- Dec 29, 2000
- 25,485
- 23,829
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Originally posted by MGREG
If he resorts to violence for one comment, imagine what manner of stupid things he will do if he is PM.
Perhaps lie to the Australian public? Sorry, that was JWH.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Originally posted by MGREG
If he resorts to violence for one comment, imagine what manner of stupid things he will do if he is PM.
Originally posted by Goldenblue
Interesting poll on MSN - Nine
Are you concerned by violent events in Mark Latham's past?
Yes: 1506
No: 1841
I voted yes, but to be fair, the story is not out yet.
Originally posted by kirky
Perhaps lie to the Australian public? Sorry, that was JWH.
Originally posted by MillerCHF
You and I both hoped Melbourne would do well this year (I'm presuming you also did because you're apparently a Dees supporter) despite the fact nobody believed it would happen.
John Howard, like the Melbourne Football Club, is a national treasure and symbolises what it is to be an Australian. Therefore he will prevail.
Also G-d is on Mr Howard's side because he stands for all that is good in the world.
And no matter how left you are, do you really want a PM with man-boobs?
Originally posted by MGREG
That is when Labor are at their bravest, like all lefties.
When it is an even fight they cower in their little grovelholes and point.
Latham is about to be exposed as the thug he is. Those women abuse ads arent on now for nothing.
And how he tried to explain away the assault today was absolutely disgusting and unbecoming of anyone wanting to achieve the highest elected public office.
Latham is a disgrace to Australian politics.
It is going to be one GREAT election night!
Three more years for you Labor sucks to complain. BEAUTIFUL!
Originally posted by Tim56
Assuming it is true, as you have, I would like ask what merit there is in king hitting a bloke 20 years older than you?
Originally posted by Goldenblue
Interesting poll on MSN - Nine
Are you concerned by violent events in Mark Latham's past?
Yes: 1506
No: 1841
I voted yes, but to be fair, the story is not out yet.
Originally posted by MGREG
And Keating and Hawke. No Latham will be a lot worse than that. More on a par with Whitlam.
Originally posted by demon_dave
I'm sure you did, but I wonder if they should take a poll if people are concerned with Howard being the biggest liar in politics,
yes: 9765
no:4, mgreg,tim56,pseudjane and yourself
or another poll on who is the ugliest little man(emphasis on the LITTLE & UGLY) in politics
Howard by a landslide 20,000,000 to 4
Originally posted by Tim56
Assuming it is true, as you have, I would like ask what merit there is in king hitting a bloke 20 years older than you?
Originally posted by FuManchu
You put your hands on me aggresively I don't care if you're Methusela, I give it back to you with interest.
Its called standing up for yourself, a strange concept to todays do gooders, I know.
Originally posted by MGREG
Actually it is a good response from Boofhead, but unfortunately we dont live in the Stone Age anymore.
People we look up to are more disciplined than that. He should be benched permanently.
Ah, Boofhead Latham. A man born many thousands of years after his time.
Originally posted by 1jasonoz
Howard wouldn't hit a person, he would re- issue the balaclava's to his henchmen, unchain the dogs, then drag you before the courts to take your house under the secondary boycott provisions of the trade practices act, for trying to stand up to keep your job.
Originally posted by FuManchu
You'd be the bloke who'd go crying to mum after copping a few, rather than standing up for yourself, I take it.
If someone wants to impose themselves physically on someone else, then they shouldn't complain when someone deals with it physically.
Originally posted by MGREG
Yeah real intelligent taking the Vandenberg option.
Why isnt he playing at the moment?
Latham is a dumb.ar.se and if he debates issues and solves problems by punching people out you can see ehy his first wife left him.
He cant manage his own family he is going to mange the country?
SHHHEEESH..
Nuff said.
Originally posted by MGREG
Oh boo hoo.
If it ends up putting a trade unionist in jail, how can you say its wrong?
Labor just do it to themselves in branch fights like at Maribyrnong or wherever it is.
Now that is SERIOUSLY funny stuff. Labor people sending bullets in the mail to their fellow membes with their (the recepient's) name on it.
These idiots so it to themselves.
Uncultured bully boys.
If it ends up putting a trade unionist in jail, how can you say its wrong?
Originally posted by 1jasonoz
So you agree that what i posted above is ok, even if they support a company that breaks the law?
This bit got me;
Please explain what you mean by the above statement. My understanding of what you have said is you don't really care what happens, as long as a member of a union goes to jail your ok? Should we remove the name Simpson and his Donkey from the History books then, or what about the last Tasmanian Anzac who died, remove his name from the books for being a unionist alongside Simpson? Also should Simpson have been arrested and deported for being not being an Australian Citizen. Should he have been locked up in jail, and sent back to the UK?
Also do you think it is ok to have secondary boycott laws that can cause an employee to lose their house, yet don't apply to companies that cause other companies to lose money due to them breaking the law?
Originally posted by MGREG
BOO HOO again.
Secondary boycotts are a typical disgusting union tactic to widen a dispute and hurt as many people as possible.
Typical selfish union b.astard pri.cks. Dont come with the sentimental bullcrap. Martin Bryant was a unionist too, Relevance? NIL.
Go suck on Halfpenny's d.ick. In its present state.
Originally posted by 1jasonoz
You haven't answered the question MGERM? To hard to face the truth? Answer the questions fool.
How are Secondary Boycotts a "typical disgusting union tactic to widen a dispute and hurt as many people as possible". Explain that please, and answer the question, why don't the same laws cover Employers who cause other companies to lose money through their actions in breaking the law?
Originally posted by MGREG
MGERM?
In that case, my response is blow it out of your ar.se union boy.
Unionists are the scum of the earth. Not the rank and file, but the Martin Kinghams and Norm Gallaghers of this world.
Thank God a lot of them are now dead. Jack Putty Nose Nicholls, what fine unionist he was.
They are just fronts for criminal activities such as the bulding unions.
Unions are slefish bas.*****. Go suck a big one Daisy you p.rick.