.

  13. Shevill Mathers

    Very well put, you hit all the points very well. I just hope that it all translates into a Labour victory and we can move forward instead of Tony Abbott’s looking backwards mentality and lack of vision. Conservative means ‘comfortable’ and not straining oneself too much. We now live in an era that requires adjustments to changes in so many areas, communications and climate change being high on the list.

  14. Michael Taylor

    Reblogged this on Café Whispers and commented:

    And to think that a few weeks ago the election result was a forgone conclusion.

  15. GeorgeMitchell

    Jo, I think Dasha is spot on. It looks like the ALP are happy to install someone many of its parliamentarians loathe for the chance to win the election. Fair enough, it’s their call and a vote was held. Maybe they will be vindicated. As keen as I am to see the Liberals kept from office, I find it hard to suppor the new Rudd-led ALP. Dasha’s point was that Mr Rudd, rather than the ALP, may not really care for ordinary workers and he/she may be right. Mr Rudd’s main concern seems to be his own advancement. Sadly, we might have to distinguish the ALP’s good works from the identity of a leader chosen out of desperation. It all leaves me wondering about what they will do if they win. They have shackled themselves to a pretty unpleasant man who seemed incapable of effective leadership or decision making for the short-term expedient of utilising his campaigning skills. I wonder how long it will take till they are once again very keen to be rid of him.

  16. Terry2

    “They have shackled themselves to a pretty unpleasant man who seemed incapable of effective leadership”

    I’m sorry, George who are you talking about; this comment seems to sum up Tony Abbott…..did you see Rudd at the National Press Club yesterday? it was pretty impressive.

  17. johnlord2013

    First rule of politics. Attain power. Second rule. Retain power.

  18. lefturnahead

    This is a very well thought out and precise piece of writing,keep up the fight and the good work.

  19. GeorgeMitchell

    You’re right of course Terry, I was referring to Mr Rudd but the comment does sum up Mr Abbott too. I am an ALP voter, but a fan of neither of these individuals. For the first time since I began voting back in 1984 the ALP has thrown up a leader that I cannot stand and I am at a loss as to what to do on polling day. Naturally I would rather see a Labor government, but I am very uncertain about a Rudd government. I remain to be impressed, but would love to be proved wrong.

  20. doctorrob54

    Regardless whether or not you like PM Rudd or not the issue is Lab.or Lib.that is the choice.Abbott and his bunch of lying cretinous thieves care nothing for the working class and under privileged.
    Without us to do their heavy,laborious,gut-busting toil they would have nothing.Always remember that an extra car,holiday or the high life will come before a wage rise for their workers.Prove me wrong.How many of them would get out of bed on a Weekend and bust their arses for $15/hour.I have lived in the real world 58yrs.and the answer is none of them unless they are farmers.

  21. Lisa craig

    Truly well written – finally my thoughts are encapsulated in this blog. Thank you.

  22. Anna-Rose

    Great article, absolutely hit all the nails on the head, I admired Julia for her strength and devotion,unfortunately, I believe she could have cost us the election, so am looking forward to to Kevin Rudd as our PM for the next few years….

  23. Truth Seeker

    John, don’t know what’s going on. 🙁 I tried it three times and it worked perfectly, but I appreciate your efforts anyway 😀

    Cheers 😀

  24. Ann Akee

    sorry but cannot agree with much there, as it is little more than more of the same rhetoric, that we have been hearing for years from left hand side of divide.
    The conservatives are not stuck in past, if anything, since labor been in power we have gone backwards. When Libs were in, some of the biggest changes and progress happened. Internet started booming, construction and mining was under way at good pace. people were buying houses, spending money and enjoying their lives. Businesses were opening and we didn’t have all the economic freeloaders. So tell me, what has been so positive about Labor rule, that they have made our country progressive? I cannot see it but am open to your enlightening me?

  25. Min

    Ann, you talk about the past but what is Tony Abbott’s vision for the future? It depends upon what you mean by “progressive”, record household debt under Howard, housing unaffordability, vastly widened gap between the haves and the have nots. Increased elitism in access to university education, unaffordability of medical and especially dental care. Howard’s Handouts to pensioners resulting in further erosion in what once used to provide the elderly with dignity in their old age. The Howard Years, the wasted years.

  26. David Cann

    We didn’t have the GST however we did go and engage in an illegal war, based on a lie. And I for one am ashamed of culpability as a George Bush puppet state. Now we can really talk responsibility for deaths. Like thousands. Unfortunately once you’ve helped make a mess you are committed to try and clean it up.

