This is the problem with how people react to speech that they consider hateful or problematic.

It always ends up with the speaker being able to claim victimhood and entrenches the ideas that were rallied against.

There are several words (ie: sexist, bigot, homophobe, islamophobe, xenophobe, racist, misogynist) that have pretty much lost all meaning due to their overuse, to the point where actual bigoted opinions are able to slip their way into the public stream of consciousness.

The Liberal party is a "broad church" (LNP people love to keep reminding us that Howard said that) because in the 40s they bandied a bunch of disparate factions of people with one common interest, getting and keeping the Labor party out of government.

Ironically, these days Labor in their lurch to the right have lost a significant chunk of their Left voter base hence why people can keep saying "their lowest primary vote etc. If they lost their far right nutjobs, their would be only subtle differences between Lib/Lab. Bring it on.

When you can stand behind your religious convictions to justify draconian beliefs you're never really in a position to have to justify your opinion though.

It's still not socially acceptable to criticise religious beliefs.

Outlets like Fairfax do

Bernadi is fine. This country definitely needs a conservative base but I think breaking away from the Liberals would be stupid, as it is a conservative party in its own right. We definitely need folks like Bernadi, Christiansen and even Pauline Hanson to cancel out marxists, terrorist sympathisers and thought police on the left, even though I wouldn't want them running the country. I quite like hearing Bernadi speak because he doesn't give a fuck what anything thinks and he's totally impervious to the lefts shrieks of racist and homophobe.

No secret you vote for the Greens then

Those words you described are now owned by the Left side of politics, no one else can use them...If anyone uses them , including the centrists it would almost be infringement of copyright and trademark

Bernadi is quite extreme in his opposition to gay marriage ...and I think he's devotion to Christian ideals are out of touch with mainstream society's

Edited by Socawho: 6/7/2016 03:52:12 PM

Rusty mate you really need to get out a dictionary and see what 'liberal' means.

Failing that just head to their website.

There is not a single thing there that says the liberal party is a 'conservative' party that espouses 'conservative' values.

https://www.liberal.org.au/our-beliefs

We Believe:

In the inalienable rights and freedoms of all peoples; and we work towards a lean government that minimises interference in our daily lives; and maximises individual and private sector initiative

In government that nurtures and encourages its citizens through incentive, rather than putting limits on people through the punishing disincentives of burdensome taxes and the stifling structures of Labor's corporate state and bureaucratic red tape.

In those most basic freedoms of parliamentary democracy - the freedom of thought, worship, speech and association.

In a just and humane society in which the importance of the family and the role of law and justice is maintained.

In equal opportunity for all Australians; and the encouragement and facilitation of wealth so that all may enjoy the highest possible standards of living, health, education and social justice.

That, wherever possible, government should not compete with an efficient private sector; and that businesses and individuals - not government - are the true creators of wealth and employment.

In preserving Australia's natural beauty and the environment for future generations.

That our nation has a constructive role to play in maintaining world peace and democracy through alliance with other free nations.

In short, we simply believe in individual freedom and free enterprise; and if you share this belief, then ours is the Party for you.

Fuck all to do with left or right, both sides exercise fallacious & hyperbolic use of language to make awful arguments.

The true political divide these days is Libertarian Vs. Authoritarian.



Like nearly all other anti-gay preachers, there's a 95% chance that Bernardi is a closet homosexual.

Not really. He made a curt comment linking gay marriage to beastiality, but that has nothing on what grand mufti thinks about homosexuals

My political leanings have never been a secret on here. Unlike others I don't pretend to be centrist ;)

No not directly a Greens voter but because of some policies of Labor's that I find unacceptable to support they were preferenced higher than Labor from me this election (and a million miles higher than Liberal but that goes without saying) :lol:

YOU JUST LOVE COMMUNISM AND ONLY WANT FREE STUFF WITHOUT HAVING TO WORK FOR IT

No it doesn't. We're trying to grow away from the dark ages not go back to them :lol:

If you think beastiality and homosexuality are remotely relatable you should not be a public representative.

I'm more impressed that Bernardi thinks that a dog has the capacity to express enthusiastic verbal consent at a wedding ceremony, and able to overcome the lack of opposable thumbs to sign the wedding certificate.

Cory has a senate spot for life under the LNP banner, but if he formed a new conservative party...not so sure.
I dont think it would be a success for him in SA, probably only one senate spot? NXT will draw most of the protest vote in SA in coming years, then there's the Greens and Family First (maybe), but not as many angry Conservatives as he thinks.
He should move to QLD.

The Labor manifesto states that Labor is a democratic socialist party, does that make everyone in the Labor party a democratic socialist?

The liberal party is traditionally a conservative party, with conservative MPs, though its definitely not a requirement for membership.

Sir please do not question my faith, God works in mysterious ways =;

The dark ages would be executing homosexuals, and no one on the liberal right is advocating that. Muslims on the other hand...

That is completely untrue, and your assertion belies a lack of knowledge about history.

The history of the Liberal Party is history of the tug-of-war between "wet" and "dry" factions. It has always gone through cycles of alternating between being socially liberal, and social conservatism.

It is only because John Howard (conservative) was PM for an extended period, that the Liberal Party took a definitive turn towards social conservatism, which was extended under Abbott.

Malcolm is merely bringing the party back to a more socially liberal position, entirely in line with their history under leaders such as Andrew Peacock, and Malcolm Fraser.

The common thread of the Liberal party is that they are all economically liberal - laissez faire capitalists, and anti-union.

The Liberal Party exists, and was created, only to keep the ALP out of govt. Which is fair enough, if that is your point of view.

But the party has never been "traditionally a conservative party".

My thoughts exactly

The dark ages burnt heretics and witches and pagans....on the holy cross


Edited by Socawho: 6/7/2016 05:27:27 PM

If Benardi had his way some Dolphins would be culled...:lol:

A straight answer was all I asked....and it seems all I get was a mixed bag

You didn't ask me anything I gave up information voluntarily ;)

The Liberal-Right? Now there's an oxymoron if I've ever seen one. The right side of the liberal party are not liberals, they are conservatives.

Well to be honest they aren't all addicts, a large % are just no hopers and drop kicks.....one couple wanted to name their child "0" (zero) and apparently you are not permitted to do so, so my daughter had to explain that to them, they abused her and carried on about it for ages until they decided to change the name from a numeral to letters, ZERO......](*,) ](*,) ](*,)

and to clarify things, my daughters experiences are not isolated, my father was a copper and my mother a nurse and i have employed people over a 26 year period........so we see a good cross section of the community and FFS this country is in trouble if we have to rely on the current generation and their offspring

That's where I think you are wrong though - crime is down, alcohol consumption by youth is down etc.

Those dropkicks you refer to have existed through history, and continue to. However, I think there are actually far less now than in the past.

Subjective experience is absolutely the worst basis on which to make generalised judgements.

sorry, can't agree with that........plenty more no hoping dropkicks than ever before.......lazy fucks with zero attention span.......wouldn't work in an iron lung......FFS our welfare budget is 38% of our whole economy....that tells you there are way to many non productive kunts out there with their hands out.....

i have been employing people for over 25 years for my business, in the past i could get kids out of school at year 10 and they could pass TAFE and make it through the apprenticeship and become tradesmen........i now have to employ year 12 school leavers and they can't hack the TAFE course and fail....so much for being more intelligent and committed, our curriculum for school and TAFE are failing miserably..... throwing money won't fix the problem, they needs to revise the system and make teachers more accountable and lift the teachers skill set.....i think the ATAR for school teachers at uni now is around 50...LOL](*,) ](*,) ](*,)

aspiring to mediocrity...... how often are teachers reviewed and have to sit test to prove they are up to scratch.....????