Well this is the US Politics thread and not the Aussie Rules Politics thread...
US Politics II
- Thread starter DaveC
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
- Status
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
there's a lot happening over here (grand juries!) but this has gotten some attention over here.
i particularly enjoyed this article:
He is such a simpleton. It's bad enough that he may be too stupid to understand the complexities of global relationships but he has such enormous hubris that even if his base stupidity wasn't the barrier to understanding, his unwillingness to admit that he doesn't know anything will always sink him.
More and more I blame his children. They are obviously brazen grifters obsessed with greed because there is no way that any child who has respect for their parent would allow them to get to this point. I'd have locked my Dad in the basement before letting him make an utter fool of himself like this. Let alone enable him and be an "advisor". My God.
More and more I blame his children. They are obviously brazen grifters obsessed with greed because there is no way that any child who has respect for their parent would allow them to get to this point. I'd have locked my Dad in the basement before letting him make an utter fool of himself like this. Let alone enable him and be an "advisor". My God.
Also, my favourite bit of news from the this week may be that the Secret Service had to vacate the floor beneath Trump's apartment in Trump Tower in Manhattan because they could not come to an agreement about their continuing lease. Rumors are he was charging them 4x the market rate. So now the Secret Service is sitting outside in a TRAILER on the STREET in the middle of fucking New York City, guarding the trash inside.
OP
OP
DaveC
Blue Crack Addict
i don't know where on earth you guys get this from. i know turnbull sucks in general but what is he supposed to do when he's trying to get trump to keep an important agreement he clearly doesn't even want to understand, let alone maintain.
god forbid he attempts to be somewhat diplomatic and deferential in his first phone call with the newly elected president of the united states.
what did you expect, for him to call trump a cunt and tell him to fuck off or something?
Danny Boy
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
[tweet]893203074939928576[/tweet]
Last edited:
Moonlit_Angel
Blue Crack Addict
Can somebody try and make sense of this sentence for me?
Also, I love how Trump is worrying so much about being seen as weak and ineffective after one week in office. Ahahaha. Ahaha. Aha. Ha...
...ha. Yeah. God, what a moron.
(Honestly, I just want to know more about these "local milk people" he's referring to. I saw that bit on Colbert last night and for some reason, that really cracked me up.)
Danny Boy
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
Pharma Douche was convicted of securities fraud.
namkcuR
ONE love, blood, life
i don't know where on earth you guys get this from. i know turnbull sucks in general but what is he supposed to do when he's trying to get trump to keep an important agreement he clearly doesn't even want to understand, let alone maintain.
god forbid he attempts to be somewhat diplomatic and deferential in his first phone call with the newly elected president of the united states.
what did you expect, for him to call trump a cunt and tell him to fuck off or something?
Yeah, it's incredible that Cobbler would say Trump came off looking presidential there. He came off like an ignorant, narcissistic, xenophobic, angry, petulant, ADD-addled child.
I do not know anything about Turnbull or much about Australian politics in general, but to me he came off as somebody attempting to be nice and deferential to Trump because that everyone knows that's what Trump responds to.
Seems like you guys hate your PM. I thought you hated your previous guy, Abbott, but maybe you hate this guy more.
namkcuR
ONE love, blood, life
Perhaps I'm giving him too much credit, but I think maybe he was trying to say, 'as far as the people who voted for me are concerned, I am the world's greatest person because I don't want to let people into the country, and it will be bad politically if I let these people in now'.
Moonlit_Angel
Blue Crack Addict
Yeah, that sounds about right. Certainly the only translation that would make any sort of sense.
I can't get over how, no matter who he's talking to or wherever he's speaking, he can't seem to go a single sentence without proclaiming himself or anything tied to him as "the greatest" in some form or another. He is truly the most narcissistic person I've ever seen in my entire life. It's incredible.
I can't get over how, no matter who he's talking to or wherever he's speaking, he can't seem to go a single sentence without proclaiming himself or anything tied to him as "the greatest" in some form or another. He is truly the most narcissistic person I've ever seen in my entire life. It's incredible.
LuckyNumber7
Blue Crack Addict
I actually think he means he's really good at not allowing people in the country. Like, the best in the world at not letting people in the country.
He just speaks and writes like a 4th grader.
He just speaks and writes like a 4th grader.
