Comments
Who cares what Sue Napier thinks. Having read the Bob Cheek bio, her true colours were revealled to all.
Posted by Elizabeth on 22/03/06 at 07:32 AMClassic Elizabeth - attack the messenger to again reveal your true colours and ignore the importance of the message.
Now the election is over you can again hide behind your cloak of murky colours and make puerile pontifications.
Sigh ...
Posted by Cassy O'Connor on 22/03/06 at 12:50 PMIts reasuring that the integrity of Tasmanian democracy is still in the hands of Robin, whose credentials for this job were established by the Rouse inquiry.
It’s equally comforting that the Libs are willing to subordinate their own political interests to those of Gunns’.
That Tasmanians of both major parties voted overwhelmingly to continue being financial carers for the Big Chipper is a decisive blow to those still trying to push the evolution theory.
John Hayward
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 23/03/06 at 03:42 AMWhen did Napier become the heroine of the Greens?
Posted by Elizabeth on 23/03/06 at 04:54 AMThe much loved heroines of the Tasmanian Greens are Peg Putt, Christine Milne and Di Hollister.
Also, every woman who voted Green for her childrens’ future; and every woman who - paid or unpaid - devotes countless hours to the Greens’ relentless efforts to secure a more sensible, sustainable future.
You, Elizabeth, involve yourself in truly spiteful, lowest common denominator debate. Your grammar and spelling are dreadful, and you evade the heart of important issues.
The web has given you a vehicle you would not have secured otherwise on talent alone. The convenient cloak of anonymity means you don’t have to get up there, say what you believe and cop the consequences - good or bad. It takes a certain lack of courage.
Whoever you are, I don’t like what you represent.
Posted by Cassy O'Connor on 23/03/06 at 07:00 AMI still can’t work out why we bother holding elections in Tassie.
It would save millions if we just let the Gunns board run everything, and nothing would change.
They might even run the hospitals more efficiently
The only effective opposition has always come from outside the whole parliamentary sham.
Maybe the Exclusive Brethren have a point.
Posted by Justa Bloke on 23/03/06 at 08:12 AMA sad day for launceston and the tamar valley a majority decision by so called informed politicians who have placed this state in jeopardy. This is nothing more than an endorsement of a flawed product, the speech by mlc dean was appalling; full of dubious references, meaningless facts taken from wherever and delivered in a way that there was a get out of jail free in every paragraph, in other words, his delivery lacked conviction and substance.To be one of the six aldermen who denied the other five the right to hear an alternative view from dr raverty recently was appalling yet Mr dean was quite happy to hear from mr ormerod an drew in the presence of mr fletcher former mlc and a consultant to gunns If that is not a conflict of interest I dont know what was , absolutely gobsmacking behaviour.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 30/08/07 at 10:21 PM
