|
sydneycroatia58
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 40K,
Visits: 0
|
Might as well start a pool on how long it takes for a) Abbott to try and destroy the ABC or b) Get a bunch of his mates in there to stop the crazy lefties daring to pull him up on his bullshit.
Edited by sydneycroatia58: 3/12/2013 09:32:27 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
Mr wrote:notorganic wrote:Mr wrote:paulbagzFC wrote:Mr wrote:Will be reversed on Thursday. Commonwealth argument is compelling. Being? -PB Marriage is a federal issue. Don't you think that the court would have put an injunction if they intended to reverse? Marriage as a federal issue isn't as compelling as the act argument: only heterosexual marriage is legislated for federally in the marriage act, and it does not preclude states from making legislation to cater for other types of marriage. I'll leave the high court to adjudicate. In Australia marriage is between a man and a woman. Not any more according to the high court.
|
|
|
|
|
Joffa
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 66K,
Visits: 0
|
Anyone else been watching 'Keating, The Interviews' with Kerry O'Brien?
|
|
|
|
|
sydneycroatia58
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 40K,
Visits: 0
|
:lol: People are hilarious. They get told by News Ltd that Labor ripped $1.2bn of funding out for Gonski and they lap that bullshit up and run with it :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
notorganic
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21K,
Visits: 0
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mr
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6K,
Visits: 0
|
Joffa wrote:Anyone else been watching 'Keating, The Interviews' with Kerry O'Brien? Super viewing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joffa
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 66K,
Visits: 0
|
Mr wrote:Joffa wrote:Anyone else been watching 'Keating, The Interviews' with Kerry O'Brien? Super viewing. Yeah I've really enjoyed it, one of Australia's few genuine Statesmen.
|
|
|
|
|
Mr
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6K,
Visits: 0
|
afromanGT wrote:Mr wrote:notorganic wrote:Mr wrote:paulbagzFC wrote:Mr wrote:Will be reversed on Thursday. Commonwealth argument is compelling. Being? -PB Marriage is a federal issue. Don't you think that the court would have put an injunction if they intended to reverse? Marriage as a federal issue isn't as compelling as the act argument: only heterosexual marriage is legislated for federally in the marriage act, and it does not preclude states from making legislation to cater for other types of marriage. I'll leave the high court to adjudicate. In Australia marriage is between a man and a woman. Not any more according to the high court. Chill out champ. Thursday.
|
|
|
|
|
afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
Mr wrote:afromanGT wrote:Mr wrote:notorganic wrote:Mr wrote:paulbagzFC wrote:Mr wrote:Will be reversed on Thursday. Commonwealth argument is compelling. Being? -PB Marriage is a federal issue. Don't you think that the court would have put an injunction if they intended to reverse? Marriage as a federal issue isn't as compelling as the act argument: only heterosexual marriage is legislated for federally in the marriage act, and it does not preclude states from making legislation to cater for other types of marriage. I'll leave the high court to adjudicate. In Australia marriage is between a man and a woman. Not any more according to the high court. Chill out champ. Thursday. No chance. The High Court wouldn't place an injunction which it just planned to overturn a week later and open itself up to public ridicule, vicious media and lengthy appeals.
|
|
|
|
|
Mr
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6K,
Visits: 0
|
afromanGT wrote:Mr wrote:afromanGT wrote:Mr wrote:notorganic wrote:Mr wrote:paulbagzFC wrote:Mr wrote:Will be reversed on Thursday. Commonwealth argument is compelling. Being? -PB Marriage is a federal issue. Don't you think that the court would have put an injunction if they intended to reverse? Marriage as a federal issue isn't as compelling as the act argument: only heterosexual marriage is legislated for federally in the marriage act, and it does not preclude states from making legislation to cater for other types of marriage. I'll leave the high court to adjudicate. In Australia marriage is between a man and a woman. Not any more according to the high court. Chill out champ. Thursday. No chance. The High Court wouldn't place an injunction which it just planned to overturn a week later and open itself up to public ridicule, vicious media and lengthy appeals. You do realise that an injunction needs to be requested? Calm down.
|
|
|
|
|
afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
Quote:You do realise that an injunction needs to be requested? Calm down. Yeah, but they would deny it if they were planning on overturning it in a week. They'd face uproar from all the gay couples who get married over the next week only to have that marriage nullified.
|
|
|
|
|
paulbagzFC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K,
Visits: 0
|
I'm sensing Mr doesn't like homosexuals? :lol: -PB
|
|
|
|
|
afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
Just out of curiosity, if we went back to 2003 and told Australians that in 10 years they would elect Tony Abbott as PM, what do you think their response would be?
|
|
|
|
|
notorganic
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21K,
Visits: 0
|
paulbagzFC wrote:I'm sensing Mr doesn't like homosexuals? :lol:
-PB Correct.
|
|
|
|
|
afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
paulbagzFC wrote:I'm sensing Mr doesn't like homosexuals? :lol:
-PB I'm not sure if it's that he doesn't like homosexuals or he's worried he'll accidentally discover he likes cock in his bum.
