Give this lady an Order of Australia medal

Medal of the Order of Australia (OAM)

Medal of the Order of Australia (OAM) Image via Wikipedia

The death spiral of PM Julia Gillard and the Labor Party in Australia continues, and it has been pretty much a sealed fate thanks to one nameless woman in gift shop where Gillard got cornered, and this lady stood up to not only Gillard, but a member of Parliament. According to Andrew Bolt at the Herald Sun, this video has been been getting wide circulation on TV networks, or as he says “…every TV bulletin ran this”.

Watch this lady take down the whole Gillard carbon tax scheme in just a few minutes. I love the way she shuts down the assistant Graeme Perrett, Member of Parliament. Video follows:

And it gets worse. Bolt writes on his blog:

The public has spoken and it’s over

Julia Gillard kept her cool admirably at the people’s forum in Brisbane last night, yet the whole thing was a disaster for her. No Labor MP watching could conclude that the party has a hope under a woman so distrusted.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Larry Kirk

Yeah, lies like a lawyer, doesn’t she?
But it was Brisbane.. wasn’t that Kevin Rudd’s mum?

DCC

Does Pinocchio come to mind?

Jimmy Haigh

“When you start telling the truth I’ll listen to you.”
Nice one.

Jesse Gump

Regarding the videos, Gillard’s responses are typical politician baloney. Are you sure she is not from the US?

Carl Chapman

The “assistant” is Graeme Perrett, Member of Parliament. If he chose to, he could vote against the carbon tax and that would be the end of it.

This is turning into a horse race.
Will Gillard or Obama suffer a total meltdown first. The pressure is mounting on both and neither is handling it very well. I think Obama is closer to it than she is, but Gillard is in public a lot more….
Where is the smart money on this one?

Peter Kerr, Perth West Australia

Yes, but people at the lower end of the income scale (i.e. most of them) are going to be significantly overcompensated for the carbon tax. In two years the opposition leader is going to say to most of the electorate “You know that extra spending money you’ve got in your pocket? Well vote for me and I’ll take it off you”. That’s sure to go down well.
The next Australian election is not a foregone conclusion.

What a condescending simpleton. She hasn’t a clue. Someone said “pigheaded” a while back to describe Ms. Gillard. Certain one-celled organisms are more useful. How she reaches out and touches the lady…watch the reaction…”get your hands off me!”
Brrrrr-rrr.

Stealth tax, scam. Cash grab.
That’s all it’s ever been about.
Julia Gillard’s Strategy: “If I can take your money and give it to some illiterate who will vote for, life will be perfect for my Party.”

mike g

She probably thinks she is gracing the lady with her touch. I’d pull a muscle recoiling from that touch. Who presents the Order of Austrialia? Don’t know if I’d want one if this woman does the presenting.

Jenn Oates

Awesome.
Really awesome.

Some time ago I drew a parallel between Gillard and Juan Peron. They are two leaders connected not just by their constant mismanagement, but by an ability to say something loudly and publicly, then deny they ever said it just as loudly and publicly. Gillard has been stupendously successful on a number of occasions.
Once she was supposed to be addressing the nation without notes. When a lucky camera caught sight of the notes being placed in front of her, her minders explained that the notes were for reference, not for reading. She got away with it.
When she was shadow health minister, she accidentally sent a text to her opposite number, health minister Tony Abbott, containing a confession that she found her portfolio bewildering. The cover-up she contrived for that was extraordinary, and involved an arranged radio interview where she claimed that the text was a prank. (Very honorably, Abbott had not tried to use the misdirected text against her, so the interview was a just-in-case.)
Her fudging over her affair with a married front-bench colleague would have made Peron envious.
And now the tax lie. If West Oz carries out its threat to secede, we could always join Argentina. Though I think they’ve had enough Perons.

