Which Australian Prime Minister is better: Gough Whitlam or Julia Gillard? (2 Viewers)

[funkshen]

gough whitlam supported the indonesian invasion of east timor

a true hero of the left

it took a sensible man like john howard to sort that out

 

[Rafy]

* was taken down by liberal scum through a horrible loophole in the legislative system.

The GG did what he did on the understanding that an election would immediately be called. The matter was essentially sent to the Australian people for their determination. Whitlam was subsequently defeated in what remains the largest 2PP landslide. If the people wanted him back they would have voted him back in.

 

[funkshen]

because having your government dissolved by the GG couldn't possibly tarnish your reputation, or be used by the opposition to curry favour with with the well informed voters of this great nation

hitler dissolving parliament and ruling by decree was legitimate too. it's what they wanted! they voted the weimar constitution and hitler in, after all.

it was a dick move.

 

[Lentern]

And now you have Gillard trying to out-Howard the coalition on asylum seeker policy. Oh how far the ALP have fallen.

And the coalition. I think you'll find Fraser was my second rated Prime Minister, ahead of Rudd, Hawke and Keating, while Gillard was only one place above Howard's Brutopia.

 

[Lentern]

gough whitlam supported the indonesian invasion of east timor

a true hero of the left

it took a sensible man like john howard to sort that out

I don't see how the East Timor crisis is really a left/right issue.

 

[funkshen]

I don't see how the East Timor crisis is really a left/right issue.

this thread isn't a left/right thread either. but you brought up commitment to international human rights, which seems to influence your rankings of prime ministers - why else would you rank fraser so highly? but the fact remains that both whitlam and fraser supported the indonesian conquest of east timor (and west papua), precipitating a human rights crisis (you know, genocide) that pales in comparison to any of their stances on refugee intake, a criteria you obviously hold in esteem. johnny h went in there and showed those indonesians whats what, and gave the east timorese a taste of a little thing we like to call freedom

 

[townie]

Lenore Taylor? You seem to also be ignoring the enormous efforts Rudd went to, infinitely greater than any other Australian politician, to bring together a global agreement at Copenhagen. You also seem to be basing your argument on this political fiction that Rudd could have magically rammed it through the senate and gotten his way.



Um, no he could not have easily implemented it, the Labor Parties national platform was resolutely against it when he came to the leadership in 2006, changing it would have been very difficult indeed. And on basis of your cynicism about his voting motives I would argue you're predisposed to think cynically of him and there is little chance of a constructive dialogue.



Don't give me that crap line of tories since kingdom come that "oh he just through money at the problem" go down to hospitals, schools etc and find a NUM or a principal that tells you that funding is an enormous part of the problem. And name one reform Gillard has seen through to completion since Rudd left office? The closest I see her coming is the carbon pricing which is still three years off completion.



Which means what exactly? No Labor leader since Evatt has been. Gillard doesn't either, she is not part of the socialist left faction she is part of a small subfaction called the Ferguson left which is way more closely aligned with the a bunch of renegades from the right faction than it is with the major lefties. They are very trade union/blue collar worker oriented, not socially progressive the Ferguson left.

But this seems pointless, basically anything he does that you agree with you say "he was just playing politics" and anything you disagree with you say "huh! this is the real Rudd, isn't he awful."

That's because he was awful.

Re: senate - no he couldn't ram it through but he didn't need to drop it either or he could have called a double dissolution.

Re: platform - no he might not have been able to pass it but he still could have publicly supported it, or at least pushed to change the platform.

Not being able to stand for something in the face of opposition or difficulty was the hallmark of the Rudd era.

 

[Lentern]

this thread isn't a left/right thread either. but you brought up commitment to international human rights, which seems to influence your rankings of prime ministers - why else would you rank fraser so highly? but the fact remains that both whitlam and fraser supported the indonesian conquest of east timor (and west papua), precipitating a human rights crisis (you know, genocide) that pales in comparison to any of their stances on refugee intake, a criteria you obviously hold in esteem. johnny h went in there and showed those indonesians whats what, and gave the east timorese a taste of a little thing we like to call freedom

He really didn't.

 

[funkshen]

He really didn't.

exhibit a, an australian soldier administering freedom to east timorese children, on behalf of john howard

 

[Lentern]

That's because he was awful.

Re: senate - no he couldn't ram it through but he didn't need to drop it either or he could have called a double dissolution.

Re: platform - no he might not have been able to pass it but he still could have publicly supported it, or at least pushed to change the platform.

Not being able to stand for something in the face of opposition or difficulty was the hallmark of the Rudd era.

