Search results

That one sentence sums up the whole problem with this debate, here and in the wider world, on both sides of the debate. It's no longer a scientific debate between learned men and women. It's become a political debate, where slagging off one's opponent is par for the course.

People will believe what they want to believe. They will look for affirmation from those who believe the same, and will ignore, belittle or completely dismiss the opinions of those who disagree. Suggesting that the people who disagree with you, only do so because they are lazy or feeble...

So person A believes one thing, and discredits person B's facts / opinions. Person B, in reply, does the same thing to Person A. Around and around we go. Nothing is to be gained here. The thread was about the political manoeuverings involved in repealing the tax, not the legitimacy or...

From the age.com.au regarding the senate after the next election.

They'd have to wait until the parliament sat, write the legislation to repeal the 18 acts of legislation, then put it to a vote. If it was voted down in the senate, the ywould have to wait three months before putting it t oa vote again. The senate also has the right to put the legisaltion to...

http://www.abc.net.au/elections/federal/2010/guide/senate-results.htm Found this online; it seems to indicate that 36 Senators were not up for election in 2010, and 40 were elected. Not sure why it wasn't a 50/50 split. EDIT: It's because the ACT and NT Senators do not get six year terms...