“It’s not justiciable at that stage, although it would be down the track once bills are passed in a joint sitting.”

Either my spellchecker or Crikey HQ had changed justiciable to “justifiable”. Thanks to Harry for pointing that out.

Waiting for ETS, waiting much longer for more sensible language from you or your over-heated speech-writers.

I am a great lover of simple English, simple, un-affected English. I am also a rather detached observer of the Australian political scene. Recently I have developed a conviction that you can never achieve the office you seek because you don’t grasp the consequences, for yourself, of using lush and extreme language.

If you resort so frequently to the fervid language of penny dreadfuls, you will yourself in turn, be seen as somehow embodying the essence of penny-dreadfuls. Mud chucking will have a remarkable effect. It will come back to you. “…sacrifice on the altar of Mr Rudd’s vanity..” Oh dear! Isn’t that a trifle over-heated? It really does more to make you sound like a menopausal drama queen, than a credible alternative PM. It certainly suggests that you have little to offer other than cliches.

But you are not alone. Does Mr Hockey not realize that his serial belligerence simply portrays him as a would-be playground bully to anyone and everyone who loathes bluster, noise and grandstanding? Sound and fury signifying - well it seems to me - signifying only sound and fury, but nothing more substantial.

So many of your colleagues from the previous government failed to grasp that they were seen as blustering and arrogant. I find it truly sad that the lesson so clearly conveyed by the results of the last election has not yet been grasped.

If you really want us to believe that it might be sensible to wait for a better ETS, please give some thought to the notion that you will have to sound both sensible and credible, and perhaps even have some specific realistic policies in place.

Ransack the desks of your speech writers and purge all those with a secret stash of bodice-rippers, get a grip on plain English, and perhaps we might listen.

Furthermore the Nats represent country towns and their mineworkers a million times better than the ALP.

Going to Copenhagen unilaterally compromising the Oz economy is stupid not least because it would not help slow the rise in global CO2 atmospheric concentrations one iota.

And that, assumes a conviction that slowing or leveling the rise would make a positive difference and before that assuming a rise is actually ‘bad’ and that assumes believing in the IPCC hook, line and sinker even if you could allow the IPCC as a body of open-minded scientists and not politically infected quasi-scientific body.

Moreover it seems highly likely that there will be no global agreement after Copenhagen in the present circumstances which makes Rudd’s plan even more stupid if that were possible but unfortunately it seems it is………

True enough the Rudd Government and their NSW aparatchiks are ready to prosecute their wedge on the Libs & Nats. But the ALP is in power and they will have to front the world and the European bankers, and Obama administration etc on the island city of Copenhagen Denmark:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen

That is, the folks who write global reinsurance for SME economies like Australia. And why would they if we don’t pull our weight on the escalating insurance costs nationally and worldwide relating it seems to dangerous global warming?

The fact is the ALP Govt can’t deliver despite their selective duchessing of national interest groups, just like the ALP spin machine couldn’t keep safe 200 dead people in the Victorian megafire. What a metaphor, may they rest in peace.

You can blame the Greens or the Coalition, Fielding or Barnaby or the X-man but PM Rudd is the one who will wear it because the government, is the government, is the government. They have the job of delivering peace order and welfare, and they get paid to do it. No one else.

Keating learned to his everlasting chagrin in 1996, so did Carr in 1995 much to his surprise. Now we assume Rudd will get his medicine. To paraphrase Alan Ramsey who referred to a prissy self promoter for a PM - as if to balance up his laothing of The Toad - no one likes a smart *rse, especially one who can’t deliver.

Bring it on indeed.

If you feel up to it DAVID1 then do it. I’m certainly not doing it for you.

Fielding & the Liberals have most to lose. Greens (who have most to gain by a DD called for any other type of rejected bill) could lose 2nd preferences in the Senate election by alienating less radical greenies, both in groups like the ACF its associates, and from ALP & Liberal Wets (if that term’s still around).

BTW: Thanks for the “Rudd’s vanity” meme, bound to get more of an airing before weekend opinion polls.

A reminder for The Greens. I do understand your reasons for not wanting this ETS scheme. However, perhaps you might remember during the Republic debate… Ultimately the Republic was killed when Republicans wanted it on their terms, or nothing. And nothing was exactly what the voter got.

A reminder for Malcolm Turnbull: re Chris Chris Christopher Pain, as so many Australians pronounce the word, Pyne. Get rid of the little f — -ker. He brings no credit to a Party which is foundering in the rough. Even less so to a man as ambitious as you.

Fielding supports a deferral until after “Capenhogen”.