:rof:
Printable View
:rof:
seriously though, some of the takes were so bad and deserved to be ridiculed.
remember these peanuts - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...?ITO=applenews
Yeah the clowns doing the bleating and putting shit on those who objected are pains in the arse
Typical of them is the my opinion is right and your wrong for disagreeing
Then to top matters off their the type of clowns who block you ban you etc for expressing a contrary view that doesn't fit in with their little narrative
They the type who just like to take their bat and ball and **** off home
That just politics between the two parties leveraging chaos on each other for political gain and ****ing the country over to try and get themselves elected
I couldn't give two ****s if Barnaby Joyce is part foreign citizen
I more concerned as to who the idiots are who continue to elect him in the first place
Oh legit, out these clowns by all means.
They weren’t making a case, they were injecting themselves into the argument. I think there’s a difference.
But the lady doctor on that ad getting threatened with being struck off the register?
Nope, that’s some bullshit right there.
I think even on here the good Member has his own certain style but I respect the way he presents it. Sure there’s been the odd terrible post but even though we disagree on this issue I’ll listen to his point of view.
Anyway now that this is over let’s get back to the reasonable and polite discussion on climate chan.............OH DEAR GOD KILL ME NOWWWWWWWWWWWWW
Bloody hell plague.. Don't start that old chestnut off again.. haha
Just get back to your devil's dandruff with Wilso and then take him to Bunnings..
Listen my brother if you try and hook up in any Asian country going in cold then you are a clown (unless it’s Bali and you happen to know the guy who knows the guy who runs the whole damn place).
But I’ve only been to Honkers with family so haven’t had a big night out yet.
Back there in March for the races with the boys so maybe you’ll need to give me some tips.
61% is a terrible result and were this vote to have been an actual referendum it would probably have failed to be carried anyway. I'm personally not for same sex marriage - but I still voted Yes because I don't believe myself or anyone for that matter has the right to determine the status of any relationship between two consenting adults as illegal.
Almost 40% of people in this country think that they should have the right to control / determine the legal status of a relationship between two consenting adults.
Anyone that thinks Australia is more progressive now than it was 50 years ago is kidding themselves.
In 1967 Indigenous Australians were given the right to vote. Run that same referendum today and I guarantee it would not pass - this country is an abortion.
actually one more thing on the vote.
when it was advertised it was made perfectly clear that every vote would be anonymous.
but
they seem to be talking about a heck of a lot of data narrowed down to age/sex/location etc.
errrrr how would they have that info unless your vote was tied to your personal data file via the census/electoral role?
yes yes yes they are gonna say its deep deep deep down in the cyber abyss that no one can ever get to and publish.
Just remember Hillary thought the same thing.
hashtagstaywoke
67 referendum was over 90%. No way would thode numbers be matched today.
lol, A bit confused
a. you voted against your opinion.
b. if no one has the right to determine the status of relationship you shouldn't have voted at all. You helped decide a relationship status albeit helping to create choice
now back to the next outrage supercars, wheres our local jobs?