Home | About | Donate

Abbott Ousted in Australia


#1

Abbott Ousted in Australia

Jon Queally, staff writer

A revolt within the conservative Liberal Party on Monday has resulted in the ouster of Australia's Prime Minister Tony Abbott as one of his top cabinet ministers, Malcolm Turnbull, takes over leadership of the nation's ruling coalition.


#2

Basically - shit in, shit out.


#3

His photo here reminds me a bit of Dresie's from Transvaal in the famous photo by Ballen. It's the ears and expression, I suppose.


#4

Big surprise huh? Regardless of what Turnbull says( nothing has changed) something has changed. The people of Australia are rejecting Abbott's hard line anti-environment policies and the liberal party is seeing the writing on the wall.

What is interesting is that all around the world (okay the West) conservative business as usual politicians and corporate oligarchs are starting to sweat. People don't want the reactionary only point of view. They want CHANGE and that isn't what conservatives do now is it? What happened to Abbott is telling! People are waking up and things are changing for the better.


#5

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#6

Have million-cum-billionaires ever made responsible, compassionate and proponents of populism presidents/prime ministers...especially in the last half century? Turnbull is Abbott inside and out with the only difference being the level of rancid in the rhetoric. There is a glimmer of hope that Australia will toss Turnbull to the curb and soon. Abbott is now free to don his hardhat, pick up his pick-ax, carry his tin lunch bucket full of mutton and help out his coal miner pals.


#7

So tired of having the extreme right radical reactionaries still being referred to as conservatives when all they seek is a return to the pluto-oligarchy of the gilded age... and then some.


#8

Tony Abbott could be described with the following words "Idiot" and "Filth". How many times have I asked, "How on earth could it be that this idiot is actually our Prime Minister?". He is not the organ grinder, he is the monkey. If an idiot like him can be prime minister, then so can Homer Simpson. He grooms himself. And his intelligence is good enough to sell vacuum cleaners, and his ability to suck up to the big money means that he could easily be the vacuum cleaner, but that is the limit of his potential. Nothing more.

However, as they say, every light fluffy cloud has a dark and sinister side. It may be that Tony Abbott could never have won the next election. But Malcolm Turnbull may do so, keeping his right wing reactionary in power for another election cycle, which would be a bad thing indeed.


#9

There are two reasons for Turnbull's accession. 1) His ego-he wants to be Australia's first president, thus completing the Americanisation of Australia; 2) Tony Abbott was the best asset available to the Australian Labour Party.

If anyone thinks remotely that Turnbull will do anything socially useful for Australia, look at his deputy, Julie Bishop. She is a hard right admirer of Thatcher. Nothing, but nothing will change except that Australia may develop the same ridiculous and expensively corrupt circus that is the USA's presidential election.

Would any sane Australian want any of the following former and present PMs as presidents? Bob Hawke, Paul Keating, John Howard, Kevin Rudd, Julie Gillard, Tony Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull. Give me QE 2 any day; and a Governor-General who can sack a Prime Minister if necessary.


#10

If you don't have a viable replacement for the monarchy, do not change the system. Electing another politician as president is not a viable replacement. Other then that, the new prime minister does not have a hard act to follow. Rudd was and is a idiot and an embarrassment to Australia. I'm so happy he is investigating his own political oblivion!


#11

And Abbott!


#12

Conservative Liberal Party? What the hell does that even mean? Does this party want to protect liberal ideals from regressive elements that are pushing for a future composed of the past? And here I thought that American politics were a CF. I don't even understand the names on the scorecard down under.


#13

The reality is that the inevitable global economic contraction is under way in many countries as the availability of natural resources irrevocably decline. This contraction is starting to be felt even in Australia. The new leadership is unlikely to tackle that problem even with the prompting from the Greens. Ironically, the 'free' natural resources (iron ore, coal, LNG, other minerals) are rapidly getting beyond reach.


#14

The old bait n switch form of politics just like in the USA...Promise them the moon but give them nothing but excuses.


#15

The answer lies in a book called 1984. The name is Orwellian. The "Liberal Party" of Australia is a right wing party that governs on behalf of Rupert Murdoch, Rio-Tinto and Monsanto.


#16

Only in the United States does 'liberal' mean anything like 'left' or the opposition to the current order of things. In the rest of the world Liberal parties stand for free-market unlimited growth capitalism, privatization of public assets and minimal government regulation of the economy. In other countries they are often in coalition with conservative parties and are opposed by social democratic, labor and green parties.

The Australian Liberal Party is more towards the conservative end of the spectrum and usual governs in coalition with an even more conservative rural interests party. However the Liberals have acted sometimes in a fashion that would be regarded in the U.S. as 'liberal'. They are traditionally pro high immigration levels and dismantled one of the Labor Party opposition's main planks of its platform - immigration restriction on grounds of race. They introduced and funded the Special Broadcasting Service that provides television and radio programs in languages other than English. In past times, they also successfully opposed a Labor government's proposals for a national ID card.


#17

The republican model on offer is for a ceremonial head of state (as in Finland of Austria for example) not an executive office as in France and the U.S.A. (de facto monarchs).


#18

Thank you for the instruction. Politics is confusing enough even when you understand what the labels mean.