Comments on: Barbara Bennett, public service TV star

By: Connie Coburg

Connie Coburg — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 09:39:58 +0000

OOps i forgot to ask, has the Govt now taken on the role of the business unions, supposedly protecting the rights of the employee but in fact protecting the employer at taxpayers expense? We can’t have happy workers, they must give up AL SL and PH for less than $2 an hour more! If you dont sign then is no offer of a job. What employer would have an employee who won’t toe the line on conditions. Every employer who willingly sacks or does not employ a person due to not signing (does this go to the workplace authority as an agreement has not been signed?)should be shamed on a new website. Someone out there has the knowledge on how to so this.

By: Connie Coburg

Connie Coburg — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 09:32:06 +0000

Regarding my last post, did Barbara get paid for acting in those ads or was it a favour for Joe???

By: Connie Coburg

Connie Coburg — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 09:29:59 +0000

Barbara Bennett is a nice lady, she was my former CEO at her former job. But she has broken the APS values that are espoused within the public service of being apolitical. Will she face a reprimand, reduced pay, a fine, or termination? Or once a person gets to a higher level within the Public Service the APS values no longer apply? Everyone should be treated equally.

By: Scorpio

Scorpio — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 08:50:19 +0000

A bit off topic, which seems to be a common intent here, but I don’t think I have seen the English language tortured as much since I went to Uni.

I remember long nights sitting with a dictionary and thesaurus trying to make some sort of sense out of convoluted Academic Texts.

If I have to read too many threads along these lines, I might have to rumble around in the boxes down stairs and dig them out again.

By: adrian

adrian — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 03:18:33 +0000

This has been the most entertaining thread, for which I must thank Nabakov and paul walter, and indirectly, John Greenfield.

By: paul walter

paul walter — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 02:44:44 +0000

Nabakov, thanks for the kiddie-porn, loved the movie too. Or identical sibling was “other”( bad) Nabakov ?
Vladimir, am true paragon of rectitude when it comes to sticking to the issues and beaut bloke generally.
So, Greenfield’s responses are generated of a mother or (worse) blonde fixation? Can the writer add praises for timely interspersion of Rogers’ aphorism?
For subject suggest copious doses of castor oil and emetics in concert with long freezing showers, during hangover phase.
No, won’t releive subject of fixation but will be a good buzz for rest of folk involved.
People deserve consolation for reading that gov have spent 170 mil on sydney conference , on top of 190 mil for porn filters,40 mill to persecute Haneef near- billions for drawn out aborigine lobotomization/genocide and near-billions more for ads, inc Elizabeth Bennett.( Howard recast as bumbling Bennett senior, whither Bishop sisters? ). Joe Hockey’s celluloid D’arcy turned out a ripper-off of gulled juvenile labour, but we won’t mention unspeakable W……….s during prime time.
All of this to run the economy into such strife as to induce interest rates rises, for which only the indubitably profligate states could be remotely and exclusively held responsible ?
Devilish cunning, these socialists…

By: Nabakov

Nabakov — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 17:06:25 +0000

You’re not helping my “The Education of John Greenfield” moment here, paul walter.

But at least you haven’t personally abused your current or potential interlocuters here without cause. I suppose it’s a start for all concerned.

By: paul walter

paul walter — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 16:06:53 +0000

John Howard’s emotional Sera Burnheart on the naughty things damaging his W……..s if the wicked Ruddites, cynically jerked by the evil union thug meat puppet masters, get their horny-handed mits on the levers should alert all to what’s at stake.
Yes , more of the sort of codswallop dished up by bums like Coonan, Abetz and Brough lately!
Fear and loathing feed off emotionalism so there is little doubt that, at the broader level the Grunfeldt ‘contrarians’ would love nothing better than to raise the hackles of intelligent people in order for the victim hood/entitlement subliminals to have the right medium in which to thrive.
But the Hansonists get first exposure because they watch free-to-air and read tabloids.

By: Pavlov's Cat

Pavlov's Cat — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:16:18 +0000

â??No youâ??re not hereâ??

should read

â??No youâ??re not alone hereâ??

Do you think? I liked it better the first time.

By: Nabakov

Nabakov — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 12:46:41 +0000

“No you’re not here”

should read

“No you’re not alone here”

Damn leather kimono sleeves catching on the keyboard.