Long post ahead, but it's hopefully informative for some of you wondering why the Turnbull and Trump transcript has been received the way it has by many in Australia.
Abbott was a vile individual - but you knew that he stood for what he said he stood for. He was, to use the words of one of his political idols, not for turning. It made him popular with the Liberal Party's strong far-right and socially conservative parliamentary factions, but unpopular with the electorate at large. The Libs were heading towards a huge thumping in 2016 when they blinked and restored Malcolm Turnbull to the leadership. They still got a belting, but managed to cling to power by a single seat. Turnbull had been the leader in opposition before Abbott rolled him and won power in 2013, and that period had actually made Turnbull look good to centrist and centre-left voters; one reason he was rolled was his commitment to action on climate change. He was a suave businessman who had played a role in the rise of the Internet in Australia in the nineties, and he came across on TV as a cool guy who would bring many swing voters back to the Libs from Labour.
But he sold his soul to be leader. He contorted himself in so many different ways to get enough votes from the party room to gain the leadership that he became beholden to various policies of the right-wing factions that he had previously argued against passionately, that are unpopular publicly, and that have very little chance of passing parliament (the government does not control the Senate, and has proven poor negotiators with the motley assortment of crossbench parties). Australia's paralysis on marriage equality, for example, is almost entirely down to this pact. Turnbull found himself bound to the socially conservative factions' demand for a national plebiscite, even though parliament won't pass legislation to enable a plebiscite, and if he dares to try to pass marriage equality through routine legislation, which is all that is required, he might lose the leadership through a party revolt.
He has done so many backflips, advanced so many policies he previously did not support, and in general been so gutless in the face of pressure from fringe nutters in his party, unwilling to stand up for the principles the public thought he had, that it's going to take something extraordinary for either he or the Libs to retain government at next year's election.
I am, of course, partisan. But I think this is a pretty fair overview of why Turnbull is unpopular, and especially so among the centre-left who previously thought of him as the "cool dad" of parliament.
And now for why the Trump thing has compounded this impression. Trust me, this transcript is damaging Turnbull in Australia much more than it's damaging Trump.
Sorry, this article is very flawed and it accepts too much of Turnbull's comments at face value. Here are a few examples:
Complete rot. The "deaths at sea" justification is ex post facto for a draconian anti-refugee policy that Trump is possibly correct to characterise as "worse" than his. I'll spare you the evolution of Australian policy towards asylum seekers, especially those who have come by boat, but the two major parties have been in a race to the bottom to outdo each other in severity and exclusion of so-called boat people since the 1990s. They believe this is a vote winner, especially in marginal seats such as those in western Sydney. These draconian policies made the voyage to Australia increasingly dangerous.
Inevitably there were tragic drownings at sea, which provoked a strong humanitarian response - especially when these involved large numbers of children. Instead of acknowledging that bipartisan policy had contributed to these sinkings, and seeking to stick the boot into the Rudd/Gillard Labour government (who were in power during some of the worst sinkings), the Liberals started selling their even-more-draconian policies as seeking to protect deaths at sea. This had never been part of the debate until the Libs feared that the drownings would need them to moderate their policy, which would be unacceptable to a large chunk of their base. Those who pointed to flaws in Liberal policy, or who wanted to admit refugees who arrive by boat, were no longer just bleeding heart lefties or national security ignoramuses; they were monsters who accepted children drowning. It was a trick to cast the Liberals as humanitarians when, in fact, the reason boat arrivals cause so much hysteria (out of all proportion with their tiny numbers) is because these people are predominantly Middle Eastern and/or Muslim.
Trump is, in fact, dead right when he says "What is the thing with boats? Why do you discriminate against boats? No, I know, they come from certain regions. I get it." This quote will be used relentlessly against Turnbull by his opponents, mark my words.
Here the author gives away their unfamiliarity with Australian political discourse. "Economic migrant" is a dogwhistle to say "these are not legitimate refugees, they are coming from comfortable lives abroad to steal your jobs". These people have been found to be refugees with a valid fear of persecution. That's why Australia won't send them home.
Trump might not get this, but the important point here is that a ban on boat arrivals breaches the UN Refugee Convention. Australian politicians have been careful to side-step this (Labour are guilty too); whenever pressed on arrivals by air, they point to people-smuggling as the issue, trying to use that thin veneer as a defence that they are not in breach of the Convention.
Turnbull just exposed his own party's line as a lie - it is, simply, an irrational targeting of the means of arrival, regardless of whether those who arrive are terrorists or Nobel laureates. It's purely political: there is no fear in Australia of refugees who arrive by air, only of those who come by boat. And people are asking, with validity, why Turnbull is more frank with Trump than he is with the Australian people.
Abbott was a vile individual - but you knew that he stood for what he said he stood for. He was, to use the words of one of his political idols, not for turning. It made him popular with the Liberal Party's strong far-right and socially conservative parliamentary factions, but unpopular with the electorate at large. The Libs were heading towards a huge thumping in 2016 when they blinked and restored Malcolm Turnbull to the leadership. They still got a belting, but managed to cling to power by a single seat. Turnbull had been the leader in opposition before Abbott rolled him and won power in 2013, and that period had actually made Turnbull look good to centrist and centre-left voters; one reason he was rolled was his commitment to action on climate change. He was a suave businessman who had played a role in the rise of the Internet in Australia in the nineties, and he came across on TV as a cool guy who would bring many swing voters back to the Libs from Labour.
But he sold his soul to be leader. He contorted himself in so many different ways to get enough votes from the party room to gain the leadership that he became beholden to various policies of the right-wing factions that he had previously argued against passionately, that are unpopular publicly, and that have very little chance of passing parliament (the government does not control the Senate, and has proven poor negotiators with the motley assortment of crossbench parties). Australia's paralysis on marriage equality, for example, is almost entirely down to this pact. Turnbull found himself bound to the socially conservative factions' demand for a national plebiscite, even though parliament won't pass legislation to enable a plebiscite, and if he dares to try to pass marriage equality through routine legislation, which is all that is required, he might lose the leadership through a party revolt.
He has done so many backflips, advanced so many policies he previously did not support, and in general been so gutless in the face of pressure from fringe nutters in his party, unwilling to stand up for the principles the public thought he had, that it's going to take something extraordinary for either he or the Libs to retain government at next year's election.
I am, of course, partisan. But I think this is a pretty fair overview of why Turnbull is unpopular, and especially so among the centre-left who previously thought of him as the "cool dad" of parliament.
And now for why the Trump thing has compounded this impression. Trust me, this transcript is damaging Turnbull in Australia much more than it's damaging Trump.
Sorry, this article is very flawed and it accepts too much of Turnbull's comments at face value. Here are a few examples:
Complete rot. The "deaths at sea" justification is ex post facto for a draconian anti-refugee policy that Trump is possibly correct to characterise as "worse" than his. I'll spare you the evolution of Australian policy towards asylum seekers, especially those who have come by boat, but the two major parties have been in a race to the bottom to outdo each other in severity and exclusion of so-called boat people since the 1990s. They believe this is a vote winner, especially in marginal seats such as those in western Sydney. These draconian policies made the voyage to Australia increasingly dangerous.
Inevitably there were tragic drownings at sea, which provoked a strong humanitarian response - especially when these involved large numbers of children. Instead of acknowledging that bipartisan policy had contributed to these sinkings, and seeking to stick the boot into the Rudd/Gillard Labour government (who were in power during some of the worst sinkings), the Liberals started selling their even-more-draconian policies as seeking to protect deaths at sea. This had never been part of the debate until the Libs feared that the drownings would need them to moderate their policy, which would be unacceptable to a large chunk of their base. Those who pointed to flaws in Liberal policy, or who wanted to admit refugees who arrive by boat, were no longer just bleeding heart lefties or national security ignoramuses; they were monsters who accepted children drowning. It was a trick to cast the Liberals as humanitarians when, in fact, the reason boat arrivals cause so much hysteria (out of all proportion with their tiny numbers) is because these people are predominantly Middle Eastern and/or Muslim.
Trump is, in fact, dead right when he says "What is the thing with boats? Why do you discriminate against boats? No, I know, they come from certain regions. I get it." This quote will be used relentlessly against Turnbull by his opponents, mark my words.
Here the author gives away their unfamiliarity with Australian political discourse. "Economic migrant" is a dogwhistle to say "these are not legitimate refugees, they are coming from comfortable lives abroad to steal your jobs". These people have been found to be refugees with a valid fear of persecution. That's why Australia won't send them home.
Trump might not get this, but the important point here is that a ban on boat arrivals breaches the UN Refugee Convention. Australian politicians have been careful to side-step this (Labour are guilty too); whenever pressed on arrivals by air, they point to people-smuggling as the issue, trying to use that thin veneer as a defence that they are not in breach of the Convention.
Turnbull just exposed his own party's line as a lie - it is, simply, an irrational targeting of the means of arrival, regardless of whether those who arrive are terrorists or Nobel laureates. It's purely political: there is no fear in Australia of refugees who arrive by air, only of those who come by boat. And people are asking, with validity, why Turnbull is more frank with Trump than he is with the Australian people.
OP
OP
DaveC
Blue Crack Addict
good informative post, ax. lots of context and interesting background information. my opinion of turnbull has gone from "generally seems to suck" to "definitely really sucks".
it hardly means that trump looked any "better" than turnbull in this though. if anything it just means we heard the sound of two chimpanzees competing to see who can fling the biggest turd at the wall.
it hardly means that trump looked any "better" than turnbull in this though. if anything it just means we heard the sound of two chimpanzees competing to see who can fling the biggest turd at the wall.
Vlad n U 2
Blue Crack Addict
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2008
- Messages
- 28,386
I am finding the difference in reporting between US and Aus media to be pretty fascinating on this to say the least, anyone here in the centre or left of centre has been disgusted by Turnbull in this transcript - at some points it seems that even Trump of all people is shocked by our government's refugee policy. A lot of us think both leaders came off as bad as each other.
I think a lot of very Trump-critical US media seems to position anyone he has some sort of conflict with as a positive figure as a default (see here). Often this doesn't seem to take into account this figure's actual politics, as I've seen instances where Shinzo Abe's wife was celebrated for embarrassing Trump etc. even though Shinzo Abe is as far to the right as Trump himself is.
They both suck incredibly, but in mildly different ways. Abbott was an ultra conservative imbecile (not unlike Trump) who was openly callous towards the vulnerable whilst Turnbull is like a right wing Dem/moderate Republican who has no spine or any real convictions other than kowtowing to the far right of his party/inflicting more pain on the vulnerable (but in a more 'polite' manner than Abbott).
Last edited:
Cheers mate. Definitely agree with your characterisation there.
That was hilarious, and it seems she has more redeeming qualities than her husband, but oh man that was a total milkshake duck moment.
I think the difference lies in that Turnbull sounds like a shady politician, which isn't shocking, whereas Trump sounds like a fucking imbecile, which I guess is also not shocking.
On second thought, nevermind
On second thought, nevermind
cobl04
45:33
Extremely well-put, Ax.
For my two cents, Trump is Trump. Like, I guess, Abbott, we know who Trump is and we know what he stands for and we know he doesn't kowtow or pussyfoot around. Whilst he is the most vile Western politician that I have ever known in my time being politically engaged, there is a weird respect I pay the man for at least having the strength of his own convictions.
When I began to get politically engaged, I admired Turnbull. He was very consistent on climate change and marriage equality, and was the nicest (for lack of a better word) of the Liberals. I had faith that we could reach a sensible discourse with him around - there's even an instagram post I did the night of the spill.
The reason that I said what I originally said boils down essentially to this part:
It makes me sick to my fucking stomach. Forget diplomacy, forget all the bullshit, forget Trump being Trump. This is a man who is the prime minister of Australia flagrantly and openly admitting that he doesn't give a remote shit about the lives of 1250 people, this is a man openly admitting that all he wants is the veneer of a deal so that he can look good and strong, he doesn't give a flying fuck that the rest of the deal goes to shit, all he cares about is saving his own fucking face. It is utterly galling and completely sickening.
I've seen a lot of American commentary on this essentially commending Turnbull for "standing up" to Trump or whatever and it is making me so mad. He's not remotely standing up at all, he's acting like a fucking skittish cat. "Oh Trump, please just say you agree once, and then you can do whatever you want, please, please, please, just make me look good." It is fucking pathetic. You're all correct, Trump is a complete imbecile, but we already knew that. This is just the latest in a long line of examples and it doesn't remotely reflect badly on Trump, because what he said about shooting someone on fifth avenue has proved presciently correct.
That is not being "deferential" as has been used twice in this thread. That is a pissweak human completely betraying all his own convictions, the Australian people, so he can try and save his own fucking hide.
