Author |
Australia goes down the toilet! |
|
|
21-Aug-2010 11:00:51 PM
|
Debating whether I should move overseas, I don't think I can deal with an Australia where only a little over 10% of the country believe in anthropomorphic climate change and compassion for people fleeing persecution. Can anyone suggest somewhere with half a soul and heart that has good climbing?
|
21-Aug-2010 11:04:47 PM
|
If we all leave on boats will Abbot turn us around and make us come back? Or can we declare Natimuk a new country, all move there and run it properly?
|
22-Aug-2010 12:35:25 AM
|
Latest policy update:
After a deal made with Bob Katter, Tony Abbot has changed his last point of the action contract from 'Stop the Boats' to 'Shell the Boats'
|
22-Aug-2010 7:15:51 AM
|
I can think of no better outcome than to have had the leftard Gillard the Rangar out of office. She is a true water melon. Green on the outside and definitely red commo on the inside.
Shaking my head why the good people of Melbourne would vote in a (REMOVED). What the hell is he talking about marriage discimination. There's no marriage discrimination, a man and a woman get married, they have kids in a secure bonded contractual relationship. Kids grow up knowing who their mother and father are and continue to enjoy the benefits of that ongoing knowledge and love.
Two (REMOVED) get "married" they then need a third party to donate a kid if they want a "family". Kid grows up totally confused and wanting to find their true parents. No, that is no way for marriage to work.
FROM MODERATOR - THIS IS AN UNACCEPTABLE POST PHIL. I HAVE REMOVED CERTAIN SECTIONS BUT HAVE KEPT ORIGINALS RECORDS FOR FUTURE REFERENCE TO DISCUSS MORE DEEPLY WITH OTHER MODS.
|
22-Aug-2010 7:48:47 AM
|
hey phil maybe they want homosexual members down there in the ...(sorry I'll edit that out myself)...but what I really wanna know is - did you get pissed and post?
bloody good election outcome so far, i like.
|
22-Aug-2010 9:19:40 AM
|
Whoever gets in is going to have to deal with the Greens in the Senate from next year so there's a reasonable chance the independents will support a Labour minority government as the more stable prospect. However, they may demand a leadership change from the ALP before they back them!
(Any odds on the return of K.Rudd?)
|
22-Aug-2010 9:27:53 AM
|
On 22/08/2010 Phil Box wrote:
>I can think of no better outcome than to have had the leftard Gillard the
>Rangar out of office. She is a true water melon. Green on the outside and
>definitely red commo on the inside.
>
>Shaking my head why the good people of Melbourne would vote in a (REMOVED BY MODERATOR) as their member. What the hell is
>he talking about marriage discimination. There's no marriage discrimination,
>a man and a woman get married, they have kids in a secure bonded contractual
>relationship. Kids grow up knowing who their mother and father are and
>continue to enjoy the benefits of that ongoing knowledge and love.
>
>Two (REMOVED MY MODERATOR) get "married" they then need a third party to donate a kid if
>they want a "family". Kid grows up totally confused and wanting to find
>their true parents. No, that is no way for marriage to work.
You are an ignorant, redneck piece of shit. The problem with democracy is that the vote of an oxygen thief like you counts as much as that of informed people.
|
22-Aug-2010 9:44:24 AM
|
A couple of bits of really good news though;
1. That useless seat-warmer Wilson Tuckey has finally been consigned to the dustbin of political history where he belongs.
2. Stephen Fielding, the dumbest person ever to hold a seat in Australian federal politics will no longer be polluting the senate - along with the rank excuse for a political party which is Family First.
|
22-Aug-2010 9:47:44 AM
|
Lol duncan...everyone gets to vote mate....thats why its called a democracy...just because Phil disagrees with you dosn't make him less informed..he just has different opinions.
Note I don't agree with phil but certainly dont take your view, that my opinion should be worth more than his...get over yaself.
|
22-Aug-2010 9:52:37 AM
|
I'm still trying to figure out if Phil's rant is genuine, or is he just doing a send-up of red-necks in his state?
|
22-Aug-2010 9:53:49 AM
|
On 22/08/2010 Phil Box wrote:
>I can think of no better outcome than to have had the leftard Gillard the
>Rangar out of office. She is a true water melon. Green on the outside and
>definitely red commo on the inside.
>
>Shaking my head why the good people of Melbourne would vote in a (REMOVED BY MODERATOR) as their member. What the hell is
>he talking about marriage discimination. There's no marriage discrimination,
>a man and a woman get married, they have kids in a secure bonded contractual
>relationship. Kids grow up knowing who their mother and father are and
>continue to enjoy the benefits of that ongoing knowledge and love.
>
>Two REMOVED BY MODERATOR get "married" they then need a third party to donate a kid if
>they want a "family". Kid grows up totally confused and wanting to find
>their true parents. No, that is no way for marriage to work.
I first thought this was a tongue in cheek post, if not, then this abhorrent post I have ever read on chocky. If it is not a joke then what happens now will be very interesting given that Phil is a moderator here? If this is a joke Phil, please feel very smug with your trolling.
|
22-Aug-2010 10:07:15 AM
|
On 22/08/2010 rodw wrote:
>Lol duncan...everyone gets to vote mate....thats why its called a democracy...just
>because Phil disagrees with you dosn't make him less informed..he just
>has different opinions.
No, the fact that he doesn't understand why gay people are being discriminated against makes him uninformed. The fact that he called Gillard a communist makes him uninformed. If he understood the issue, or what communism was, he wouldn't say these things, hence he is uniformed. He is also a redneck piece of shit. The two may or may not be related.
|
22-Aug-2010 10:33:11 AM
|
Nice one Phil. You tool.
|
22-Aug-2010 10:37:05 AM
|
I think your all way to PC..but then again this is chockstone.
|
22-Aug-2010 10:57:40 AM
|
Regardless of it's intention, the Phil Box post betrays a dark and bitter train of thought which seems way out of place in 2010. If it was meant to be humour, it was distasteful humour. If it was meant to be a troll, it was a pathetic troll. If it was an honest opinion, it is incredibly sad and worrisome.
Ian
|
22-Aug-2010 11:09:46 AM
|
On 22/08/2010 rodw wrote:
>I think your all way to PC..but then again this is chockstone.
People use "you're too PC" (or "your to PC" in your case) as a way of defending the fact that they're bigoted arseholes. There is a difference between not always being politically correct and being a racist and a xenophobe.
|
22-Aug-2010 11:19:13 AM
|
Hold on there, Duncan. Let's not get ahead of our selves. While Phil Box's statements are easily read as bigoted, homophobic and uncomfortable with socialism, there is nothing in that statement indicating that he harbors any ill feelings towards aliens or people with different color skin.
|
22-Aug-2010 11:23:40 AM
|
Fair enough, it was more of a general statement in response to RodW than a specific comment.
|
22-Aug-2010 11:29:51 AM
|
On 22/08/2010 Duncan wrote:
>People use "you're too PC" (or "your to PC" in your case) as a way of
>defending the fact that they're bigoted arseholes.
Thanks for the grammar lesson.....added a lot to your arguement....not...but I still disagree with you.
|
22-Aug-2010 12:07:29 PM
|
You proved my point when you tried to defend homophobic sentiments by saying that those of us who opposed them were too PC.
|