Where’s the case being made that the welfare state, even in good times, is immoral?
Sheik Yer’Mami says: “Down under, its all socialism, all the time.”
So what we have here is actually a pseudo conservative victory, which may result in his doing some conservative things, but Abbot is for maintaining the nanny state at all costs. He came out strongly against the immigration/asylum policies of the Labor party,
Asylum and immigration became major factors. Australians are concerned that an influx of asylum seekers are looking to skirt the standard immigration process, leading to a welfare state that is unsustainable by projected tax revenues.
But if that’s the case being made, he therefore isn’t against the very system drawing hundreds of thousands (monthly or yearly) to the Australian welfare state. Abbot is for the protection of the socialist nanny state, therefor he has rejected true conservative principles which makes him a faux conservative, like the RINO’s of the Republican party.
NOTE: That both Stephen K.Bannon and Alexander Marlow at Breitbart.com fail to address this is a major shame. This is nothing more than party hat swapping with some moving of the deck chairs.