  27. Möbius Ecko

    OK Ann as I did with someone else let’s breakdown your contentions.

    AA. The conservatives are not stuck in past.
    ME. Conservatism means that, they don’t want change just things as they were. A ruling class. Howard’s 11½ years were marked with stagnation with the only major reform introduced being the GST, a regressive tax and an attempt at WorkChoices, which was also a regression to the past.
    In 11½ years there was only one major infrastructure project and that wasn’t completed, the incoming Labor government did that.
    In the meantime the rest of Australia’s infrastructure was deteriorating and the longer that went on the more it was going to cost future generations and hurt the Australian economy.
    I won’t go into the rest of Howard’s many failures, they are well documented but I will say that given the greatest opportunity of any government in Australia’s history he completely wasted it.

    AA. …if anything, since labor been in power we have gone backwards.
    ME. Can you detail exactly where we have gone backwards.
    Standard of living is better than under Howard.
    Interest rates and disposable income are better.
    Productivity has improved.
    The economy is tracking better.
    Savings have significantly increased.
    …and many more that have been well documented and covered here.
    Though there have been failures as well, but no worse than under Howard, like homelessness, gap between rich and poor etc.

    AA. When Libs were in, some of the biggest changes and progress happened.
    ME. Please I would like to know what they were?

    AA. Internet started booming,
    ME. That would have happened no matter who was in government. Difference is Labor are utilising the technology and improving the infrastructure for it, Howard did absolutely nothing until he proposed improvement at the very end of his 11½ years, way too little too late as the rest of the world was leaving Australia behind. Labor initially took up Howard’s proposal but quickly dropped it as it was obvious it could not work for the nearly $5 billion it cost. They replaced it with the NBN.

    AA. construction and mining was under way at good pace.
    ME. That had nothing to do with Howard and would have occurred no matter who was in government. It aided Howard in hiding his very bad economic management.

    AA. people were buying houses, spending money and enjoying their lives.
    ME. Sorry but Howard instantly pumping $50 billion into the housing market made Australia’s housing extremely unaffordable. Howard shifted public debt to massive private debt making us the nation with the most personal debt in the world and lowest savings, something that was unsustainable. Even Costello at the time said it was unsustainable but Howard kept on promoting personal debt.

    AA. Businesses were opening
    ME. Sorry, Howard presided over record bankruptcies as businesses loaded up with too much private debt they couldn’t repay. Howard’s brother’s business went bankrupt.

    AA. and we didn’t have all the economic freeloaders.
    ME. Who would they be? There are no different welfare requirements now than there were under Howard, in fact Gillard made things worse for some sectors like single mums.

    AA. So tell me, what has been so positive about Labor rule, that they have made our country progressive? I cannot see it but am open to your enlightening me?
    ME. I won’t make this post any longer but if you look you will find a huge list of major reforms and progressive policies bought in by Labor. More policies and reforms in one term than Howard managed in three.

    Howard’s was the largest government in Australia’s history and by far the highest taxing. It was also the most wasteful as measured by the IMF and other monetary organisations. it increased private debt to unsustainable levels, increased poverty, bankruptcies, government advertising on self aggrandisement, decreased women’s pay, productivity, infrastructure and many other areas.

    You don’t need to take my word for it, all that is verifiable and can be easily found.

  28. Natasha

    Min, your reply to Ann are purely ideology-based rhetoric, not factual.

    1) ” record household debt under Howard”

    It showed the economy was in good shape, people were doing well and confident to spend money and to invest under Howard.

    2) “housing unaffordability”

    House price continued to increase since Labor came into power 6 years ago. The medium house price is currently much higher than the Howard period. Perhaps it is because of the natural trend of inflation, but saying housing unaffordability under Howard is just rubbish.

    3) “vastly widened gap between the haves and the have nots”

    Labor has been in power for 6 years now, a recent report showed that the gap between high income and low income has further widened than ever before.

    4) “increased elitism in access to university education”

    Where is your evidence? Access to university has largely unchanged under Hawke Labor or Howard Liberal since Whitlam’ open access policy.
    In fact, it is Gillard Labor that cut $2.8 billion university funding in this year’s budget which will likely affect the numbers of university enrollment.

    5) “unaffordability of medical and especially dental care”

    False again. Howard government established the first universal dental care scheme in 2005.
    Gillard Labor didn’t like it too expensive and repackaged the scheme under different name. But the new Labor package won’t start until 2014 and many people are left out with cheap dental care between last year and 2014.

