Didn't Howard say at the recent NSW Liberal Party shindig that big business should be financially supporting the Libs to a far greater extent? Wouldn't be thinking in terms of a quid pro quo would he? Nah! - after all he's the 'battlers' friend, isn't he!!!!!!!!!!!

What a great idea!
We don't need traffic laws anymore, after all the good ole Australian people know how fast to drive where-ever they go.
Or why not get rid of police forces all together.

Good idea. No traffic laws. And those parking meters are obviously just a revenue-raising nuisance, and what with the increased productivity and lower cost structure won't be necessary - we can trust the Australian people to pay the right amount of tax - so we can get rid of them too.

Aren't the Australian public the employers of our politicians? How then do we get the politicians onto these very beneficial workplace agreements? And what are the terms and conditions that we should set for them? A letter writer in The Age today quotes Mr. Andrews as saying the minimum wage is about $70 too high. We could start with offering a wage at the current minimum wage, but we would have to cut out all of their present perks, in the better interests of the country, of course. John Howard, Kevin Andrews and Peter Costello should be first to sign up, in public. They would probably be better able to explain why it doesn't apply to them.

At last chairman johnny has ditched that outmoded maoist/thatcher model, ( there is no society )where nothing can happen in the media whithout JH having his opinion on it. He's gone over to a real anarchism where the people make thir own choices. Did he read the bit where the big jobs have to be shared with the other comrades, and not hogged by the incumbent

I don't trust the PM, so why would I trust "the Australian people" just because he tells me to?

Could you or more to the point would you trust people that voted for the little lying rodent aka John Howard?

Our esteemed PM has a track record that means we can have absolute total trust that what he says is exactly and precisely what he means, more or less, give or take a misleading statement or two, and perhaps even a porkie, unless of course its a non-core statement in which case we can be absolutely certain that he hasn't told us enougth, and that any embedded truth is accidental, alll over-ridden by the constraint that at election time the ends (re-election) justifies the means (truth, honesty and integrity? - don't be silly we're politicians trying to get re-elected, ethics - why mention foreign exchange?).

There are two types of people in the world - those who do the right thing, and those who do the right thing if they don't think they can get away with doing the wrong thing. Sure, you can trust the first type - that's obvious. But the best possible systems have to be put in place to convince the second type that they can't get away with doing the wrong thing. That's one of the most important roles of government. Trusting the first type is easy. Trying to stop the second type from exploiting the first type requires lots of clever hard work. When he's carrying on with all his flowery rhetoric, you sometimes wonder whether John Howard understands this, and whether he's got his mind on his job?

There is a third kind of person in the world. Merlin David Beck, whom thinks he is above all other people to judge them. "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy."