I don't find this kind of comment very helpful. You can't be slightly more charitable to the positions of a government a majority of your fellow citizens voted for? You don't have to agree with them, but you can attempt to understand why they might hold those views without needing to be racist or stupid.
I'm not keen on many of the positions of President Obama, Harry Reid or Rand Paul, but I wouldn't describe them as "mouth breathers" on HN.
I'm not a citizen of Australia, they didn't win a majority they won a plurality, and regardless I don't feel any compunction when describing Abbott as a mouth breather.
As I explained clearly in my comment, I have never experienced anything like the paucity of talent in Australian politics. I'm capable of disagreeing with the government of the day while respecting the intelligence or talent at play.
I'm perfectly comfortable with my description of Abbott and I stand by it.
Seems a bit odd to use it as an insult though, as quite a few people (myself included) are more or less 'mouth breathers' because of medical conditions.
We all breath through our mouths. I could have described him as having 'slopey shoulders', I doubt the progenitor of that insult intended people with back problems to take insult, though I guess some may take it too literally.
The majority of the population did not vote for the complete undermining of the clean energy sector in Australia. We were promised a moderate, consultative government with "no surprises" as Tony Abbott once put it. A country with such a rich history of scientific innovation deserves so much better.
I'm not keen on many of the positions of President Obama, Harry Reid or Rand Paul, but I wouldn't describe them as "mouth breathers" on HN.