Jul 21, 2006 - A leading Melbourne Anglican has opposed the election of a “liberal” archbishop for the Melbourne Diocese when the diocese's synod tries.
I feel sorry for you that you are probably twice my age and don't have a proper understanding the political spectrum. It amuses me that you think that nearly every right-wing idea is dogshit at best. In your remaining years I hope you can realize how idiotic it is to think nearly every idea from the other side of the political spectrum is dogshit, and that the right/left divide is more media brainwashing than actual policy stances. I'm glad me and my mates aren't as intellectually devoid and blindly scared of other ideas, as your generation seem to be.
But you know, keep thinking your way and living in a partisan world where you can't comprehend that an idea can be good no matter which 'political side' it came from. How is it that so many people (particularly in this sub) just blindly hate/badly characterise the liberals/PM. If you watch some content of ScoMo (and others) in a non-political situation you’ll actually see that he seems like a decent, fair dinkum bloke. I’m not saying he’s perfect and I certainly don’t agree with every policy either, but I think we should be a bit less constantly skeptical of politicians. Sure a lot of them are crooked, but they were elected (and presumably intend) to honourably serve the people and improve their lives.I say, make sure government is doing a good job, but don’t always assume the opposite. Why does this read like a PR attempt at making politicians not seem like pieces of shit? Weirdest use of words, like an american pretending to be aussie.Gooday mayte.
Throw another shrimp on the barbie. Fair dinkum.Sure, there are some that do try to work for the people. Then you have people like scomo that quite obviously are self serving - just the story on how he got preselection.He's a piece of work and any 'good' that comes from what he does would be a side effect not the intended purpose.Even just the latest libspill nonsense. He played both sides.
Only for his own benefit, not for some great cause.I don't know any policies resulting from him that are for the good of australia which sums him up for me.Just a fair dinkum bloke. Who says that let alone for this example of a politician. Could've picked some random lib that isn't obviously in it for just himself.Even abbott atleast has consistency with the ideas he spruiks, not that I agree with him either but he atleast seems to be doing what he thinks is right. Scomo's version of right seems to be 'do I benefit? Ok that's right.' Which seems to be an inherent problem with politicians. Firstly, I am Australian born and raised, I live in Perth and have never actually left the country.
Feel free to ask about any Australia-specific things if you for whatever reason don’t believe me.I did a little research on Morrison’s pre-selection and to me it seems suspicious for sure, but I assume that the reason the whole malicious fiasco went down is more likely to be party member fears of losing the seat, rather than Morrison deliberately instigating the attacks. However obviously I don’t have any evidence supporting that, so he just as easily could be a defamatory prick.I don’t really see where you’re coming from with the ‘played both sides’ thing.
As far as I’m aware Morrison was fully supportive of Turnbull and vice-versa. I even did a little research to try and prove your theory but nothing jumped up at me, so please link anything showing he played both sides because I would genuinely like to see it.When it comes to Morrison’s likability obviously it’s all a matter of opinion, but I thought this clip showed a pretty reasonable side of him.Also what makes you so completely anti-ScoMo? I haven’t done an awful lot of research on the guy so I’d be curious to hear what caused you to form such a negative opinion him.