Fred Allen

She has that stunned, somewhat hopeless, yet smug look on her face that says she won’t be getting through the next election, but she has to hold the party line…but she’ll be okay…she’s got that golden parliamentary parachute that more than counteracts any impact her tax will have on her personal finances. Unlike most other Australians.
I don’t know how they do it. Land values are through the roof. The baby boomers (majority of the land owners) are well into the swing of retirement. Young families can’t get a look in on home ownership without selling their first born to the banks. And Julia wants to impose more taxes. Do Australians (and I’m one) realize the train is going so fast that one rickety bridge is all it will take and the whole lot will plummet over?

Doug in Seattle

Gillard sure has a thick hide.
As for whether she or Obama implodes first? My money goes on Obama – his threatening of pensioners was the kind of trick I would have expected from Pelosi (and you might remember what happened to her in the last round of elections here in the US).

TomRude

Stephen Harper and the Income Trust Tax…
This Gillard is a snake… carbon pollution… LOL

Woah. “Why did you lie to us?
Short answer? Julia Gillard is a professional politician in a popular democracy, where the votes of gullible fools are precisely equal to those of thinking, skeptical, scientifically literate citizens.
You get the votes of gullible fools by lying to them.
To paraphrase the character of Col. Nathan R. Jessep, “They can’t handle the truth!.”
And so, madam, that’s why Julia Gillard lied to you.

Greg Cavanagh

to John Kehr says:
July 13, 2011 at 7:21 pm
Julia has a heart of stone. It won’t be her that cracks first.

Geoff

There is a very simple solution to the carbon tax debate we are having in Australia.
And this is : Only those who voted green should have to pay it.
Then everyone is happy.

R. de Haan

Those values that guard her every day are… pretty rotten.
In the former USSR she would have a better chance.

Mac the Knife

Good for that sweet, polite little old lady! I’m glad that was caught on video. Hope it goes viral!
Gillard has the same professional 10W-30W oily veneer as Obama.
‘I’m not a socilaist but I do believe in wealth redistribution…. ‘ They just get there by different paths.
Same snake oil… different hemisphere

Tom

She’s there to carry out the extremely unpopular and illogical policy of the social engineer globalists. It’s impossible for her not to be a liar. Evil is out in the open for all to see now.

Dr Mo

Look out for the side profile shot of Ms Gillard, and watch her nose grow with each waggle of her head. Serious!

Boar Breath

Read the Australian Treasurer’s report, the state plainly the carbon tax will go up every year, to a maximum of $62 dollars. The carbon tax is designed to make it so expensive to use energy that regular folks can’t use so much. They are going to force Australians to live like a third world nation. Is this what the Australian people have worked and strived for all the years of this great countries history. Is this the life you want to leave for the children of Australia? Do you believe that the government will provide those subsidies forever? On Gillard’s word?

RockyRoad

How more egalitarian can this Julia Gillard wench get? She actually thinks that limiting carbon from AUSTRALIA is actually going to make an impact on the world’s CLIMATE?? Who on earth is this woman’s science advisor?? Or does she even have one?? Laughable, I say! Laughable!!
Doesn’t she realize all the CO2 from Australia is blown out to sea and by the time it comes back around in the atmospheric rotation, it’s so dilute her carbon cap would make essentially no difference? Again, laughable!

Richard Patton

I love it! I just wish Obama’s appearances in public were as unscripted. From what I hear nothing is left to chance-the voters questions ahead of time are pre-screened.

kramer

I read in one of Australia’s newspapers that $4 billion a year was going to be spent (transferred) overseas each year by the buying carbon credits from other nations.
I find this interesting because policy-makers have repeatedly said there needs to be redistribution of wealth both within and between nations. This is simply the “between nations” part of global wealth redistribution tied to AGW. I also read that the Australian government was going to give part of this carbon tax money to people who will have a hard time with the higher energy prices. This is the “within countries” part.
I also noticed that in the first year of this scheme, it will add 0.7% to the CPI of Australia. 0.7% is also what the NIEO called for back in the 70’s as payment from developed countries for development programs in developing countries.
As far as I’m concerned, AGW is not about AGW but about a way to implement parts of the NIEO that fizzled out in the 80’s.

Dave

A betrayal of the first magnitude!
The Australian Government and Labor party is now on a deathwatch, due to self-inflicted wounds!
Watch peoples standard of living nosedive. Watch industry and manufacturing flee this poor broken country thanks to the lunatics running the country.
PM JULIAR (THERE WON’T BE A CARBON TAX) Gillard may ram this hateful CO2 ETS/tax through but is spells the end of the Labor government, the slimy backstabbing independents and the greens in the next election.
Maybe they can join the farting climate destroying Camels out in the lonely never never land in the back 40. Because they won’t see anymore political power or deserve trust for the following 20 years after that, if they’re lucky.

AusieDan

Peter Kerr, Perth West Australia you said on July 13, 2011 at 7:23 pm
Yes, but people at the lower end of the income scale (i.e. most of them) are going to be significantly overcompensated for the carbon tax. In two years the opposition leader is going to say to most of the electorate “You know that extra spending money you’ve got in your pocket? Well vote for me and I’ll take it off you”. That’s sure to go down well.
The next Australian election is not a foregone conclusion.
UNQUOTE
The latest public opinion poll (Gallacy) found that a clear majority believe that they will be worse off.
It’s an open question at the moment.
Will the offer of over compensation for the carbon dioxide tax will voters over?
Or will they realise that this is just the first installment and what follows will be far worse?
Have you read “the Wisdom of crowds”?
Given enough time I don’t think too many will be easily fooled.

Amino Acids in Meteorites

Thanks for posting this. It’s the first I’ve heard of it.
Global warming has too much momentum. In America Sen. Inhofe has been the biggest influence in stopping Cap N Trade. I’d like to think that this blog, and others, have helped too. But President Obama is ignoring legal procedure and is going directly to the EPA, bypassing Congress, and Sen. Inhofe, to enforce carbon regulation with all its fees. Diesel engine truck regulations will affect everyone. Governments are ignoring the good of the people. I hope November 2012 comes soon enough here in America (the next big elections) to save us from what looks like a recession turning into a depression. But I think it’s too late. There could be economic suffering for the American people.

You have to love the Aussies. They don’t take any BS from their politicians.

Dave

OT
Only in Australia.
The BBC seems disdainful:
An Austrian atheist has won the right to be shown on his driving-licence photo wearing a pasta strainer as “religious headgear”.
Niko Alm first applied for the licence three years ago after reading that headgear was allowed in official pictures only for confessional reasons.
Mr Alm said the sieve was a requirement of his religion, pastafarianism…. A self-confessed atheist, Mr Alm says he belongs to the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, a light-hearted faith whose members call themselves pastafarians.
A medical interview established the self-styled ‘pastafarian’ was mentally fit to drive The group’s website states that “the only dogma allowed in the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is the rejection of dogma”.
Now, this talk of “religious headgear” and dogma suggests one faith in particular.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14135523

Dave

O boy my imagination kicked into overdrive.
Apology’s to Australians everywhere.
It should read:
Only in Austria.
The BBC seems disdainful:
An Austrian atheist has won the right to be shown on his driving-licence photo wearing a pasta strainer as “religious headgear”.

Lord Jim

@Peter Kerr, Perth West Australia
The compensation won’t cover the costs of this monster.

Steve Oregon

Politicians like her are eveywhere. Here we have one who this week argued against allowing a public vote on a boondoggle project she supports even though a poll showed 71% oppostion.
She pulled and read the last line from this Edmund Burke quote without mentioning the rest.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Burke
… it ought to be the happiness and glory of a representative to live in the strictest union, the closest correspondence, and the most unreserved communication with his constituents. Their wishes ought to have great weight with him; their opinion, high respect; their business, unremitted attention. It is his duty to sacrifice his repose, his pleasures, his satisfactions, to theirs; and above all, ever, and in all cases, to prefer their interest to his own. But his unbiased opinion, his mature judgment, his enlightened conscience, he ought not to sacrifice to you, to any man, or to any set of men living. These he does not derive from your pleasure; no, nor from the law and the constitution. They are a trust from Providence, for the abuse of which he is deeply answerable. Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.

charles nelson

One of the greenie channels SBS or ABC is running a campaign for an outfit called 1millionwomen.com or something like that.
The byline is something about women caring enough to save us from climate change!!!
Maybe the excellent Lady in the shop would lead the rest of australian’s women against the Gillard’s green nonsense.

Larry Kirk

The frightening thing is that she genuinely seems to believe that she hasn’t lied. She appears to have no grasp of the concept as it is commonly understood. She thinks that it was a perfectly reasonable and honest thing to have done, to have told this woman one thing in order to get her vote from her, but then, once the lady has given her vote, to go and do precisely the opposite. She can see nothing wrong in having broken her word, even though she gave that word in order to obtain a powerful, financially remunerative position in public office.
If she did that to the woman in the course of an everyday financial transaction, it would be considered a criminal offense. But she seems to consider that, having done it to the public at large, in order to purchase the power and salary of an elected position as national leader, she has done nothing wrong.
The woman is right though. Gillard made her a promise in order to obtain her vote, then once she had got it, she went back on her word. The lawyer in Gillard may not consider this a lie, but the ordinary, honest voter knows that it is.

Good god. What a narcissistic defense.
What is she defending??
Methinks she protesteth too much.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA

pat

unfortunately, when i turned on commercial radio in brisbane this morning, which is where the lady spoke to the PM yesterday, the female presenter was venting about how the PM was violently abused in the street and how shocking it was! fortunately most people had seen the clip and knew better.
the political Opposition is still playing games, saying they will go to an ETS when the rest of the world does, so the fight is not over yet. the Carbon Vultures are already drooling over the prospects of trading thin air, and it’s hard for politicians to disappoint them, as they all desperately need a new Financial Bubble.
meanwhile, back in the real world, the Australian economy is already suffering in many ways, the latest being the big Department stores, tho small retailers are probably suffering even more. shops in my local malls are shutting down on a regular basis and not being replaced:
14 July: SMH: DJs blames Gillard government taxes for profit plunge
“I think the [carbon tax] debate has certainly fuelled a reduction in confidence,” he (David Jones chief executive Paul Zahra ) said.
Mr Zhara said the flood tax, a looming carbon tax and threats of higher interest rates were forcing its shoppers, especially higher income earners, to curtail their spending and essentially go on a shopping strike.
He said people just didn’t “know what else is about to hit them”.
“We are in the eye of the storm, it’s a perfect storm,” he said…
He told journalists that the drop in sales during the fourth quarter was “rapid and unprecedented” as far back as David Jones records go, which was 20 years…http://www.smh.com.au/business/djs-blames-gillard-government-taxes-for-profit-plunge-20110714-1hf97.html

Julian Braggins

The Red Queen keeps repeating the Big Lie of “Carbon Pollution” many times a sentence in her Addresses to confuse her audience. Someone we dare not mention (hint, Germany, 1930’s) stated the “Big Lie repeated often enough, becomes the Truth”.
Carbon Dioxide is not Carbon as we know, it is the essential ingredient of life. She must be, as we all are, the end product of carbon dioxide processes, unless she claims exemption and belongs to the lowly forms of life that live in the deep, dark, black smokers of the oceans.

Belief in AGW go bye bye:
http://i.min.us/icnj0w.gif

Brendan

Whats even scarier, is that in the Governments own report is this gem
“In order to reach our pollution target of reducing emissions by 80 per cent on 2000 levels by 2050, Treasury said that 434 million tonnes of carbon abatement would have to be sourced from overseas. ”
Basically we have to purchase our ‘savings’ from overseas. No doubt the carpet baggers and shysters will have a field day. Maybe I can get the CCX to re-open and snaffle some credits at 5c a Tonne?

rbateman

Two of a kind, Gillard and Obama. Promises always followed by About Face.
Obama is coming unglued. The Social Security hostage dare was inexcusably brutal and genuinely ugly.
The lady reminds me of Clara Peller and her line “Where’s the Beef?”
Only this lady has the Beef, and there’s no way for Gillard or Obama to justify themselves.

christoff

Questions unanswered by Gillard include why did you lie to us, how much effect will this have on CO2, how much effect will this have on temperature, why won’t you let the people vote on important issues – such as this –
fot those of this who oppose governmental ineptitude and arrogance – the question is what can we do ?

Chuck Wiese

If this doesn’t qualify for an Aussie recall, nothing would. This woman is an outrage, just like most politicians in the USA.

jorgekafkazar

Penny for the Gill?

Chris in Hervey Bay

Our democracy got to this because we let it.

John R. Walker

If she’d stayed in Wales she could probably have kept lying and defrauding the taxpayers and got away with it ‘cos the carbon liars and scammers are still well in control over here…
Same methodology – they don’t debate, they dictate!

Agnostic

I hope no one minds, but I would like to repost this response my father gave to an email sent to him by Julia gillard. I originally posted this in carbon tax mark 4, but towards the life of that thread.
Agnostic says:
July 11, 2011 at 9:20 am
Here is an e-mail my father (a retired project engineer) received from Julia Gillard.
“Dear Colin,
The time has come to move from words to deeds – from a climate change debate to action on climate change.
That’s why I have announced the Government’s plan for a clean energy future.
Under our plan, five hundred big polluters will start paying $23 for every tonne of carbon from 1 July 2012. By 2020 this will cut pollution by 160 million tonnes.
Some of the cost will flow to consumers, which is why we will provide nine in 10 households with permanent tax cuts, pension increases and higher family payments, plus 20 per cent extra for most lower-income households and pensioners.
The carbon price will drive huge investments in clean technologies like solar, wind and geothermal – bringing $100 billion worth by 2050.
Pricing carbon is a big change for our country, so please continue your activism and commitment because it has never been more important.
Keep telling your friends and family about why climate action is so important for our environment and for creating the jobs of tomorrow.
Make sure they get the facts by visiting our cleanenergyfuture.gov.au website where they can find details of the Government’s plan and what it means for them.
Australians are a confident, creative people. Together we can build a brighter future for our nation.
Julia”
Here is his response:
“Dear Julia,
Thank you for your message below. As a self funded retiree I will happily receive whatever allowances your plan provides for me. However, I despair over the way your carbon tax issue has arisen. I guess it’s been driven by your perceived need to reduce Australian emissions of carbon dioxide. I think your conclusions are premature,
I understand your perception that anthropomorphic emissions are causing global warming (AGW). But despite what your advisors say, the SCIENCE IS NOT SETTLED. It never is on any subject. In the case of climate science there is a lot of evidence that global temperatures have stopped rising (despite the continuing rise in CO2 levels) and that the impact of CO2 may not be as severe as the IPCC would have you believe.
Before using the state of knowledge as it is currently known in order to make far reaching policy decisions, you need to carry out Due Diligence studies in order to verify that what you are being told is correct. The level of detail required to execute proper Due Diligence for something as complex as the dynamics of climate change is truly enormous. Peer review is not due diligence. Neither are the IPCC reports. Certainly not the Garnaut reports.
Peer review of published papers is in general a coarse filter to ensure that if the evidence which the paper examines is valid and if the writers have done their sums correctly and if the results appear to make sense and add to the body of human knowledge then it’s OK to publish. Peer reviewers are unpaid experts in the same field as the writers of the paper. They seldom see all the basic data, the computer codes, the corrections, deletions and adjustments, the instrument calibration details, full details of all assumptions, etc, and their judgements are often coloured by their personal prejudices. Also they don’t get to see the experimental equipment and test environments or the actual samples that form the basis for the paper being reviewed. Usually none of this matters because scientific progress is self correcting. If a rocket scientist gets it wrong the rocket may crash or wander off course or fail in some other way. Oh dear, what a shame. Well, we’ll get it right next time round.
Predicting climate change is not rocket science. It’s much, much more difficult. And the consequences of getting it wrong may be much, much more costly. So what do you do, given that there may be something happening that could cause humanity immense harm unless we change something? You conduct proper Due Diligence studies – engineering quality, not academician quality.
You need to get the protagonists – those who claim we have a severe, looming problem – to assemble their best arguments and evidence to support their case. They should only offer papers which have been published with full public disclosure of all the data and computer codes so that the claims made within the paper can be reproduced by others. Then you appoint a Due Diligence Team (DDT) and give it a proper briefing (a Scope of Work). In the commercial world DDTs are usually independent disinterested contractors. They will need to see all of the things that peer reviewers usually don’t see as described above. In fact for proposals which will cost the community billions, the DDT will want to see a lot more. For example, many academic papers cite other previously published papers. These citations may have to be examined too. They will want to see the ‘bad’ data as well as the ‘good’. Also, published papers and other evidence may be invited for positions purporting to be contrary to the protagonists case. There is plenty of evidence which appears to throw doubt on many aspects of the IPCC case for climate change (the politically acceptable expression for AGW) and this will need to be subjected to DDT examination too.
Unlike the authors of the IPCC reports who are nearly all climate scientists, the DDT should comprise physicists, economists, engineers, mathematicians (especially statisticians), geologists, biologists and climate scientists. But no more than 25% of the team should be climate scientists. It’s doubtful if the DDT will ever be able to achieve certainty on any matter but they should be able to come much closer to the truth than has the IPCC.
Contrary to what you may have been told, the IPCC reports comprise the assessment by no more than 40 or 50 climate scientists, of all the published papers that in their opinion support in some way, climate change outside the realm of natural variation. Reviewers of each chapter in the reports were not permitted to see data which was not expressly provided in the relevant papers. In fact one reviewer was threatened with dismissal because he kept asking to see data. There is no audit trail for positions taken by authors of each chapter. None. In the business world, if a financier were asked to commit billions for some project on the basis of a report of the quality of any of the IPCC Assessment Reports he would tell you to “Go away – don’t waste my time”.
I’m a retired engineer with a background in project management. Many of my peers agree with me about this.
Colin”

Patrick Davis

“RockyRoad says:
July 13, 2011 at 8:35 pm”
Gillards actual science advisor resigned in protest ‘coz Gillard was ignoring her. Gillard receives “climate science” advice from an economist, Prof. Ross “Gold Mine” Garnout. All economists agree there has to be a price on carbon. Tim Flannery has stated that is all global emissions of CO2 (From human activities) temperatures might not start to drop for 1000 years. Rudd had Penny Wong as climate change minister, Gillard has Combet, and not one of them has an actual clue about physics and chemistry.
“Peter Kerr, Perth West Australia says:
July 13, 2011 at 7:23 pm”
The compensation (Compo) is just vote buying for the next couple of years so that Labor/Greens are returned to Govn’t. Well, that is what Gillard/Brown hopes. They are seriously deluded. The compensation will eventually be worth nothing and may even be repealed, just like compensation for the introduction of the GST in Aus. The actual tax falls short by as much as AU$4.5billion when compo is factored in. So where is all the extra money coming from? Most AGW/carbon tax supporters claim Labor won a majority when in actual reality the Coalition won more votes. The minority Labor lead Govn’t was created by the Greens joiing Labor followed by the independents crapping on their electorate. The next election will see these traitors out of Govn’t for sure, sadly by then, the damage will be done. Gillard also states that any corporates/companies “price gouging” will be fined AU$1.1mil which to me suggests industry WOULD go offshore, no question.

Mr. Alex

“why did you lie to us?”
She lied because she is a politician and politicians lie… she should know that.