    6) “Howard handouts to pensioners resulting in further erosion …… the elderly with dignity……”

    According to you, Howard’s handouts were bad and eroding people’s dignity, Labor’s many more Handouts are good and increasing people’s dignity. Poor Mr Howard, he could never get things right.

    Howard and his government were not perfect and have many flaws during their 12 years rule. That is why people decided to vote them out in 2007.

    However, to me and to many people, two major achievements of Howard coalition government are undeniable – paid off the debts and consecutive budget surpluses, provided border security and our country’s sovereign integrity.

  29. Möbius Ecko

    Ann Akee I can provide sources to any of the contentions above but just to disprove your statement of businesses were opening under Howard.

    Australian bankruptcies at record low

    The data also showed that the total personal insolvency level is at its lowest level since June 2006, with all states and territories besides the Northern Territory recording falls in total personal insolvency.

    That’s right, bankruptcies were at a high during the end of the Howard era, in which they had continued to rise despite Australia being in the greatest sustained economic boom in it’s history, a boom that had nothing to do with Howard and whose benefit he totally wasted.

  30. doctorrob54

    Cheers Mobius,I still can not understand how anyone can admire Howard the Coward,He is one of the most disgusting Australians that ever lived and is partly responsible for the terrorism now around the world.And he is totally responsible for the deaths of forty Aussie service men and God knows how many injured and maimed many psychologically in two wars he and his two cronnies started and lost.

  31. Möbius Ecko

    Natasha, you have some things right, like housing affordability and the gap between the rich and the poor, the difference is that Labor have flagged them even if it hasn’t done anything, but Abbott plans to not only increase the disparity but to accelerate it with one projection I read on his showing Australia heading towards the US in wealth disparity.

    Howard started the unaffordable housing cycle by instantly pumping $50 billion into a first home owners scheme that had the immediate effect of significantly increasing house prices in one hit as well. The eligibility to obtain loans was also reduced to some instances of not requiring any deposit, which also led to people loading up with personal debt.

    Record household and private debt was a deliberate strategy of Howard’s to get people to artificially pump up the economy, but it was unsustainable, a point Costello made but Howard ignored.

    Howard paid of debt at the cost of the rest of Australia and all he was doing was shifting that cost to future governments.

    And can you tell me what’s wrong with manageable government debt that builds infrastructure, increases employment and pays for the services needed?

    Howard only paid of debt because he was handed a good economy, something he acknowledged before his first budget when he said he was handed a better economy by half than he though possible, he sold off Telstra in a botched split up, that Australia is still paying for to this day and will for many decades to come and became the highest taxing government in our history along with falling into the longest sustained economic growth period in global history.

    The border security meme is a myth.

    Tell me Natasha what is different to the current boat people policy to Howard’s?

  32. Möbius Ecko

    Found a graph on bankruptcies: http://tinyurl.com/lucm69c

    Also found some other interesting stats on it. The state with an increasing rate of bankruptcies is NSW ever since O’Farrell came to power.

    Haven’t looked at Queensland but as Newman is sending that state backwards at a great rate it wouldn’t surprise me if they also have started to go up since Newman took power.

  33. Natasha

    Möbius

    Howard inherited a $96 billion deficit from Keating Labor government in 1996 – a Labor government with “the recession we have to have.”

    Howard paid off the debt in first term and achieved Consective budget surpluses ever since.

    I incline to trust a coalition government in terms of economy management in this unstable, deteriorating economy environment.
    Without surplus and good financial position, you can’t afford to fend off next GFC/recession sucessfully, you can’t provide job security, you can’t fulfill whatever grand revolution ideas Labor has, you can’t give decent handouts to the needies.

  34. Bacchus

    You can’t argue with ignorance Mö. Howard inherited a $96 billion debt** from Keating, $40 billion of which was left over from the Fraser years when Howard was treasurer.

    He also sold off assets (you’ve mentioned Telstra), taxed the tripe out of the country, and let vital infrastructure run down over his 3 terms. By far the worst government in my lifetime!

    ** What is it about right-whingers that they don’t understand the difference between debt & defecit, yet still want to argue as if they’re expert economists 🙄

  35. Möbius Ecko

    Because Bacchus you take away Howard’s surpluses they have absolutely nothing. Time and again when debating on Howard and all his failures are pointed out they always come back to his surpluses, because they have nothing else.