No he was not awful but I daresay what I'm seeing here is something that seems to be very common amidst the gay, atheist lefties of the world in that Rudd's Christianity and his reluctance to support gay marriage completely poisoned him for them and as such grant him no fair evaluation. It's preposterous given no major political leader in Australian history has backed it, and it is such a faddy issue that his whole political worth rest upon it but for for the narcissistic few it seems to be the only issue that matters.

As for the ETs, the Greens and the coalition were both voting against it, what would calling a DD have achieved? Labor still would not have come close to having an upper house majority.

Rudd stood up for public health, for asylum seekers, for Indigenous Australians, for workers rights, for the unemployed, for pensioners and more so than any political leader in our nations history, for action on climate change. At heart he was an old fashioned humanitarian socialist the kind of which we had not seen since Whitlam. By comparison Gillard whom you defend walked away from climate action, she seeks to deport asylum seekers to Malaysia and Nauru, she is insular and parochial when it comes to foreign policy and is uninterested in reconciliation. who needs a Howard, when with Gillard and Abbott we have a consensus.

 

[Lentern]

exhibit a, an australian soldier administering freedom to east timorese children, on behalf of john howard

You really are a fuckwit sometimes.

 

[soloooooo]

Gillard is a dope. Rudd was alright for a while although by his end days he had lost his way.

 

[Lolsmith]

No he was not awful but I daresay what I'm seeing here is something that seems to be very common amidst the gay, atheist lefties of the world in that Rudd's Christianity and his reluctance to support gay marriage completely poisoned him for them and as such grant him no fair evaluation. It's preposterous given no major political leader in Australian history has backed it, and it is such a faddy issue that his whole political worth rest upon it but for for the narcissistic few it seems to be the only issue that matters.

oh my

 

[Lolsmith]

I want Rudd to be put back in power and then deposed again just so I can see him cry

 

[Lentern]

oh my

I'm one of the mob I'm allowed (not the atheist bit obviously). I've been involved in a number of the rallies and media campaigns and there is this odd phenomenon whereby for some reason people who oppose it on religious grounds seem to be considered more offensive than people who oppose it on other grounds. And I think that's what's at play here with the Rudd hate.

 

[funkshen]

You really are a fuckwit sometimes.

gough whitlam and malcolm fraser: supported indonesian imperialism, and its forseeable consequences, wholeheartedly
john howard: fought the indonesian imperialists with his bare hands and gave the east timorese the gift of self-determination. if we didn't vote him out in 2007 he would've liberated west papua too, probably.

who's the fuckwit?

 

[Lolsmith]

Is this the same kind of freedom Bush gave to the poor muslims?

 

[funkshen]

Is this the same kind of freedom Bush gave to the poor muslims?

nah its legit bro, go to east timor, it is paradise

also it's kind of the opposite. we were freeing the downtrodden catholic timorese from the muslim imperialists.

 

[Riproot]

No he was not awful but I daresay what I'm seeing here is something that seems to be very common amidst the gay, atheist lefties of the world in that Rudd's Christianity and his reluctance to support gay marriage completely poisoned him for them and as such grant him no fair evaluation. It's preposterous given no major political leader in Australian history has backed it, and it is such a faddy issue that his whole political worth rest upon it but for for the narcissistic few it seems to be the only issue that matters.

As for the ETs, the Greens and the coalition were both voting against it, what would calling a DD have achieved? Labor still would not have come close to having an upper house majority.

Rudd stood up for public health, for asylum seekers, for Indigenous Australians, for workers rights, for the unemployed, for pensioners and more so than any political leader in our nations history, for action on climate change. At heart he was an old fashioned humanitarian socialist the kind of which we had not seen since Whitlam. By comparison Gillard whom you defend walked away from climate action, she seeks to deport asylum seekers to Malaysia and Nauru, she is insular and parochial when it comes to foreign policy and is uninterested in reconciliation. who needs a Howard, when with Gillard and Abbott we have a consensus.

fuck off, slut.

I still liked Rudd regardless of his stance on that shit.
I just thought he was a major fucking TOOL.

Your third paragraph is more what the Labor Party did than what Rudd did.

Also, both Gillard and Abbott are shit, but Gillard is the less-shit or the two.

 

[Lentern]

fuck off, slut.

I still liked Rudd regardless of his stance on that shit.
I just thought he was a major fucking TOOL.

Your third paragraph is more what the Labor Party did than what Rudd did.

Also, both Gillard and Abbott are shit, but Gillard is the less-shit or the two.

Not really, most of the leaks we've gotten through Laurie Oakes, Lenore Taylor and Nicholas Stuart suggest that the bulk of the Labor party were a lot more hesitant when it came to Climate action, reconciliation, stimulus and asylum seekers than Rudd and he more or less just road roughshod over the top of them.