|
|
|
|
|
notorganic
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21K,
Visits: 0
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mr
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6K,
Visits: 0
|
RedKat wrote:afromanGT wrote:Just out of curiosity, if we went back to 2003 and told Australians that in 10 years they would elect Tony Abbott as PM, what do you think their response would be? About an hours worth of laughter, some liberals included in that. He was a rising star as way back as the republic referendum. He's obviously shone up like a bad penny in the dearth of conservative talent. I think the overarching response would be one of bewilderment, specifically - is that the best there is?
|
|
|
|
|
batfink
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.9K,
Visits: 0
|
notorganic wrote:batfink wrote:notorganic wrote:batfink wrote:notorganic wrote:batfink wrote:no mention of the $1.2 billion Shorten pulled out of education funding in the weeks leading up to the election??? Repeating this false line really demonstrated your blind role as a link in the ever shrinking LNP circlejerk, despite your claims of impartiality. lol...right....you are a media premature ejectulator....you cream at the mere wiff of an anti Abbott story...lol sad really And yet you have to lie to find am alternative. Keep saying scraping finky. the fact remains that Shorten chopped 41.2 billion out of education prior to the election, so the LNP say we will honour thoe previous governments committments, then Shorten lies and denies he cut the funding forcing Pyne to reinstate $1.2 billion in funding....very simple politics for the well informed....MATT so go and do your homework...you are way off the mark..... It's spin, it's not a fact. Thankfully though, you're about as convincing as the mincing poodle himself. was thinking the same of you....if the media say it then its fact....... sad but true....it was not spin....it's a standard ALP tactic to fuck the books on the incoming government...lol...as if they weren't already fucked....
|
|
|
|
|
Mr
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6K,
Visits: 0
|
With the populace so seemingly pliant, will Abbott strike a blow for Neo-Cons all over the world? Or will Australians wake up and realise once gone the ABC can never be replaced.
|
|
|
|
|
batfink
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.9K,
Visits: 0
|
sydneycroatia58 wrote::lol: People are hilarious. They get told by News Ltd that Labor ripped $1.2bn of funding out for Gonski and they lap that bullshit up and run with it :lol: yeah people are hilarious, when Bill Shorten is asked 4 times in parliment to deny it and he sits there with a big smirk on his face and all his buddies just laugh and giggle like school kids......but hey the ALP never lie or backflip when they were in Government....:shock:
|
|
|
|
|
afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
batfink wrote:if the media say it then its fact....... :lol: #-o So KRudd is a Nazi. :lol: :oops:
|
|
|
|
|
batfink
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.9K,
Visits: 0
|
afromanGT wrote:batfink wrote:if the media say it then its fact....... :lol: #-o So KRudd is a Nazi. :lol: :oops: [-x [-x [-x [-x
|
|
|
|
|
paulbagzFC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K,
Visits: 0
|
batfink wrote:afromanGT wrote:batfink wrote:if the media say it then its fact....... :lol: #-o So KRudd is a Nazi. :lol: :oops: [-x [-x [-x [-x #121052 :lol: -PB
|
|
|
|
|
batfink
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.9K,
Visits: 0
|
paulbagzFC wrote:batfink wrote:afromanGT wrote:batfink wrote:if the media say it then its fact....... :lol: #-o So KRudd is a Nazi. :lol: :oops: [-x [-x [-x [-x #121052 :lol: -PB ???????what's that mean????
|
|
|
|
|
afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
paulbagzFC wrote:batfink wrote:afromanGT wrote:batfink wrote:if the media say it then its fact....... :lol: #-o So KRudd is a Nazi. :lol: :oops: [-x [-x [-x [-x #121052 :lol: -PB I think it's actually 121053 for those playing along at home :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
batfink
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.9K,
Visits: 0
|
afromanGT wrote:paulbagzFC wrote:batfink wrote:afromanGT wrote:batfink wrote:if the media say it then its fact....... :lol: #-o So KRudd is a Nazi. :lol: :oops: [-x [-x [-x [-x #121052 :lol: -PB I think it's actually 121053 for those playing along at home :lol: meaning???
|
|
|
|
|
afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
Meaning you made a statement, you were proven wrong and resorted to an infantile and garbage response for the 121,053rd time.
|
|
|
|
|
batfink
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.9K,
Visits: 0
|
afromanGT wrote:Meaning you made a statement, you were proven wrong and resorted to an infantile and garbage response for the 121,053rd time. SORRY....not wrong....accused of being wrong......even bill shorten won't deny he did it , which really is an admission of guilt
|
|
|
|
|
afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
batfink wrote:afromanGT wrote:Meaning you made a statement, you were proven wrong and resorted to an infantile and garbage response for the 121,053rd time. SORRY....not wrong....accused of being wrong......even bill shorten won't deny he did it , which really is an admission of guilt Oh FFS. It's got nothing to do with Bill Shorten. Your statement: "if the media say it then its fact." The reality: That's bullshit.
|
|
|
|
|
notorganic
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21K,
Visits: 0
|
And the statement about Shorten IS wrong, anyway.
The $1.2b was not money "ripped out" of school funding. To continue to assert that it is, is spin at best and a bald faced lie at worst.
|
|
|
|