    If anyone else has the stats that show if the Labor governments had taxed and ran austerity at the same rate as Howard they would also have run up surpluses, even during a GFC, then it would appreciated. It’s doing the rounds but I can’t find it at the moment.

    My boss, a very staunch conservative and Howard admirer, states that Howard should never have demonised deficits as that is now stymying Australia at both the State and Federal level and both major parties.

    Remember up until Beazley’s black hole hammered by Howard no government previously, including Liberal governments, thought anything wrong with manageable government debt. Howard raised it as an ogre for political expediency as he was heading into a losing election, and it has hampered this country ever since.

    Another massive Howard failure to add to his long list.

    Let’s also remind Natasha and co that Howard went into the 1997 election with just one policy and a debt truck. To bring down the terrible current account deficit. He pushed it throughout the campaign, though he didn’t seem to have any problems with racking up current account deficits when he was Treasurer.

    The result was he won the election on a vastly improving economy, which he admitted at the time, and went on to rack up record after record current account deficits. I think Beazley’s black hole was a distraction away from that.

    By the way it wasn’t until Rudd came in that the current accounts improved. So going on Howard’s own 1997 campaign the Liberals should not be elected.

  36. David Cann

    Howard helped create the debt as treasurer and then lied about, helping to bring the Fraser Govt down. The deficit is Howard’s demon, not because it destabilised the country, it destabilised his career. I was 22 at the time. Are our memories so short.

  37. Natasha

    Bacchus

    You said “Howard inherited a $96 billion debt** from Keating, $40 billion of which was left over from the Fraser years when Howard was treasurer”

    Are you serious? Are you saying that Hawke-Keating governments were so incompetent that they couldn’t pay off any debt and achieve any surplus during their long 13 years in government?
    Don’t you think you have stretched the truth a bit too far?

    ** please don’t misquote my writing to suit your argument – I wrote ” Howard inherited a $96 billion DEFICIT from Keating Labor…..” in my previous post.

  38. frontad84

    Tony Abbott incessantly emotes
    With his bleating of “Tow back the boats”
    Like a bloody cracked record
    Echoed by the discord
    Of his team of Liberal goats.

    Wing nutted “Flim Flam” and blubberguts “Guff”
    Look like they’re doing it tough
    For them things get worse
    Aint’ jealousy a curse
    Since Rudd put the Libs in the rough.

    For Mr “Flim Flam” and “Guff” it gets worse
    And showing jealousy is a great curse
    They’re now doing it tough
    Soon will run out of puff
    Since Rudd put the Libs in reverse.

    Today Tony Abbott the bum
    Let a grain of truth from his mouth come
    When he said, “”You can bet
    What Libs promise you’ll get!”
    By wiping all good Labours done.

    Question Abbott the Rhodes Scholar star
    And his answer will start with “Look Ah!”
    Then his slimy tongue
    Spits the usual dung
    Same old, same old, thus far

  39. Bacchus

    I wrote ” Howard inherited a $96 billion DEFICIT from Keating Labor

    Exactly Natasha – don’t you know the difference between debt and deficit?? 🙄

    Are you saying that Hawke-Keating governments were so incompetent that they couldn’t pay off any debt and achieve any surplus during their long 13 years in government?

    No, you’d be the only one here ignorant enough to make such a statement 🙄 IF you’re interested in facts, the Hawke/Keating governments ran three budget surpluses, compared to the Fraser/Howard government’s one. If you go back further, the Whitlam government ran all surpluses, no deficits, but they’re just facts – I know you won’t be interested in them…

    Like many right-whingers, I assume you subscribe to the notion that the GFC didn’t happen. I’d also assume you think the 1987 stock market crash, and the 1990-91 recession was a figment of “lefties'” imaginations.

  40. Wilson

    NQ

  41. doctorrob54

    just following

  42. billy moir

    arguably the election has always hinged on getting the rabbott into answering questions with a journalist able to ask evidence based follow up questions. this may become easier under rudd but the rabbott is a wriggler.

  43. doctorrob54

    If anyone will still vote Lib.after all the information supplied it is time to stop wasting time trying to educate them.

  44. doctorrob54

    Getting excited waiting for the two leaders debate the Toxic terrorist can’t talk his way out of this.

  45. Harry

    OD

  46. doctorrob54

    Why does Hockey continue to say Labour has never been in surplus

  47. Louie

    WU

  48. Stefan

    HM

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Return to home page
Scroll Up
%d bloggers like this: