bentaz wrote:Sounds good but I wouldn't believe a word out of their filthy lying noise holes!
Its easy to promise the world.....
juststarting wrote:bentaz wrote:Sounds good but I wouldn't believe a word out of their filthy lying noise holes!
Its easy to promise the world.....
Like that conversation between Leyonhjelm and Abbott about Adler, 'oh, we weren't ever going to honour that promise'. Those who don't learn from the past... Vote them out, the end.
bentaz wrote:Sounds good but I wouldn't believe a word out of their filthy lying noise holes!
Its easy to promise the world.....
Daddybang wrote:Well the libsh@ts got back with a majority so here's their chance to prove those that bag poliscum(me included) wrong!!!
How do the tassie mob think it'll go?
andreweden wrote:They don’t control the upper house. The other thing is they have made few promises to actually legislate anything, it’s mostly ‘review’ or ‘refer’.
Daddybang wrote:andreweden wrote:They don’t control the upper house. The other thing is they have made few promises to actually legislate anything, it’s mostly ‘review’ or ‘refer’.
I didn't realize tassie had two houses
It'll still be interesting to see how things shape up if they can get some changes thru in tassie it gives us a little hope in other states considering the hold the green mob have had down there for so long.
Daddybang wrote:In the upper house. Tassie has been seen as greenie stronghold for many years (back to brown and the dam protests) .
Although Victoria is probably the holder of that title these days.
andreweden wrote:Daddybang wrote:In the upper house. Tassie has been seen as greenie stronghold for many years (back to brown and the dam protests) .
Although Victoria is probably the holder of that title these days.
Nope, no greens in the upper house. 10 independents, 4 labor and 1 liberal.
bentaz wrote:Daddybang wrote:In the upper house. Tassie has been seen as greenie stronghold for many years (back to brown and the dam protests) .
Although Victoria is probably the holder of that title these days.
Which is ironic for Vic with our "least s**t" laws!
juststarting wrote:So basically, you should have a cat C and you have literally no use for it, other than demonstrating it through stupid paperwork... But an older fella who's been shooting longer than I've been alive and has safety built into muscle memory shouldn't have a bolt action? Bit of a nasty thing to say dude.
on_one_wheel wrote:The best part of all this was seeing gca chuck a wobbly over the lack of construction