Still sidetracking and avoiding the current question. I can't believe that you're that silly, so I'll put it again.

Why are you rude to people but complain when somebody is rude to you?  There's no answer, is there?

Let me put it to you again: Pauline Hanson and Donald Trump are fair game for jokes about their appearance. Aren't they?

Let me ignore that irrelevant observation until you have the guts to address my question instead of ducking and weaving. I am not going to be diverted by your weak attempts at evasion.

Why are you rude to people but complain when somebody is rude to you?

Let me ignore that irrelevant observation until you have the guts to address my question instead of ducking and weaving. I am not going to be diverted by your weak attempts at evasion.

Why are you rude to people but complain when somebody is rude to you?

You would almost certainly one hundred percent laugh at any description of Donald Trump or Pauline Hanson that referred to their personal appearance because you consider them to be 'fair game'; that's why you're trying so hard to not answer my question.

Therefore my description of you as a hypocrite and a liar is valid and apt. It's not being rude, it's calling you out for what you are - that's why you're trying so hard to not answer because I'm right.

My God, what will you do when you're "away on holidays"? You'll have to make a Don Dunstan dolly to argue with... although I've heard that the internet does indeed stretch to all corners of the globe now-days...

Back to the man himself.

It's those tax returns that may prove fatal. Personally, if you have nothing to hide (which is a conservatives' take on law and national security), what's the issue.

http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/dozen-investigations-threaten-to-crucify-trump-as-president-pushes-back-at-democrats/news-story/e2529810ede5be6b31e30d128dc8b097

You would almost certainly one hundred percent laugh at any description of Donald Trump or Pauline Hanson that referred to their personal appearance because you consider them to be 'fair game'; that's why you're trying so hard to not answer my question.

Therefore my description of you as a hypocrite and a liar is valid and apt. It's not being rude, it's calling you out for what you are - that's why you're trying so hard to not answer because I'm right.

(Translation: I have decided, based on no evidence at all, what Valvegear thinks and does, and because I cannot possibly be wrong, I can insult Valvegear publicly.)

I have answered your point repeatedly, but I'll do it again. I do not deny privately thinking about people's appearance etc, but I do not make public insults.  I know this answer doesn't suit you but it is both simple and true. Obviously, you will have trouble with such a concept. (Please look up "private" and "public" and try to understand the difference between them.)

Now, quit your cowardly ducking and weaving and answer my original question: "Why are you rude to people but complain when somebody is rude to you?" Your refusal to address such a simple question would compel me to believe that you are secretly ashamed of your behaviour but won't admit it.

P.S. " . . . almost certainly one hundred percent" is grammatical nonsense.

I have answered your point repeatedly, but I'll do it again. I do not deny privately thinking about people's appearance etc, but I do not make public insults.  I know this answer doesn't suit you but it is both simple and true. Obviously, you will have trouble with such a concept. (Please look up "private" and "public" and try to understand the difference between them.)

Thought-crime is the same thing as actually doing the deed, comrade. And you didn't deny denigrating Pauline Hanson in public so I'll take that as a 'yes'.

I'm not rude to you, you deserved that label. Hypocrite. When you were strenuously denying that you've ever laughed at anyone's physical appearance you first said "I wasn't bought up that way", implying it was something that was below you. Now you acknowledge that you do but only as a thought-criminal. Ha! Liar.

People going ballistic today because Trump finally got the money for his border wall - it only took two years.

The media is having a circus trying to say that it was Nancy Pelosi's wonderful negotiating work that did the trick but then others saying it was Trump that won the day.

Thought-crime is the same thing as actually doing the deed, comrade.

You mean I could get locked up for thinking about murdering you?

And you didn't deny denigrating Pauline Hanson in public so I'll take that as a 'yes'.

If I had the time, and the inclination, I would explain carefully to you the difference between criticising public figures, for which they are fair game, and insulting their appearance or something similar, for which they are not. I will denigrate Hansen's policies and views until hell freezes over, but I will not make insulting remarks about the way she looks or dresses et al.
One day, someone might also try, probably without success, to explain to you that failing to deny something does not equal "yes".

I'm not rude to you, you deserved that label. Hypocrite. When you were strenuously denying that you've ever laughed at anyone's physical appearance you first said "I wasn't bought up that way", implying it was something that was below you. Now you acknowledge that you do but only as a thought-criminal. Ha! Liar.

The topic was, and always has been, public personal insults to people; you may remember ( or probably don't wish to), that the subject was a public insult about the appearance of Gladys Berejiklian. I was brought up, by my parents (in particular, my father),  not to do that. However, nobody ever tried to tell me what I could or couldn't think. Unfortunately, we now appear to have "Don's Thought Police" operating, and this means that the lack of evidence is not important - it's what Don thinks that matters, and his major point is that he can use any term he likes because of his unshakeable belief in his own infallibility.

Thought-crime is the same thing as actually doing the deed, comrade.

You mean I could get locked up for thinking about murdering you?

Yeah see there you go with your thought-crime. And you know in these Orwellian times if you've thought it then that's as good as doing it.

If I had the time, and the inclination, I would explain carefully to you the difference between criticising public figures, for which they are fair game, and insulting their appearance or something similar, for which they are not. I will denigrate Hansen's policies and views until hell freezes over, but I will not make insulting remarks about the way she looks or dresses et al. One day, someone might also try, probably without success, to explain to you that failing to deny something does not equal "yes".

...

The topic was, and always has been, public personal insults to people; you may remember ( or probably don't wish to), that the subject was a public insult about the appearance of Gladys Berejiklian. I was brought up, by my parents (in particular, my father),  not to do that. However, nobody ever tried to tell me what I could or couldn't think. Unfortunately, we now appear to have "Don's Thought Police" operating, and this means that the lack of evidence is not important - it's what Don thinks that matters, and his major point is that he can use any term he likes because of his unshakeable belief in his own infallibility.

Yeah see isn't that funny, because you're actually the fascist here and yet you can't see it. You make the decisions about what's morally acceptable and what isn't - you're the one who was easily outraged when I repeated a moniker about Gladys Berejiklian being a compared to a 'bin chicken', and you also led the attack I said I was having champagne when that class-traitor Bob Hawke died. You said yourself public figures are fair game and you still won't deny laughing at Donald Trumps' appearance.

Double standards, much?

You and all other other people who are offended and outraged by me need to drink a cup of concrete and harden the buggery up because you're all morally righteous prudish lemony school-mistresses tutting their tongues and crossing their arms in disapproval. don_dunstan hates Bob Hawke and won't be sorry when he dies. Fainting couch time!

You tell me that I've crossed some kind of 'taste' line that you're the ultimate arbiters of. Unhappy? Think I've crossed a line? Go have a sook to the moderators and see if they are agree but otherwise just put up with it like an adult. I'm not advocating violence, I'm not stirring up insurrection against the Politburo - I'm allowed to express an opinion here and I'm going to keep doing so.

Still upset? My advice to you is to go onto a forum about crochet or pruning wisteria on the lladro where you won't be offended and disgusted so easily.

I'm really quite amused by all these young Democrats embracing Socialism.  They're handing Trump a gift in that the Middle classes will run away from voting for any possibility of the US becoming the next Cuba or Venezuela.

That said, it is pretty galling to see many big companies in the USA paying little or no corporate taxes, even with record profits...

Don; there's only one word to describe you;- Quaint. That latest diatribe is just hilariously funny and I thank you greatly for it. I should have realised ages ago that the drivel you write comes from a warped sense of humour; nobody could be serious about it. I won't bother any more because it couldn't possibly get any funnier than that.

you're the one who was easily outraged when I repeated a moniker about Gladys Berejiklian being a compared to a 'bin chicken', and you also led the attack I said I was having champagne when that class-traitor Bob Hawke died.

I do like that you think this proves something, whereas all it really proves is what a class act you are.

you're the one who was easily outraged when I repeated a moniker about Gladys Berejiklian being a compared to a 'bin chicken', and you also led the attack I said I was having champagne when that class-traitor Bob Hawke died.

I do like that you think this proves something, whereas all it really proves is what a class act you are.

I really don't have enough swear-words that I can't say on Railpage for the Hawke/Keating con-job on the working class of Australia. Part of the reason the entire nation is broke and going down the gurgler is the decisions made by that pair of old fashioned robber barons masquerading as working class heroes.

The fact that the Labor Party still eulogises these see-you-next-Tuesdays is all the more reason why they don't deserve office. Chris Bowen even admitted recently that he spoke to that worm Keating regularly.

Repulsive. I don't have to tell you they don't have my vote; in fact I'll be putting them last.

... in fact I'll be having TWO bottles of champagne when that pretentious prig Keating dies.

You never know Don. Hawke and/or Keating might outlast you.thus robbing you of a joyous moment in your miserable little life

You never know Don. Hawke and/or Keating might outlast you.thus robbing you of a joyous moment in your miserable little life

Hawkie definitely won't, he's got one foot in the grave and the other on a very slippery banana peel.

