Abbott-stinance and Monckton-ing

Breakfast Politics linked the Oz's story on Tony abbott's climate change policy with the words No cap, no compo & little abstinence in Abbott's climate plan.

It made me think of Tony's approach in another matter that was important to his faith wherein he also couldn't practice abstinence, in that case leading to the story of the child who wasn't. Is there a pattern forming?

This suggests a new word "Abbottstinance" which is when you profess that you will give up something, but never actually do!

Meanwhile why is it the opposition can't get their heads around the difference between putting a price on carbon and a tax? And exactly how does Tony now attack any part of the deficit when in his words he is opposing a tax and just wants to spend money on climate change.

There is about a 10% chance he could be successsful with a Bush-esque strategy - talk fiscal conservatism but only pracctice profligacy.

How the Government responds to Abbott will define the outcome. What they have to avoid is treating Abbott like some kind of lunatic. Parodying your opponent doesn't work, just look at Barnaby Joyce's ongoing popularity. The coalition didn't ever target the madness that was Latham - they just gave him space to do it.

This brings me to the justified criticism today by Andrew Bolt of the way what he calls the "warmists" have dealt with Lord Monckton. He focuses on some of the gang tackle approaches and in particular writers who use his (disease based) appearance as a point.

It took Paul Sheehan in the SMH on Monday to point out the idiocy of the claim that Monckton describes himself as a Nobel Prize winner. He actually claims this as sarcasm about the fact the whole IPCC won the Nobel Peace Prize. (Which I've previously described as a farce.)

I know how hard it can be to argue with a personwho won't accept the premise of your argument. But that is not an excuse for degenerating into mocking the person. Worse, mocking will backfire.

So my other new word is "Moncktoning" which is to lose and argument by trying to mock your opponent rather than engage with them.