Vic How would you rate Daniel Andrews' performance as Victorian Premier? - Part 5

[Saint]

Continued From Part 4:

Vic - How would you rate Daniel Andrews' performance as Victorian Premier? - Part 4

This thread is Continued in Part 5: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/how-would-you-rate-daniel-andrews-performance-as-victorian-premier-part-5.1282789/

www.bigfooty.com

 

[HurleyHepsHird]

This is probably right going on the recent Supreme Court appointments.

No, it's simply that there are no legal grounds to challenge the mandate.

Every historical attempt to overturn policies like "no jab, no play" etc. through the courts have failed.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

No, it's simply that there are no legal grounds to challenge the mandate.

Every historical attempt to overturn policies like "no jab, no play" etc. through the courts have failed.

Oh there are grounds. Want to link those no jab no play cases?

 

[HurleyHepsHird]

Oh there are grounds. Want to link those no jab no play cases?

Show me a successful legal challenge of any vaccine mandate in Australia and please cite the precedent on which current challenges rely?

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Show me a successful legal challenge of any vaccine mandate in Australia and please cite the precedent on which current challenges rely?

No. You said there cases. Which are they?

I just said there were grounds for a challenge to the current mandate.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Bruce is right. The way that speech is remembered is just laughable given what she was up there trying to defend.

She should be embarassed by it.

On this subject I'll take the words of women over BoomerFromBalnarring.

 

[aCunningPlan]

Dunno where. Maybe some regionals who hate city folk anyway. Sand belt electorates he’s gone.

Well it is true city folk haven't done themselves any favours.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

On this subject I'll take the words of women over BoomerFromBalnarring.

You take the words of my opponents on every subject.

And they’re always wrong. Reckon you’ll ever learn?

 

[Ghost Patrol]

You take the words of my opponents on every subject.

And they’re always wrong. Reckon you’ll ever learn?

Women are your opponents?

So you're an incel.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Well it is true city folk haven't done themselves any favours.

Certainly not when we voted the mendacious campaigner in!

 

[MarcMaverick]

Quick question: When are they going to reopen gyms etc...?

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Women are your opponents?

So you're an incel?

No.

By and large they agree with me.

Just the women informing you. You don’t speak for all women. They can speak for themselves, as individuals. Didn’t you know that?

 

[HurleyHepsHird]

No. You said there cases. Which are they?

I just said there were grounds for a challenge to the current mandate.

There have been multiple challenges to every mandate which have almost uniformly been dismissed.

The latest example of a Judge in SAs Supreme Court rejecting an injunction application, to suspend "no jab no play" policies from coming into effect, pending a legal challenge.

No Jab No Play comes into effect today in South Australia: What does this mean for your kids?

From today, South Australian children who aren't fully vaccinated will be turned away from preschools and day care centres.

www.abc.net.au

Now tell me, on what grounds, based on what case law and precedent, could these workplace mandates be successfully overturned?

Just one Australian example, any would do.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

No.

By and large they agree with me.

Just the women informing you. You don’t speak for all women. They can speak for themselves, as individuals. Didn’t you know that?

Did you actually read what I wrote?

On this subject I'll take the words of women over BoomerFromBalnarring.

You then said that women were your opponents.

You take the words of my opponents on every subject.

And they’re always wrong. Reckon you’ll ever learn?

wtf is wrong with you?

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

There have been multiple challenges to every mandate which have almost uniformly been dismissed.

The latest example of a Judge in SAs Supreme Court rejecting an injunction application, to suspend "no jab no play" policies from coming into effect, pending a legal challenge.

No Jab No Play comes into effect today in South Australia: What does this mean for your kids?

From today, South Australian children who aren't fully vaccinated will be turned away from preschools and day care centres.

www.abc.net.au

Now tell me, on what grounds, based on what case law and precedent, could these workplace mandates be successfully overturned?

No. Give me a judgment. After hearing arguments and evidence. Injunctions are not proper legal challenges.

 

[Evolved1]

Quick question: When are they going to reopen gyms etc...?

80% dd. I think it's about 4 weeks away.

 

[HurleyHepsHird]

No. Give me a judgment. After hearing arguments and evidence. Injunctions are not proper legal challenges.

You argued there was ample grounds, I'd love to hear them?

Also, why would a judge hear a case they know has no grounds? There is a reason why these challenges are often not tested by the courts.

I'm waiting.

 

[Tiger08]

On this subject I'll take the words of women over BoomerFromBalnarring.

Really .. how about if you sent them a text message talking about that their genitalia "looks like mussell (sic) removed from its shell. Look at a bottle of mussel meat. Salty C..ts in brine."?

Would they stand up and give a passionate speech defending you?

How about if you'd sent a gay bloke a message saying "LUCY is very available and keen! Could turn you from your wayward ways,"

That's the comments that Gillard was up there defending.

Peter Slipper was a disgrace but Gillard needed him to hang onto power. Filthy, dirty politics. That's all it was.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

You argued there was ample grounds, I'd love to hear them?

Also, why would a judge hear a case they know has no grounds? There is a reason why these challenges are often not tested by the courts.

I'm waiting.

Injunctions aren’t decided on the merits of a case.

You’re out of your depth.

Discrimination is one broad ground for a legal challenge.

 

[MarcMaverick]

80% dd. I think it's about 4 weeks away.

If true thank *. I need to get my body back.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Did you actually read what I wrote?



You then said that women were your opponents.



wtf is wrong with you?

I went out earlier. Did you ever answer that Nazi thing?

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Really .. how about if you sent them a text message talking about that their genitalia "looks like mussell (sic) removed from its shell. Look at a bottle of mussel meat. Salty C..ts in brine."?

Would they stand up and give a passionate speech defending you?

How about if you'd sent a gay bloke a message saying "LUCY is very available and keen! Could turn you from your wayward ways,"

That's the comments that Gillard was up there defending.

Peter Slipper was a disgrace but Gillard needed him to hang onto power. Filthy, dirty politics. That's all it was.

Nah man. You're just a slightly less creepy version of BoomerFromBalnarring

Remember this crap?

 

[MarcMaverick]

Speaking of gyms: On average how often has everyone on here gone to the gyms(Pre-COVID/ non-LDs I mean)?

 

[Ghost Patrol]

I went out earlier. Did you ever answer that Nazi thing?

Yep. Have you been drinking the Jesus Juice again?

 

[Tiger08]

Nah man. You're just a slightly less creepy version of BoomerFromBalnarring

Remember this crap?

View attachment 1256209

What planet are you on? You ok with those comments are you?

She was up there defending Peter Slipper who's comments are a hell of a lot worse than standing in front someone else's sign that says "bitch"!

 

[adogsfan5]

Enjoy.