My old grand-dad used to say "hate for good reasons, hate for the right reasons". The last 35 years since those crooks got into office have seen a complete unravelling of everything that the Labor Party and the union movement fought so hard for since the strikes of the 1890's. The fact that there's working people out there (and indeed in the Labor Party) who still look up to those criminals as some kind of heroes is totally perplexing to me.

The coming years are going to see working people in this country pushed right over the edge, losing what's left of their incomes and their homes. All thanks to those marvellous Thatcherite reforms instituted originally by Hawke and Keating.

You never know Don. Hawke and/or Keating might outlast you.thus robbing you of a joyous moment in your miserable little life

Hawkie definitely won't, he's got one foot in the grave and the other on a very slippery banana peel.

Never say never!

The coming years are going to see working people in this country pushed right over the edge, losing what's left of their incomes and their homes. All thanks to those marvellous Thatcherite reforms instituted originally by Hawke and Keating.

But you never entertain the notion that an LNP government would have done at least the same and with much more ideological vigour.

So what's not-your-lot been doing for 23 years to restore that pre Hawke-Keating workers paradise. Chairman Morrison may keep his job a bit longer so there's still hope

Back on topic, that bloke you "like" declared that wall a national emergency then goes off to play golf. Sounds like paradise!

The coming years are going to see working people in this country pushed right over the edge, losing what's left of their incomes and their homes. All thanks to those marvellous Thatcherite reforms instituted originally by Hawke and Keating.

But you never entertain the notion that an LNP government would have done at least the same and with much more ideological vigour.

Howard didn't need to do anything when he got into office, it was already all done for him. And as I've said before, only a Labor government could have got away with implementing the wage-crushing Accord - the unions would never have worked with a Liberal government to do that.

So what's not-your-lot been doing for 23 years to restore that pre Hawke-Keating workers paradise. Chairman Morrison may keep his job a bit longer so there's still hope

He may indeed keep his job longer if he can organise a crisis like that one that dropped into Johnny Howard's lap in 2001.

I wouldn't expect the Liberal Party to do a damn thing to make things better for ordinary workers, that's not their bag. But it is the "Labor" party's bag - and the fact that they've done more to push conditions backwards than anyone else (bar Howard's Work-Choices) is simply appalling.

Back on topic, that bloke you "like" declared that wall a national emergency then goes off to play golf. Sounds like paradise!

Bill Clinton declared a "national emergency" 14 times during his Presidency and dropped more bombs than any other President before him - including Roosevelt. So Trump is not doing anything out of the ordinary.

US trade deficit ballooned out to USD 621,000,000,000 in 2018, higher than at any time since Dubya was POTUS.

I think we might be hearing soon that Thump will be selecting a new scorecard.

I think we might be hearing soon that Thump will be selecting a new scorecard.

. . . whilst simultaneously blaming the Democrats in Congress for everything.

Another one bites the dust:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-14/manafort-sentenced-for-conspiracy-against-the-us/10898648

Meanwhile, many Hollywood elites are in all sorts of strife after bribing Ivy League universities to enrol their precious darlings even if they are airheads:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-12/coaches-accused-by-u-s-in-scheme-over-college-entrance-exams

The place is full of shonks.

Even that (former) pillar of all things righteous (Bono) is well connected with the fund-manager who ran the scam:

The Republican-run Senate has  rejected US President Donald Trump’s declaration of a national emergency at the southwest border, setting up a veto fight and dealing him a conspicuous rebuke as he tested how boldly he could ignore Congress in pursuit of his highest-profile goal. The Senate voted 59-41 to cancel Trump’s February proclamation of a border emergency, which he invoked to spend $USD3.6 billion more for border barriers than Congress had approved. Twelve Republicans joined Democrats in defying Trump in a showdown many GOP senators had hoped to avoid because he commands die-hard loyalty from millions of conservative voters who could punish defecting legislators in next year’s elections.

Poor old Donald; he still can't get used to the idea that he's not running his own business, and can't do exactly as he likes.

The Republican-run Senate has  rejected US President Donald Trump’s declaration of a national emergency at the southwest border, setting up a veto fight and dealing him a conspicuous rebuke as he tested how boldly he could ignore Congress in pursuit of his highest-profile goal. The Senate voted 59-41 to cancel Trump’s February proclamation of a border emergency, which he invoked to spend $USD3.6 billion more for border barriers than Congress had approved. Twelve Republicans joined Democrats in defying Trump in a showdown many GOP senators had hoped to avoid because he commands die-hard loyalty from millions of conservative voters who could punish defecting legislators in next year’s elections.

Poor old Donald; he still can't get used to the idea that he's not running his own business, and can't do exactly as he likes.

Trump was n 9 news today, saying he'd given Theresa  May advice on negociating a Brexit deal.
Hmmm,