I think its a pretty nasty piece of work but really; little children fleeing persecution in detention centres, everything else is pretty secondary.
Well, ofcourse...I know that I don't want the government to know what a pervert I am >.>;;
way to contradict yourself there, considering all branches of liberalism are built on the ideas of these "quacks". I mean what did these quacks know, they just literally wrote the book on liberty. yeah you phail at being a liberal, you fail at being a social democrat, and you fail at being a socialist or even a communist.
Oh god I can't handle this liberty oratory anymore, I give up whatever yes, poor people should starve its their fault, whatever tear down the government, let gangs and pedophiles run free the market will lock the up for us or whatever. You aren't listening, theres no point, thinking is a task beyond you you read something you like and see no reason to critically engage with it. You're a dogmatist and discussions with people like you are worth nobodies time.
Hey let's decide upon the single most important issue facing us.
Not as such but I'm sure prioritizing isn't a new concept to you.
Prioritizing is not an issue here. This is just a discussion forum. We're not actually going to do anything.
They would be blocked because they contain refused classification (but legal) content, however.
Yeah the 10 minutes to circumvent the filter would be quite a hassle. But I see your point, its incredibly stupid, what more can really be said.
Thats what the present scheme would say will happen, even with a majority in the senate, this government would not enact the clean feed in its current form. It might be a feeler or just a crude, early stages model but it would fly in the face of all this governments tentative, moderate, softly softly instincts.
Most of these arguments come out of: "I'm gonna vote for Abbott because of the filter" "You'd swallow temporary protection visas and the pacific solution for a clean feed that won't even pass?" "Stop belittling the filter freedom hater."
The Greens executive does but the greens like to boast that their members aren't on a leash like the ALP and the coalition so some Greens(none with actual seats though) like Clive Hamilton support it.
Fair enough, its good to let individual candidates make up their own minds.
yeah because liberty is all about banishing all forms of government and letting criminals run free and the poor starve to death right. that insult is incredibly funny coming from you.
Squirting and small tits aren't illegal either but the government intends to restrict access to content featuring either of those things.
You know whats extraordinary? True story, I used to post on a different forum, predominately a sports one but with a few offbeat areas including a politics section. This was probably sometime during 2007; anyway because of my criticisms of the Howard government re pacific solution, Mohammad Haneef and my criticism of Bush and Gitmo most of the members kept telling me saying something I didn't quite understand back then being only 15 and all. That I was an idealistic civil libertarian which sounded great in theory but had no idea about the real world. Granted these were mostly xenophobic liberal voters the kind of which thought that a good muslim was an oxymoron but still, don't you find that a bit funny?
is that really a true story? are you sure you didn't fabricate some of the details to make it that much more compelling
Pretty much, it might be a bit unfair to say they were mostly xenophobic but they were certainly ready to believe that significant sacrifices needed to be made in the fight against terror.
