V for Vegas posted:

http://www.corybernardi.com.au/

Jumpingmanjim posted:

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...225-gn38jl.html

Birb Katter posted:

Can't find a nice enough snippet but apparently the ADF is now "potent, agile" according to Turdballs

Birb Katter posted:

Can't find a nice enough snippet but apparently the ADF is now "potent, agile" according to Turdballs

Tokamak posted:

Just waiting for Turnbull to disrupt the budget with innovation.

quote:

Safe Schools is like child grooming, says Nationals MP George Christensen
The MP says the $8m program to combat homophobia promoted links to websites advising children about penis-tucking and gay sex

George Christensen posted:

Be very wary of those intolerant of different views when they start invading schools.

Skellybones posted:

What a bunch of clowns.

quote:

South China Sea: Beijing 'dissatisfied' with 'negative' remarks in Australia's Defence White Paper By political reporter Eliza Borrello, wires Updated 13 minutes ago

China has responded angrily to the Federal Government's Defence White Paper.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said China was "dissatisfied" with what it saw as "negative" comments about the South China Sea in the document. Ms Hua said China did not want to see an arms race and hoped relevant countries could give up joint drills and withdraw their military presence in the region. "We have noticed Australia has released its white paper," Ms Hua said. "It mentions Australia is willing to enhance cooperation with China, China welcomes that and hopes it can translate these positive statements into concrete actions. "We also noticed that this white paper made some remarks about South China Sea and East China Sea. "These remarks are negative and we are dissatisfied about this."

Defence Minister Marise Payne told 7:30 the Government knew the South China Sea was a "point of difference" between Australia and China.

"We obviously have very significant relationships with China across a range of areas and not least of which is our trading relationship," she said. "But importantly as part of our defence relationship we work with the PLA Navy, with the PLA itself. We have a strong defence relationship but we do have a point of difference in this regard [the South China Sea] and we're certainly not going to take a backwards step in articulating our position." Former minister Kevin Andrews has used the white paper release to apply pressure to the Government to send warships within 12 nautical miles of the contested islands.

The Liberal backbencher said Australia must now follow the United States' example.

"We have to exercise that freedom of navigation and that means being prepared to sail our naval vessels, to fly our aircraft through that region and say we want unrestricted trade routes in this area," Mr Andrews told the ABC.

US to increase freedom of navigation operations

Meanwhile, the United States has said it will increase freedom of navigation operations in the South China Sea. "We will be doing them more, and we'll be doing them with greater complexity in the future and ... we'll fly, sail and operate wherever international law allows," Admiral Harry Harris, head of the US Navy's Pacific Command, said. "We must continue to operate in the South China Sea to demonstrate that water space and the air above it is international."

China's Foreign Minister Wang met with US national security adviser Susan Rice on Wednesday, where the two "candidly discussed" maritime issues, according to a White House statement. Ms Rice emphasised US support for freedom of navigation and urged China to address regional concerns, the statement said.

ABC/AFP

screaden posted:

So do the Nationals actually do anything for farmers? I'm moving away from a relatively balanced area to the Mallee division in a traditional farming area and was advised by people living there that I "need to get behind the Nats if you're moving up here" but there is no loving way I'm doing that.

Solemn Sloth posted:

They do gently caress all for farmers or anyone other than the Liberal party. They wear hats and boots though so dickhead mouthbreathers vote for them.

screaden posted:

So do the Nationals actually do anything for farmers? I'm moving away from a relatively balanced area to the Mallee division in a traditional farming area and was advised by people living there that I "need to get behind the Nats if you're moving up here" but there is no loving way I'm doing that.

Cartoon posted:

What the US is doing is lunacy. Us following is somehow even worse (What's more crazy than a lunatic? Kevin Andrews for starters). In Civ V sometimes your military adviser tells you that you should do what ever you can not piss off another nation because they could wipe you off the planet. We just got that advice and decided that denouncing the other nation was a great plan. Clown nation had it coming nothing of value was lost

SynthOrange posted:

gently caress the nationals.

Solemn Sloth posted:

They do gently caress all for farmers or anyone other than the Liberal party. They wear hats and boots though so dickhead mouthbreathers vote for them.

EvilElmo posted:

So, high quality legislation the Greens are backing.

Didn't even have a section on how to count the senate votes. I do like it when vote reform is rushed through. It's not like it's important or anything.

Jonah Galtberg posted:

[TELL] me how labor helped the lnp rush through retrospective legislation to save offshore processing from an ongoing high court challenge

EvilElmo posted:

As much as I enjoy playing this game with you in here. Eventually one of you will actually answer a question rather than asking a question.

So, how many times has the Turnbull Government tricked the Greens now? That'd have to be at least the second poo poo legislation they've gobbled up in an attempt to shake the 'protest vote' label.

Budzilla posted:

Yo Auspol, I got a letter in the mail about the upcoming referendum in QLD for 4 year fixed terms. Yay or nay? I'm going for 'no' but I'm drunk and high so I could be very wrong. What should I vote? Also I am not reading the last 2 pages if this was answered.

WhiskeyWhiskers posted:

I'd say nay, because keeping shorter terms means less time for poo poo things to be forgotten about.

Cleretic posted:

Longer terms means larger projects actually get done, though. Shorter terms arguably hosed over the NBN, and on a smaller scale we have stuff like the Gawler train line in SA still not being electrified because it's never on the agenda long enough to not get hosed over by the Liberals on some level.

WhiskeyWhiskers posted:

Yeah, or you have to suffer through another year of some lovely regressive policy the libs have pushed through without any upper house to check their power.

Jonah Galtberg posted:

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/abbott-government-and-labor-reach-deal-on-metadata-retention-laws-20150318-1m2ozj.html

Budzilla posted:

This is QLD we are talking about here. The senate will be controlled by regressive Nationals.

norp posted:

aren't QLD the ones that got rid of their senate?

Budzilla posted:

I'm drunk and high

EvilElmo posted:

BBJoey posted:

my dude this is poor, even by your standards.

EvilElmo posted:

As much as I enjoy playing this game with you in here. Eventually one of you will actually answer a question rather than asking a question.

So, how many times has the Turnbull Government tricked the Greens now? That'd have to be at least the second poo poo legislation they've gobbled up in an attempt to shake the 'protest vote' label.