Send Message
Weather | Buy&Sell | Forums |  |
Weather | Buy & Sell | Gallery | Forums | |
Found it 
. It ought to be true!
www.hoax-slayer.com/gillard-lesbian-relationship-hoax.shtml
"Is the allegedly elected prime minister of the country I love and live in a lesbian, an athiest, or even a person with strong moral standards??" What..... Lesbians don't have morals? Athiests don't have Standards?. God ,imagine if Gillard was black? Can you imagine it, a black, lesbian, athiest, commy, liar, bitch !!!!!!!Cisco would have to book himself into some kind of redneck rehab center.
Personally I couldn't care less if she is homosexual or straight. Its her life and the only people affected by her sexuality are herself and her sexual partners.
What I am concerned about is we have a Prime Minister who has never had a real job in her life outside of politics or lobbying. She has never run a business. She has never broken a sweat in the course of a day's work. She is a prime example of the politicing class that overlords us, taking our money as we are too foolish in their eyes to spend it as wisely as they can. Abbott is no better.
Bring back the ruddinator, 
My keyboard doesnt have a stoop function, 
So I cant even type her name,
let alone comment,
Mr Log man sir, I will remind you that BETA always was a better system than VHS, so I'm not sure if that statement helps your point. 
Those who rabbited on about it being better were RIGHT.
We got shafted with an inferior system because we were bullied into it.
What I find fascinating about this is that the question is being raised at all
Australia like most western democracies is a representative democracy You elect
your representatives and then they wield enormous power over the country and its citizens until the next elections and noone seems to know whether the above article about the prime minister is true or not
In other words noone seems to know diddly squat about who is representing them what their values or agendas are or much else
Who cares... It doesn't matter if she is with man or woman... Whatever the case, she is f u c k e d...
Ouch, that's got to smart!!! Flysurfer you can get some cream at the chemist to rub on yer ass after that kicking.......... or , maybe you could borrow the tube that Mobydisc bought and just squeeze the last bit out.
) ... pollies being continually new at the job I think would be a good thing. They'd be in and out before they learned how to rort the system, knit events to fit in with their personal or party agendas, etc. They may actually spend some time doing what their constituents voted them in for. That'd be a nice change. There's an argument that ministers need to know what they're doing. But in the current system, the ordinary backbencher is just a drone so what difference would such a change make?
How about a return to following our Australian Constitution as it was written, to give your allegiance to any other than Australia is illegal.
An Australian elected politician is supposed to be directed only by those who elected them- not an over-riding political party.
To belong to a political party is technically treason as you are requiring your members to follow party line.
Bringing up the constitution is interesting. Has anyone ever read it? I've read a bit of it a while ago and it really is a strange document. Its strange as it really has little relationship with how modern Australian politics works.
Kiteboy, why wouldn't bringing in new MPs be a good thing? New players bring enthusiasm, fresh ideas, thinking outside of the box. Sure they wouldn't have experience but why is that bad? Our parliaments are full of hacks who are there because of the arse they licked and the favours they have to fulfill.
The electorate I live in is a prime example. Its a safe Liberal "Blue Ribbon" seat that has had the same MP for about 30 years. He does little for the electorate besides sending letters every now and them telling us how great he is. At the last federal election the ALP put up a candidate who obviously had no chance of winning. So he wasn't a unionist or political staffer who had kissed the required arses and sold his soul. He seemed like a reasonable bloke, running his own business, studying for a PhD, quite young in his early thirties. I put him at number 1 even though had no desire for the ALP to win the election. Of course my vote made no difference but it wouldn't have made any difference if I'd voted any other way.
How can anyone say representative democracy works in Australian politics? There are numerous examples where the system is broken. Here are three quick ones I can think of:
ALP federal MPs supporting the reduction of trade tariffs that result in factories closing and jobs being lost in their electorates.
Liberal Party MPs supporting the hard line, turn the boats around, policy for asylum seekers coming to Australia by boat.
Almost all federal MPs and senators supporting Australia's involvement in the military invasion of Iraq when most Australians were against it.
Representative democracy was developed in England at a time when the fastest form of communication was a man on a horse, the franchise was very limited and literacy rates were quite low. Mass media did not exist. So it made sense to have someone in parliament to represent their electorate.
What to replace it with? The way we are going we are replacing it with a fascist system where opposing the state is a treasonous act.
While the original post to this thread (the picture) has been shown to be a fake or modified, the point of the thread is to show the lack of moral fortitude most of the elected leaders of this country have or do not have.
The question is "Can persons of doubtful sexual proclivities be trusted to act in the best interests of the overall population?"
