 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General General TopicsGSMBluetoothProviders AlltelATT WirelessCingularFidoNextelSprint PCST-MobileVerizonManufacturers EricssonNokiaMotorolaCountry Specific Australian GroupUK GroupRelated Topics PocketPCPalmMore Topics ... |
Cellular Phone Forum / Country Specific / Australian Group / August 2008Keating Irrelevant
Paul Keating is busy coming on radio stations today to trumpet such initiatives as dumping Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, encouraging Costello 'the nong' to go for the Liberals Leadership, and bragging about how he and Hawke reformed the Australian economy (utter bull-sh.t) and communications competition framework (ACCC/TIO etc). Has he forgotten that he was dumped from office and was one of the most hated PMs in history? The irrelevant dinosaur should not be given any airtime to spruik his bull-sh.t ideas. f.ck off Keating. Even your ugly Dutch bitch ex-wife told you to f.ck off. ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** Of course Mr Keating is still relevant. He was a courageous and innovative Treasurer. No one in the Liberal Party has ever been that. He was a Prime Minister who believed in social justice for all, not just for some. No one in the Liberal Party has ever been that. When Keating cuts to the character of Costello (or others) the Liberal Party would be well advised to swallow their unwarranted pride, STFU, and listen. He doesn't bullshit; he gives X-ray-level appraisals that are rarely proven wrong. The Lieberals dismiss him at their peril. Why are you a 'ex-liberal voter'? > Of course Mr Keating is still relevant. He was a courageous and > innovative Treasurer. No one in the Liberal Party has ever been that. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > The Lieberals dismiss him at their peril. > Why are you a 'ex-liberal voter'? He never was, just a liar and paid Labor Party shrill. In aus.politics,aus.comms,aus.comms.mobile,aus.general,aus.legal On Tue, 26 >> Why are you a 'ex-liberal voter'? > > He never was, just a liar and paid Labor Party shrill. What is a "shrill"?  SignatureThe similarities between people makes communication possible, The differences between them make it necessary. > Why are you a 'ex-liberal voter'? In a word, WorkChoices. It was the Lieberal Party's means to install fascism in this country. Now before anyone goes running off crying "alarmist", think about the agenda behind the policy ... By destroying workers' unions, the Labor Party itself would have been weakened, being that that organisation receives a large part of its funding from the union movement. With a financially crippled Labor Party, the Lieberals would have had almost uncontested power in this country. Scary when you consider that the Liberal Party is anything but "liberal". They are the most ultra right wing mainstream party in living memory. Say whatever you like about the Labor Party, we need at least two strong parties to keep each other performing at their best. A weakened Labor Party would have resulted in bad government by the Lieberals, to say the least. The other aspect of SerfChoices was the attack on the pay and conditions of workers, especially the young and those with little bargaining position. I've got kids who will be in the workforce one day. The thought of them being victimised by employers who'd had all the power handed to them on a platter by their party, the Lieberal Party, made my blood boil. All who voted for the Lieberals in the last election, whether they were aware of it or not, actually voted for pay and condition losses for their own kids and grandkids. There's a lot of greedy arseholes out there who vote for the Lieberals because laws like SerfChoices make it easy for these AHs to exploit others. In voting to make it easier to exploit others, they are also voting to make it easier for THEIR OWN CHILDREN and grandchildren to be exploited. I can't get my head around that, how people could vote to put their own descendants in a position of powerless defencelessness. I'm convinced the Lieberals still hold to a WorkChoices agenda. Oh, they don't _call_ it that any more but their agenda is the same: to destroy unions, destroy the Labor Party, and drive down the pay and conditions of employees. I want a better country for my children than one with third world working conditions, dominated by a single monolithic political party. They can go to hell. > GerantSmythe <ger...@hello.com> wrote >> Why are you a 'ex-liberal voter'? > In a word, WorkChoices. It was the Lieberal Party's means to install fascism in this country. You wouldnt know what real fascism was if it bit you on your lard arse. > Now before anyone goes running off crying "alarmist", think about the agenda behind the policy ... It was obvious what the agenda is, change the detail of employment conditions of both the employer and the employee wanted to do that. > By destroying workers' unions, It wouldnt have destroyed w.nker's unions, they have been rejected by the absolute vast bulk of the workforce for a hell of a long time now. > the Labor Party itself would have been weakened, Too bad. > being that that organisation receives a large part of its funding from the union movement. Too bad. > With a financially crippled Labor Party, You aint established that work choices would financially cripple the labor party any more than continuing falling union membership has already done. > the Lieberals would have had almost uncontested power in this country. Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have never ever had a f.cking clue about anything at all, ever. Labor didnt win the last election due to the money that any unions ever contributed to the labor party. > Scary when you consider that the Liberal Party is anything but "liberal". > They are the most ultra right wing mainstream party in living memory. Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have never ever had a f.cking clue about anything at all, ever. So stupid that it doesnt even remember One Notion or the Nats. > Say whatever you like about the Labor Party, we need at least > two strong parties to keep each other performing at their best. And Work Choices wouldnt have changed that. > A weakened Labor Party would have resulted in bad government by the Lieberals, to say the least. How odd that they delivered the lowest unemployment rate in 30 years and by far the biggest surpluses in even longer. > The other aspect of SerfChoices was the attack on the pay and conditions > of workers, especially the young and those with little bargaining position. They've got plenty of bargaining position with an unemployment rate of 4.x%, fool. > I've got kids who will be in the workforce one day. Time for retrospective abortions for them, before they get to breed. > The thought of them being victimised by employers > who'd had all the power handed to them on a platter > by their party, the Lieberal Party, made my blood boil. Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have never ever had a f.cking clue about anything at all, ever. > All who voted for the Lieberals in the last election, whether > they were aware of it or not, actually voted for pay and > condition losses for their own kids and grandkids. Bare faced pig ignorant lie. Have fun explaining how come those on individual contracts under Work Choices have pay and conditions that leave those on the award for dead in the WA mining industry. > There's a lot of greedy arseholes out there who vote for the Lieberals because > laws like SerfChoices make it easy for these AHs to exploit others. f.ck all of those compared with the total voters, cretin. > In voting to make it easier to exploit others, they are also voting to make > it easier for THEIR OWN CHILDREN and grandchildren to be exploited. Maybe they had enough of a clue to have noticed that they themselves were getting much better wages and conditions than the award, fuckwit. > I can't get my head around that, how people could vote to put > their own descendants in a position of powerless defencelessness. Might just be because they werent doing anything like that. > I'm convinced the Lieberals still hold to a WorkChoices agenda. You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly irrelevant. What you might or might not be stupid enough to be convinced about in spades. > Oh, they don't _call_ it that any more but their agenda > is the same: to destroy unions, destroy the Labor Party, > and drive down the pay and conditions of employees. Bare faced pig ignorant lie. Have fun explaining how come those on individual contracts under Work Choices have pay and conditions that leave those on the award for dead in the WA mining industry. > I want a better country for my children than one with third world working conditions, You wouldnt know what real third world working conditions were if they bit you on your lard arse. > dominated by a single monolithic political party. So stupid that it hasnt even noticed that that wouldnt happen even if the labor party imploded completely. > They can go to hell. They make an obscene gesture in the general direction of fools like you. > >> Why are you a 'ex-liberal voter'? > > In a word, WorkChoices. It was the Lieberal Party's means to install fascism in this country. > > You wouldnt know what real fascism was if it bit you on your lard arse. For a start, retard, mind your own f.cking business. You don't have a f.cking clue what I do and don't know. > > Now before anyone goes running off crying "alarmist", think about the agenda behind the policy ... > > It was obvious what the agenda is, change the detail of employment > conditions of both the employer and the employee wanted to do that. Write in English, dumbcunt. They aren't "agreements". It's "sign this, or f.ck off." They aren't "individual" either. They were often photocopied and passed around for everyone to sign. > > By destroying workers' unions, > > It wouldnt have destroyed w.nker's unions, they have been rejected > by the absolute vast bulk of the workforce for a hell of a long time now. The agenda was to legislate unions into impotence. Kill them off. Wouldn't you love that? As a Liberal I bet you would love to see workers denied organised advocacy. Easier to screw them that way. > > the Labor Party itself would have been weakened, > > Too bad. See you've missed the f.cking point because you rushed in to critique a sentence before reading what the subsequent sentences say. > > being that that organisation receives a large part of its funding from the union movement. > > Too bad. Dumbcunt. > > With a financially crippled Labor Party, > > You aint established that work choices would financially cripple the labor > party any more than continuing falling union membership has already done. Oh, I ain't eh? Ain't?? Actually I have and did. Being an inbred RWF you missed the point. > > the Lieberals would have had almost uncontested power in this country. > > Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have never ever had a f.cking clue about anything at all, ever. You're a stupid RWA aren't you. If you attack a political party's primary revenue source (in this case, workers' unions), you limit the ability of the party to campaign, to promote their policies, to contest elections. In Australia we have seen how vulnerable and precarious is the existence of political parties. Witness the demise of the Democrats, and before that the fizzling out of One Nation. Aussies are not (compared to other countries) big participators or contributors to political activity. Once a party starts to go down (or is sabotaged by a weapon like SerfChoices), its descent might be irreversible). A diminished Labor Party might have been the start of an irreversible downward spiral. Leading, if we are to recognise Howard’s rat-cunning, to a situation of Liberal hegemony less and less impeded by a Labor opposition. > Labor didnt win the last election due to the money > that any unions ever contributed to the labor party. What is your point in saying that? Are you: a) lying; b) deluded; or c) trying to be funny? The union campaign against FascistChoices was one of the main reasons the Lieberal Party went down. You must be really dumb if you aren't aware of that. And the ACTU, in its campaign against SerfChoices, spent less thatn 15% of what the Lieberal government spent promoting it. Only the Lieberals didn't use THEIR OWN money to promote their party's policy. They used PUBLIC money, compulsorily acquired through taxation. > > Scary when you consider that the Liberal Party is anything but "liberal". > > They are the most ultra right wing mainstream party in living memory. > > Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have never ever had a f.cking clue about anything at all, ever. OK fuckwit, tell me of a further right wing mainstream party (by mainstream I mean "in government") in Australia. Howard himself said he was "the most conservative leader the Liberal Party had ever had". SerfChoices was the most extreme IR legislation in the western world. > So stupid that it doesnt even remember One Notion or the Nats. One Nation are not mainstream. Where are they now? f.cked. Fascist Tony Abbott ran Pauline Hanson into jail, remember? The Nationals are right wing in social policy, but they've always got their hand out to the government for money. Privatise the profits; socialise the losses. The agrarian socialists! > > Say whatever you like about the Labor Party, we need at least > > two strong parties to keep each other performing at their best. > > And Work Choices wouldnt have changed that. WorkChoices agenda was to kill unions and thus debilitate the Labor Party, depleting its ability to promote policies and contest elections. How many times have I got to explain this to you? > > A weakened Labor Party would have resulted in bad government by the Lieberals, to say the least. > > How odd that they delivered the lowest unemployment rate > in 30 years and by far the biggest surpluses in even longer. Stupid. I was talking about the medium-to-long term of SerfChoices. That means FUTURE, fuckwit, not what has already happened. Strong Oppositions make for good government. Over time SerfChoices would have weakened the Labor Party, thus making for poor government. By the way, for your information Rudd Labor has delivered lower unemployment than at any time under Howard-Costello. > > The other aspect of SerfChoices was the attack on the pay and conditions > > of workers, especially the young and those with little bargaining position. > > They've got plenty of bargaining position with an unemployment rate of 4.x%, fool. Tell that to the employees who lost pay and conditions, and to those subjected to executive tyranny courtesy of SerfChoices. Look, if you want to apologise for SerfChoices, go right ahead, misfit. It shows how out of touch and extreme you LIEberals are. > > I've got kids who will be in the workforce one day. > > Time for retrospective abortions for them, before they get to breed. You are a Liberal arsehole. > > The thought of them being victimised by employers > > who'd had all the power handed to them on a platter > > by their party, the Lieberal Party, made my blood boil. > > Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have never ever had a f.cking clue about anything at all, ever. What are you thanking me for? I was answering the question some other poster asked. > > All who voted for the Lieberals in the last election, whether > > they were aware of it or not, actually voted for pay and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > on individual contracts under Work Choices have pay and conditions > that leave those on the award for dead in the WA mining industry. The mining workers are in the minority of those on AWAs. > > There's a lot of greedy arseholes out there who vote for the Lieberals because > > laws like SerfChoices make it easy for these AHs to exploit others. > > f.ck all of those compared with the total voters, cretin. I repeat: There's a lot of greedy arseholes out there who vote for the Lieberals because laws like SerfChoices make it easy for these AHs to exploit others. > > In voting to make it easier to exploit others, they are also voting to make > > it easier for THEIR OWN CHILDREN and grandchildren to be exploited. > > Maybe they had enough of a clue to have noticed that they themselves > were getting much better wages and conditions than the award, fuckwit. Well, fuckwit, the great majority of AWAs stripped away conditions such as overtime, penalty payments and holiday loading. Read up on it and stop making sh.t up. > > I can't get my head around that, how people could vote to put > > their own descendants in a position of powerless defencelessness. > > Might just be because they werent doing anything like that. You vote for the LIeberals. You therefore vote to cut the throats of your children and grandchildren in the workplace. A Liberal arsehole. > > I'm convinced the Lieberals still hold to a WorkChoices agenda. > > You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly irrelevant. Ah, but I won't be irrelevant, ignorant, AND an arsehole. > What you might or might not be stupid enough to be convinced about in spades. You are the last person who should be throwing around the word "stupid". > > Oh, they don't _call_ it that any more but their agenda > > is the same: to destroy unions, destroy the Labor Party, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > on individual contracts under Work Choices have pay and conditions > that leave those on the award for dead in the WA mining industry. Why do you call yourself Speed when you're so f.cking slow? I already told you, those miners in WA are the minority of AWA signers. f.ck, how many times have I got to explain this? > > I want a better country for my children than one with third world working conditions, > > You wouldnt know what real third world working conditions were if they bit you on your lard arse. You're a dumb Liberal arsehole and an apologist for industrial relations extremism. But keep going, it will lose you c.nts election after election. > > dominated by a single monolithic political party. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > They make an obscene gesture in the general direction of fools like you. Reciprocated. Now f.ck off. > Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote >>> GerantSmythe <ger...@hello.com> wrote >>>> Why are you a 'ex-liberal voter'? >>> In a word, WorkChoices. It was the Lieberal Party's means to install fascism in this country. >> You wouldnt know what real fascism was if it bit you on your lard arse. > For a start, retard, mind your own f.cking business. Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have never ever had a f.cking clue about what usenet is actually about. Anything else at all, either. > You don't have a f.cking clue what I do and don't know. Everyone can see for themselves that you wouldnt know what real fascism was if it bit you on your lard arse. >>> Now before anyone goes running off crying "alarmist", >>> think about the agenda behind the policy ... >> It was obvious what the agenda is, change the detail of employment >> conditions if both the employer and the employee wanted to do that. > Write in English, dumbcunt. Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag. > They aren't "agreements". It's "sign this, or f.ck off." How odd that so many in the WA mining industry were happy to sign, fuckwit. > They aren't "individual" either. They were often photocopied and passed around for everyone to sign. Like that or lump it, fuckwit. >>> By destroying workers' unions, >> It wouldnt have destroyed w.nker's unions, they have been rejected >> by the absolute vast bulk of the workforce for a hell of a long time now. > The agenda was to legislate unions into impotence. Kill them off. They have been rejected by the absolute vast bulk of the workforce for a hell of a long time now. > Wouldn't you love that? I'm happy that they have been rejected by the absolute vast bulk of the workforce for a hell of a long time now. > As a Liberal I bet you would love to see workers denied organised advocacy. No one was denying them that. They have been rejected by the absolute vast bulk of the workforce for a hell of a long time now. The real workers have voted with their wallets. The unions have got the obscene gesture the deserve from almost all of them for hell of a long time now. > Easier to screw them that way. How odd that they have been rejected by the absolute vast bulk of the workforce for a hell of a long time now. >>> the Labor Party itself would have been weakened, >> Too bad. > See you've missed the f.cking point because you rushed in to critique > a sentence before reading what the subsequent sentences say. Obvious lie. >>> being that that organisation receives a large part of its funding from the union movement. >> Too bad. > Dumbcunt. Wota stunningly rational line of argument you have there, child. >>> With a financially crippled Labor Party, >> You aint established that work choices would financially cripple the labor >> party any more than continuing falling union membership has already done. > Oh, I ain't eh? Ain't?? Pathetic. > Actually I have and did. Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys, child. > Being an inbred RWF you missed the point. Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys, child. >>> the Lieberals would have had almost uncontested power in this country. >> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have >> never ever had a f.cking clue about anything at all, ever. > You're a stupid RWA aren't you. Nope. > If you attack a political party's primary revenue source (in this case, workers' unions), How odd that they have been rejected by the absolute vast bulk of the workforce for a hell of a long time now. > you limit the ability of the party to campaign, to promote their policies, to contest elections. Tell that to the absolute vast bulk of the workforce. They clearly dont give a flying red f.ck about that. > In Australia we have seen how vulnerable and precarious is the existence of political parties. Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys, child. > Witness the demise of the Democrats, They did footshot after footshot after footshot and even the stupidest voter had noticed that they were WAY past their useby date. You get to like that or lump it. > and before that the fizzling out of One Nation. They did footshot after footshot after footshot and even the stupidest voter had noticed that they were WAY past their useby date. You get to like that or lump it. > Aussies are not (compared to other countries) big > participators or contributors to political activity. You get to like that or lump it. > Once a party starts to go down (or is sabotaged by a weapon > like SerfChoices), its descent might be irreversible). Tell that to the absolute vast bulk of the workforce. They clearly dont give a flying red f.ck about that. You get to like that or lump it. > A diminished Labor Party might have been the start of an irreversible downward spiral. Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have never ever had a f.cking clue about anything at all, ever. > Leading, if we are to recognise Howard’s rat-cunning, to a situation > of Liberal hegemony less and less impeded by a Labor opposition. How odd that when the absolute vast bulk of the workforce have decided that unions are WAY past their useby date, that they gave Howard's govt the bums rush. >> Labor didnt win the last election due to the money >> that any unions ever contributed to the labor party. > What is your point in saying that? Just rubbing your stupid nose in the fact that you have never ever had a f.cking clue about anything at all, ever. > Are you: a) lying; b) deluded; or c) trying to be funny? Just rubbing your stupid nose in the fact that you have never ever had a f.cking clue about anything at all, ever. > The union campaign against FascistChoices was one of the main reasons the Lieberal Party went down. Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys, child. They'd actually decided that Howard had passed his useby date and that the risk with the dud was minimal given that the economy was booming. It had absolutely nothing to do with the lies those union clowns spewed. If the workforce had bought those union lies, they would have signed up for the union and not even one of them was actually that stupid. > You must be really dumb if you aren't aware of that. Have fun explaining how come no one signed up for a union. > And the ACTU, in its campaign against SerfChoices, spent less > thatn 15% of what the Lieberal government spent promoting it. The voters didnt give a flying red f.ck about that sh.t. > Only the Lieberals didn't use THEIR OWN money to promote their party's > policy. They used PUBLIC money, compulsorily acquired through taxation. Corse the dud never ever does anything like that, eh ? >>> Scary when you consider that the Liberal Party is anything but "liberal". >>> They are the most ultra right wing mainstream party in living memory. >> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have >> never ever had a f.cking clue about anything at all, ever. > OK fuckwit, tell me of a further right wing mainstream party > (by mainstream I mean "in government") in Australia. The Nats, fuckwit. > Howard himself said he was "the most conservative leader the Liberal Party had ever had". You're lying, as always. > SerfChoices was the most extreme IR legislation in the western world. You're lying, as always. >> So stupid that it doesnt even remember One Notion or the Nats. > One Nation are not mainstream. Pathetic. > Where are they now? f.cked. Fascist Tony Abbott ran Pauline Hanson into jail, remember? You wouldnt know what a real fascist was if it bit you on your lard arse. > The Nationals are right wing in social policy, Funny that. > but they've always got their hand out to the government for money. Corse no one else ever does anything like that, eh ? > Privatise the profits; socialise the losses. Bet you cant cite even a single example of that last. > The agrarian socialists! You wouldnt know what a real agrarian socialist was if it bit you on your lard arse. >>> Say whatever you like about the Labor Party, we need at least >>> two strong parties to keep each other performing at their best. >> And Work Choices wouldnt have changed that. > WorkChoices agenda was to kill unions and thus debilitate the Labor > Party, depleting its ability to promote policies and contest elections. How odd that that didnt actually happen when the absolute vast bulk of the workforce made an obscene gesture in the general direction of all unions. > How many times have I got to explain this to you? You can keep lying till the cows come home child, changes absolutely nothing at all. >>> A weakened Labor Party would have resulted in bad government by the Lieberals, to say the least. >> How odd that they delivered the lowest unemployment rate >> in 30 years and by far the biggest surpluses in even longer. > Stupid. Fuckwit. > I was talking about the medium-to-long term of SerfChoices. You were lying, as always. > That means FUTURE, fuckwit, not what has already happened. The big difference is that your lies about what will happen are always just your lies. What they have actually done is a different matter entirely. > Strong Oppositions make for good government. The lowest unemployment rate in 30 years and by far the biggest surpluses in even longer didnt have a damned thing to do with the opposition, fuckwit child. > Over time SerfChoices would have weakened the Labor Party, How odd that that didnt actually happen when the absolute vast bulk of the workforce made an obscene gesture in the general direction of all unions. Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed that they got elected anyway. > thus making for poor government. How odd that that didnt actually happen when the absolute vast bulk of the workforce made an obscene gesture in the general direction of all unions. Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed that they got elected anyway. > By the way, for your information Rudd Labor has delivered > lower unemployment than at any time under Howard-Costello. Like hell they did. Nothing they have done policy wise has had any effect what so ever on the unemployment rate, liar. >>> The other aspect of SerfChoices was the attack on the pay and conditions >>> of workers, especially the young and those with little bargaining position. >> They've got plenty of bargaining position with an unemployment rate of 4.x%, fool. > Tell that to the employees who lost pay and conditions, Tell that to those in the WA mining industry who didnt. > and to those subjected to executive tyranny courtesy of SerfChoices. You wouldnt know what executive tyranny was if it bit you on your lard arse. > Look, if you want to apologise for SerfChoices, go right ahead, Dont need to. The WA mining industry workforce clearly like it, fuckwit. > It shows how out of touch and extreme you LIEberals are. The WA mining industry workforce clearly like it, fuckwit. >>> I've got kids who will be in the workforce one day. >> Time for retrospective abortions for them, before they get to breed. > You are a Liberal arsehole. Is this where I'm sposed to curl up and die, child ? >>> The thought of them being victimised by employers >>> who'd had all the power handed to them on a platter >>> by their party, the Lieberal Party, made my blood boil. >> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have >> never ever had a f.cking clue about anything at all, ever. > What are you thanking me for? That completely superfluous proof that you have never ever had a f.cking clue about anything at all, ever, fuckwit. > I was answering the question some other poster asked. You quite sure you aint one of those rocket scientist fuckwit children ? >>> All who voted for the Lieberals in the last election, whether >>> they were aware of it or not, actually voted for pay and >>> condition losses for their own kids and grandkids. >> Bare faced pig ignorant lie. Have fun explaining how come those >> on individual contracts under Work Choices have pay and conditions >> that leave those on the award for dead in the WA mining industry. > The mining workers are in the minority of those on AWAs. Irrelevant to your bare faced lie. >>> There's a lot of greedy arseholes out there who vote for the Lieberals >>> because laws like SerfChoices make it easy for these AHs to exploit others. >> f.ck all of those compared with the total voters, cretin. > I repeat: You can respew your lies till the cows come home child, changes absolutely nothing at all. >>> In voting to make it easier to exploit others, they are also voting to make >>> it easier for THEIR OWN CHILDREN and grandchildren to be exploited. >> Maybe they had enough of a clue to have noticed that they themselves >> were getting much better wages and conditions than the award, fuckwit. > Well, fuckwit, the great majority of AWAs stripped away conditions > such as overtime, penalty payments and holiday loading. And so they should. Pity about the increased wages too, liar. >>> I can't get my head around that, how people could vote to put >>> their own descendants in a position of powerless defencelessness. >> Might just be because they werent doing anything like that. > You vote for the LIeberals. I dont even get to vote for them, fuckwit. > You therefore vote to cut the throats of your > children and grandchildren in the workplace. Just more of your pathological lying. >>> I'm convinced the Lieberals still hold to a WorkChoices agenda. >> You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly irrelevant. > Ah, but I won't be irrelevant, ignorant, AND an arsehole. Wrong, as always. >> What you might or might not be stupid enough to be convinced about in spades. > You are the last person who should be throwing around the word "stupid". Is this where I'm sposed to curl up and die, child ? >>> Oh, they don't _call_ it that any more but their agenda >>> is the same: to destroy unions, destroy the Labor Party, >>> and drive down the pay and conditions of employees. >> Bare faced pig ignorant lie. Have fun explaining how come those >> on individual contracts under Work Choices have pay and conditions >> that leave those on the award for dead in the WA mining industry. > Why do you call yourself Speed when you're so f.cking slow? Is this where I'm sposed to curl up and die, child ? > I already told you, those miners in WA are the minority of AWA signers. Pity about all the rest that also do a lot better under their AWA than the award, fuckwit. > f.ck, how many times have I got to explain this? You can respew your sh.t till the cows come home child, everyone can see right thru it. >>> I want a better country for my children than one with third world working conditions, >> You wouldnt know what real third world working conditions were if they bit you on your lard arse. > You're a dumb Liberal arsehole and an apologist for industrial relations extremism. Is this where I'm sposed to curl up and die, child ? > But keep going, it will lose you c.nts election after election. Nothing I say will make the slightest difference to any election, child. >>> dominated by a single monolithic political party. >> So stupid that it hasnt even noticed that that wouldnt >> happen even if the labor party imploded completely. >>> They can go to hell. >> They make an obscene gesture in the general direction of fools like you. > Reciprocated. Bet that will have them pouring from their windows like lemming as soon as they read your sh.t, child. > >> ex_liberal_voter <ex_liberal_vo...@yahoo.com.au> wrote > >>>> Why are you a 'ex-liberal voter'? [quoted text clipped - 263 lines] > > read more » Now listen here, you dumb scum. I'm not going to give a sentence-by- sentence response to YOUR sentence-by-sentence critique of MY post that answered the original question put by ANOTHER poster. I've already given you more time than you deserve. You can take your IR extremism and your trash-heap Lieberal manners and shove it up your tight arse, you despicable Liberal scum. Go and tell your children / grandchildren how you enthusiastically vote to cut their throats in the workplace, and tell them how you will never vote any other way. Low-down anti-Australian Liberal scum. Some gutless fuckwit desperately cowering behind ex_liberal_voter <ex_liberal_voter@yahoo.com.au> desperately attempted to bullshit and lie its way out of its predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always. > Some gutless fuckwit desperately cowering behind > ex_liberal_voter <ex_liberal_vo...@yahoo.com.au> > desperately attempted to bullshit and lie its way out of its > predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always. There is no "predicament", fuckwit, except that of your own making. Someone asked me a question. I answered. You butted in uninvited with a sentence-by-sentence "critique" of my answer. I gave you a sentence- by-sentence response to your sentence-by-sentence "critique". You gave a sentence-by-sentence response to my sentence-by-sentence response to your sentence-by-sentence critique of my answer to another poster. And now here you are fishing for a sentence-by-sentence response to your sentence-by-sentence response to my sentence-by-sentence response to your sentence-by-sentence critique of my answer to another poster. Well go to hell. I can't put it clearer than that. Go to hell. You are an uninformed lying IR extremist arsehole who said to a stranger (me) their kids should be retrospectively aborted to prevent them breeding. Despicable Lieberal scum. Go and tell your own kids how you enthusiastically vote (Lieberal) for their throats to be cut in the workplace. > You are an uninformed lying IR extremist arsehole who said to a > stranger (me) their kids should be retrospectively aborted to prevent > them breeding. Despicable Lieberal scum. Go and tell your own kids how > you enthusiastically vote (Lieberal) for their throats to be cut in > the workplace. Obviously you haven't come across "Our Roddles" (Rod Speed) in a ng before? On Aug 27, 10:16 am, Polly the Parrot <flatulantdi...@deadspam.com> wrote: > Obviously you haven't come across "Our Roddles" (Rod Speed) in a ng before? Obviously you have. Looks like a troll, judging from my flame-filled "reaction". Christ, I feel like I need a shower after that. "Our Roddles" eh? I'd be trying to disown him, I were you ... > On Aug 27, 10:16 am, Polly the Parrot <flatulantdi...@deadspam.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > "Our Roddles" eh? I'd be trying to disown him, I were you ... Please apply your spell-checker. The word is "drown". Some gutless fuckwit desperately cowering behind ex_liberal_voter <ex_liberal_voter@yahoo.com.au> desperately attempted to bullshit and lie its way out of its predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always. Some gutless fuckwit desperately cowering behind ex_liberal_voter <ex_liberal_voter@yahoo.com.au> desperately attempted to bullshit and lie its way out of its predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always. In aus.politics,aus.comms,aus.comms.mobile,aus.general,aus.legal On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 00:08:09 +0800, GerantSmythe top posted: > Why are you a 'ex-liberal voter'? Who are you talking to? SignatureThe similarities between people makes communication possible, The differences between them make it necessary. > Paul Keating is busy coming on radio stations today to trumpet such > initiatives as dumping Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, encouraging > Costello 'the nong' to go for the Liberals Leadership, and bragging > about how he and Hawke reformed the Australian economy (utter > bull-sh.t) and communications competition framework (ACCC/TIO etc). And fools like you are actually stupid enough to listen to his sh.t. > Has he forgotten that he was dumped from office Unlikely. > and was one of the most hated PMs in history? Unlikely. > The irrelevant dinosaur should not be given any airtime to spruik his bull-sh.t ideas. That will continue while ever fools like you continue to listen when they do that. > f.ck off Keating. Even your ugly Dutch bitch ex-wife told you to f.ck off. > Paul Keating is busy coming on radio stations today to trumpet such > initiatives as dumping Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, encouraging [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > f.ck off Keating. Even your ugly Dutch bitch ex-wife told you to f.ck off. Boy was she fuggy > ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** >> Boy was she fuggy >> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** Least her surname wasn't "Anus" >>> Boy was she fuggy >>> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** >> > Least her surname wasn't "Anus" What do you mean by that?. >>>> Boy was she fuggy >>>> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** >>> >> Least her surname wasn't "Anus" >> > What do you mean by that?. It's a reference to Beazley's wife. >Paul Keating is busy coming on radio stations today to trumpet such >initiatives as dumping Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, encouraging Costello [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Has he forgotten that he was dumped from office and was one of the most >hated PMs in history? Q: Only 2 PMs have been voted out of their electorate, who were the 2 conservative f.ckers? :P > The irrelevant dinosaur should not be given any airtime to spruik his bull-sh.t ideas. > >f.ck off Keating. Even your ugly Dutch bitch ex-wife told you to f.ck off. > >** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** > Paul Keating is busy coming on radio stations today to trumpet such > initiatives as 9% superannuation for all Australians (would have been 15%, enabling the baby boomers to retire in comfort, if Highrate Howard and Comatose Costello hadn't stuffed it! B^p ) Most significant Economic reform of the Australian financial system in the post-war era! APEC, the regional economic foundation of our resource wealth 4% growth bequeathed to HighRate Howard and Comatose Costello's do-nothing-for-a-decade government! > encouraging Costello 'the nong' You are so right, he is a f.cking NONG! > to go for the Liberals Leadership, Nah, he's too gutless! Even His mates say so - 'No Balls!" B^D > and bragging about how he and Hawke reformed the Australian economy Too bad you can't find a single structural change Costello can brag about! BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAA In ten years he achieved nothing of significance but just sat on his arse, doing what Howard, a COMPLETE NONENTITY, told him! > Has he forgotten that he was dumped from office Howard will never forget not only being unceremoniously dumped from office but TIPPED OUT OF HIS OWN f.cking SEAT!!! B^D By an ex-ABC reporter!!! A GIRL! B^D BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAA! Keating is already remembered for his economic reforms, Costello is just know as a SOOK! Of course the ALP wants him to lead the Lieberals, because EVEN HIS LIEBERAL MATES ADMIT HE HAS NO BALLS!!!!! BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAA! "'No balls' Costello can't lead: Hewson" - Streem 1/8/2008 "Peter Costello lacks the courage to challenge Brendan Nelson for the Liberal Leadership, a former Liberal leader says. John Hewson says recent media coverage over Mr Costello's possible tilt at the leadership is pointless, because he lacks "the balls" to challenge. Dr Hewson told Sky News it was a pointless argument. "When I look back at Peter's career he's never had the balls to challenge, or make a move, or actually move to get the job, in circumstances where he could have got it," he said. http://www.getsomenuts.com.au/MakeItPersonal/view.php?id=8828 BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAAAA "GET SOME NUTS!" Mr T. This will play long after he loses the next election! ;-) --------- Australia not immune from US recession - Peter Costello 20/11/2007 "Mr Costello said a report by global investment bank Goldman Sachs, which found the impact of the US mortgage crisis could be far greater than thought, posed risks to Australia." Can't be Rudd's fault then, they knew the meltdown was coming back in '07, and they knew it would be a TSUNAMI: "The report suggests investors may need to cut back lending by $US2 trillion." Costello hadn't seen it coming, or had been lying; "Mr Costello, who just months ago claimed Australia's economy was strong enough to withstand the impact of a US recession, has now changed his tune. He said if US banks start withdrawing "huge sums of money", we could see further pressure on interest rates as people compete for funds. "They are saying that this could lead to a downturn in the world's largest economy," he told radio 3AW. Mr Costello said if this happened, domestic lenders would lose money, Australian institutions would charge higher lending rates to recoup higher borrowing costs, and exchange-rate sensitivity would affect Australia's competitiveness. "This is a very, very big risk out in the international economy at the moment," he said. "And believe me, Australia will not be immune. It will take a lot of management to get us through this." Mr Costello said periods of strong growth in Australia had always ended in inflation and high interest rates" - The Age 20/11/2007 --------- > Paul Keating is busy coming on radio stations today to trumpet such > initiatives as dumping Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, encouraging [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** I like him now. He's doing a good the tories rattled, even if he is "Irrelevant". SignatureA: Top posters Q: What's the most annoying thing on usenet "Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives."- John Stuart Mill -- A: Top posters Q: What's the most annoying thing on usenet "Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives."- John Stuart Mill |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.