Andrew Bolt – Turnbull on the brink


Posted in Temp. 18 Comments »

18 Responses to “Andrew Bolt – Turnbull on the brink”

  1. Kaboom Says:

    There was a commenter on Bolt’s Blog yesterday (Colin, I think?) who posted a link to an interesting article by Matt Taibbi in Rolling Stone magazine, setting out the “connections” enjoyed worldwide by Goldman Sachs.

    In looking for a motive for Malcolm Turnbull’s strange behaviour, you should remember that he is a wealthy ex-Golman Sachs executive.

    I have never heard of Matt Taibbi, but if even a fraction of what he says about GS is true, then this is just political dynamite.

    Here is the link to the Taibbi article in Rolling Stone (of all places!).

    It has been around since July this year, so the fact that it hasn’t been pulled lends a bit of credence.

    • Winston Smith Says:

      I read the column yesterday and was amazed at what I saw. Is there anyone verifying this dynamite?

    • Colin Says:

      I wish someone… anyone… preferably someone with contacts and/or clout was following this up – a serious investigative journo’s dream, I’d have thought. Imagine being the journo who brought down such a villainous, treasonous Tall Poppy as Turncoat… you’d likely be hailed a national hero in due time!

      BTW, “Thank you” most sincerely Kaboom, for having the uncommon integrity to credit me for originally pushing this story at BoltA’s. I still remain stupefied that few others have really cottoned on to it, despite my repeatedly posting about it for months! (rolls eyes in abject exasperation)

  2. Rosemary Says:

    There are some ‘doom and gloom’ merchants on Andrew’s blog who forcast the world’s end if the Nationals split from the Coalition and run separate.

    Yes, that might be the case for awhile, but I think if Turnbull hangs on and continues to drag the Liberals kicking and screaming further to the Left, well the Liberals will well and truely lose their Conservative voter base.

    The way I see it is that ultimately it would be a good thing for the Nats to split and take with them the Conservatives from the Liberal party. It means they can redefine themselves as a true Conservative party and the Liberals can evolve into god knows what? The Laborals perhaps… At any rate, a split from the Coalition would allow the Nats to run candidates in electorates that they weren’t able to before. They can be like the Greens to the Labor party – separate but picking up or allocating Liberal preferences. Also would give us a clearer choice.

    What do you reckon?

    • Kaboom Says:


      You are absolutely correct. The LNP in Queensland must be gnashing their teeth at this point, as it is quite apparent that the voice of conservatism is going to be publicly perceived as the Nationals, and not the Liberals.

      We should gird ourselves up for 2013. The Liberals are completely rooted for either (1) a double-dissolution election by February 2010; or (2) a normal election within a year.

      I’m afraid that the Nationals will be the only logical choice. Tempted as I am to join the Climate Sceptics party, a one-issue group will have limited impact, given today’s media sound-byte reporting.

    • Carpe Jugulum Says:

      I tend to agree with you, the Nats have fairly well defined their poiition. The Libs on the other hand, i have no idea anymore as to what they really stand for.

      A split would cause some short term pain but would allow the respective parties define their positions, this would either cause an electoral meltdown at the polls or reinvigorate them (i suggest the former)

    • Colin Says:

      Totally agree Rosemary. It seems the one political hope we have left is for the Nats to split, taking the few heros in the Libs with them.

    • elsie of brisbane Says:

      Rosemary, I agree too, the Liberals are becoming a no-man’s land of feeble policies. They seem spineless and don’t have the ability to appeal to anyone at the moment. What do they stand for except as a vague echo for Rudd?

      The way Turnbull announced the ETS really annoyed me (We DID this and We DID that)….. He could not see he has been played like a hooked fish on Labor’s fishing line, and is being reeled in.

  3. Kaboom Says:

    48-35 spill motion defeated.

    Sad day for Australia.

    • Carpe Jugulum Says:

      Shit………..have to see what happens in the senate, either way the libs have lost my vote, perhaps the could rename themselves “Lib Inc – A wholly owned ALP subsidiary”.

    • winstonsmith101 Says:

      Bloody sad day for Australia.
      All we can do now is watch the Liberals go down the gurgler.
      Perhaps a free market/small l liberal paty will emerge from the ashes, but I won’t put money on it.
      I’l be voting Nationals/LDP.

    • Kaboom Says:

      But, then again, we may have missed a bullet!

      Imagine a Kevin-v-Kevin election. Jesus Christ……….

  4. wakey74 Says:

    If Joe Hockey believes that the Liberal party is progressive and not conservative then there is no chance of me ever supporting them. They just become labour-lite

    Joe Hockey speaking after the meeting. “Clearly this issue has done us incredible damage and I hope the Australian people forgive us…”. Emphasises the Liberal Party is a progressive part

  5. NT Woman Says:

    Im from Andrews Blog. I think the only real conteder for Liberal leader is Andrew Robb – I know he is ill, but so was Churchill – and for me, this is like world war three.

  6. WinstonSmith101 Says:

    Guess what’s not on the front page?
    A certain East Anglia CRU!

  7. Alex Says:

    As far as I am concerned, the Liberal party has been hijacked and as it is no longer the party for which I have always voted. I cannot remain loyal to it (indeed, it is the party that has been disloyal), and I find this distressing.

    I live within the Bradfield electorate and will be placing the Climate Sceptics Party supported candidate number one in the upcoming by-election and will support the Climate Sceptics Party candidates in a future Senate election. (The Nationals will be next on the list.)

    I have written to all of the members of the Coalition and informed them that I cannot and will not vote for any party or individual who votes in favour of ANY ETS or approves of the signing ANY agreement coming out of Copenhagen. Similarly, I cannot and will not vote for a party that is led by Malcolm Turnbull.

    • Struth Says:

      The mirage of democracy and illusion of choice has disappeared totally now. You have a one party state with two faces to choose from. 90% of the sheeple will continue to vote for the One Party State. 9% with truly diseased minds will vote Green(to keep the bastards honest) 0.9% will vote informal, leaving 0.1% to vote Climate Sceptic. Solomon did say that only one man in one thousand gains wisdom. Unless the Nats start flying solo, I will vote Climate Sceptic if able to.
      Otherwise I get my name crossed off the roll then proceed to make a paper aeroplane out of the ballot paper. Covered in obscenities.

  8. spot_the_dog Says:

    Baa. Baa. Baa.
    Song for Malcolm Turnbull and the Australian Liberal Party

Well, SAY something...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: