It annoys me to no end that due to Labor's scare campaign about AGW all layers of media constantly and intentionally misquoting Tony Abbott as a climate sceptic. He has stated very clearly (like the rest of us) that climate change is happening but not solely caused by human activities. Because of this, instead of taking action about the situation, we are locked into a useless debate and wasting time and money needlessly.

Months ago I have seen a prediction from a meteorologist that due to the the movements of the Earth, most of the rain will fall into the Southern Sea instead of the continent. The rain goes South - nobody listens - no precautions taken although it is already happening.

Clay I have read the Adelaide version of the New York Times story, but I can't find the actual story. Do you know how I can find the actual American version.

It annoys me to no end that due to Labor's scare campaign about AGW all layers of media constantly and intentionally misquoting Tony Abbott as a climate sceptic. He has stated very clearly (like the rest of us) that climate change is happening but not solely caused by human activities. Because of this, instead of taking action about the situation, we are locked into a useless debate and wasting time and money needlessly.

Months ago I have seen a prediction from a meteorologist that due to the the movements of the Earth, most of the rain will fall into the Southern Sea instead of the continent. The rain goes South - nobody listens - no precautions taken although it is already happening.



Tony Abbott is lampooned because of his religion by many, yet ..speak against the Global Warming cult, and one is damned as a heretic.

Strange.

**************************



Just as a side note, not many people would know that Mr Abbott has spent a number of his annual holidays travelling north to teach children...often mostly Aboriginal children.

Clay I have read the Adelaide version of the New York Times story, but I can't find the actual story. Do you know how I can find the actual American version.

...

If you Google " New York Times Newspaper " and then do a search you will find it ..........

Sorry Clay. Have done that & a search through their subject index, comes up with nothing on Abbott or Hockey & the Liberal leadership debacle.

http://query.nytimes.com/search/sitesearch?query=Tony+Abbott&srchst;=cse

...

The exact story might not be in this lot but there is plenty of reading for you innes ............... :)

...

Anyway its no doubt old news by now and may have been Archived ............

This might be it.



http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/01/australian-government-in-turmoil-over-climate-bill/

Thank you koko...........

Tony Abbott blogs live every Friday.

He answers 99% of the comments.

For those genuinely interested in what he thinks, [url=http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/yoursay/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/rudds_ets_is_really_an_extra_tax_scheme/]have a look here.[/url]



Part of today's article...





"Now, we couldn’t have just waved that through the Parliament. It would be grossly irresponsible of us. As an Opposition our job is to hold the Government rigorously to account. Oppositions are not there to get legislation through. Oppositions are there to hold the Government to account and unless we are confident that a piece of legislation is beyond reasonable doubt in the national interest, it is our duty as the Opposition to vote it down."



He will be online at 4.00 pm to-day.

Here is a story on Tony Abbott by Laurie Oaks. [url=http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/tony-abbott-must-not-use-spin/story-e6frfhqf-1225807113686]Link[/url]



ON radio the day after his election as federal Liberal leader, Tony Abbott was explaining how he'll have to be more careful about what he says from now on.



"You're not going to become bland and spin-driven, are you?" asked the alarmed talkback jock.



"No," replied Abbott. "I will try not to be. But I will also try to act in accordance with - dare I say it? - the dignity of the position."



That pretty much summed up the new leader's dilemma.



The best thing Abbott has going for him is the perception that he is a straight talker who says what he thinks in an interesting way in an age when most politicians won't utter a word that is not focus group-tested.



His greatest weakness is a lack of discipline demonstrated by his tendency to speak before he thinks, in language not always appropriate and sometimes offensive.



Abbott was not supposed to emerge victorious from Tuesday's meeting of Liberal MHRs and senators.



Having ruthlessly shattered the party to get his way on climate change and destroy Malcolm Turnbull, Right-wing power broker Nick Minchin believed Joe Hockey was the right alternative leader to put Humpty together again.



Even Abbott was saying publicly that Hockey would be a better prospect than him to heal divisions and reunify the warring groups.



But because Hockey refused to sell out his principles and the moderates fluffed their maths and split their vote, it is Abbott who now takes on Kevin Rudd.



And that, with due respect to Hockey, makes it a more interesting contest, and possibly a more dangerous one for the Labor Government.



Abbott will be less predictable than Hockey would have been, more aggressive and a lot more willing to take risks. Whatever happens, Rudd will know he has been in a fight.



There are already critics suggesting that Abbott shares many qualities with Mark Latham. This is true. But he also has one very important quality that the sour and snarling Latham lacked - Abbott is immensely likeable.



His attractive, outgoing personality was evident in interviews in his first few days as leader. So was his strength as a communicator.



A former journalist, Abbott has a direct, cut-through style and presents his views in an attention-grabbing and easily understood way.



When former bureaucrat Rudd opens his mouth, a kind of verbal sludge spews forth.



Given that politics is largely about selling messages, the advent of Abbott means the PM had better lift his game.



But the man who will now lead the Coalition to next year's election also has a message problem. He is spouting too many of them.



In just three days we had pronouncements not only on climate change policy, but also on industrial relations (bringing back WorkChoices-style individual agreements), the need to give Canberra constitutional control over state laws, a more generous paid maternity leave scheme than Rudd's, and abolition of means-testing on "a whole lot of family benefits".



Treasury calculated the cost to the Budget of the means-testing proposal alone at about $3 billion over four years.



And this from a man who, in the same interviews, castigated Rudd for heading a big-spending government.



It was a reminder that Abbott has never had the degree of interest in economics that would normally be expected from someone aspiring to the prime ministership.



But when The Australian ran a "Libs making policy on the run" headline, Abbott - a keen cyclist, as everyone knows - began to backpedal.



Complaining that "various policies" were being read into the opinions he'd been expressing, he said: "I want to make it crystal clear that the Opposition has not finalised its policies. It won't be finalising its policies until early in the new year."



In other words, we should all ignore what he's been telling us since he became leader. Bizarre.



Which brings us back to the discipline question. Abbott - as he acknowledged on that talkback program - now has to resist the temptation to run off at the mouth. He can't afford gutter language any more, or gaffes like his 2007 election campaign attack on dying asbestos campaigner Bernie Banton.



He should also recognise that he can no longer allow expensive policy proposals to pop out of his mouth unconsidered and uncosted. Voters expect political leaders to treat such things seriously.



It does not follow, though, that Abbott must close down his personality and become as boring as most contemporary politicians.



If he is smart, Abbott will remain the Mad Monk - an affectionate nickname these days. He will retain the courage to chance his arm. He will shun spin doctors wanting to change him and script him. Be yourself, Tony. It's your best chance.



While Abbott and Minchin were the big winners from the Liberal upheaval, Turnbull and Hockey were the clear losers.



All Turnbull achieved by refusing to stand aside in the leadership ballot was to cruel Hockey's chances and hand the party over to the Right, in the process sacrificing the emissions trading policy he claimed to believe in so passionately.



And Hockey emerged from the process unjustly labelled weak by critics, when the truth is that weakness would have guaranteed him the leadership.



Abbott would have vacated the field and Hockey would have been elected in a partyroom landslide, had he bowed to Minchin's demand to abandon the emissions trading concept.



But, unlike Minchin and Abbott, Hockey believes human activity is a factor in global warming.



As a Liberal, he believes in market-based solutions. [b]And as shadow treasurer he knew any alternative climate change policy - the kind Abbott now purports to embrace - would cost taxpayers billions of dollars.[/b]



So he stuck to his guns. That was not weakness. It was strength.