Sorry, I've worked up quite a head of steam, but it just infuriates me. I cannot wait to see go out on his fucking arse at the next election and I will soak up the joy for the two minutes before the realisation that we're stuck with a Labour government that will also only be interested in a veneer.
For my two cents, Trump is Trump. Like, I guess, Abbott, we know who Trump is and we know what he stands for and we know he doesn't kowtow or pussyfoot around. Whilst he is the most vile Western politician that I have ever known in my time being politically engaged, there is a weird respect I pay the man for at least having the strength of his own convictions.
When I began to get politically engaged, I admired Turnbull. He was very consistent on climate change and marriage equality, and was the nicest (for lack of a better word) of the Liberals. I had faith that we could reach a sensible discourse with him around - there's even an instagram post I did the night of the spill.
The reason that I said what I originally said boils down essentially to this part:
It makes me sick to my fucking stomach. Forget diplomacy, forget all the bullshit, forget Trump being Trump. This is a man who is the prime minister of Australia flagrantly and openly admitting that he doesn't give a remote shit about the lives of 1250 people, this is a man openly admitting that all he wants is the veneer of a deal so that he can look good and strong, he doesn't give a flying fuck that the rest of the deal goes to shit, all he cares about is saving his own fucking face. It is utterly galling and completely sickening.
I've seen a lot of American commentary on this essentially commending Turnbull for "standing up" to Trump or whatever and it is making me so mad. He's not remotely standing up at all, he's acting like a fucking skittish cat. "Oh Trump, please just say you agree once, and then you can do whatever you want, please, please, please, just make me look good." It is fucking pathetic. You're all correct, Trump is a complete imbecile, but we already knew that. This is just the latest in a long line of examples and it doesn't remotely reflect badly on Trump, because what he said about shooting someone on fifth avenue has proved presciently correct.
That is not being "deferential" as has been used twice in this thread. That is a pissweak human completely betraying all his own convictions, the Australian people, so he can try and save his own fucking hide.
Sorry, I've worked up quite a head of steam, but it just infuriates me. I cannot wait to see go out on his fucking arse at the next election and I will soak up the joy for the two minutes before the realisation that we're stuck with a Labour government that will also only be interested in a veneer.
namkcuR
ONE love, blood, life
I believe both of you guys. I really don't know anything about Australian politics so I'll take your word for it. What you both say makes a lot of sense anyway. About Trump though...
Are you kidding? I'm sorry for what's about to come, but I can work up a head of steam too.
The man has NO convictions. He was a New York Democrat(meaning socially liberal and fiscally in favor of whatever benefited the wealthy) until about ten minutes before he ran for President as a Republican.
He is on video stating emphatically, in the 90s, to be pro choice. Now he's pro-life? People's views can change but that's not what happened here.
The whole campaign he promises over and over that if he's elected healthcare will be better and cheaper for all those blue collar types who voted for him, then celebrated with Republicans from the House of Representatives after they passed their version of a bill that would be absolutely awful for those very blue collar types, and then spent that last two months begging Senate Republicans to do anything that had to do to pass their version of a bill that would be even worse for those blue collar types than the House version. Because he doesn't give a fuck. All he wants, ALL he wants with regards to healthcare, is for anything with the word 'repeal' in it to pass so he can go on TV, claim a win, and brag about how great he is. It doesn't matter that the bill, had it become law, would've probably done the opposite of what he said he'd do for those peoples' healthcare.
During the campaign, he says how great he's going to be for LGBT people, how much they're going to love him(which actually wasn't all that hard to believe since, like I said before, he's been a socially liberal Democrat for most of his adult life), and now he's trying to remove Transgender people from the military. And he's only doing it to get the social conservatives to cheer for him and to attempt to distract people from the Russia investigation.
He spends the whole campaign raging about Mexicans and how he's going to build the wall, and now is this transcript with the Mexican president, he admits to the guy that he doesn't actually care that much about the wall. Oh and by the way, apparently his rage against Mexico in general stems from a business deal he made with Mexican businessmen that went bad, after which he took them to court and didn't make out as well as he wanted. It seems that he allows personal grudges to dictate his worldview. Like how some suggest his hatred of Obama stems from when Obama made fun of him practically to his face during a White House Correspondents' Dinner.
He spends the whole campaign purporting to be the voice of the little guy and then assembles the wealthiest presidential cabinet ever, which is obviously what presidents who want to fight for the little guy do.
He claimed to be anti-interventionist but now he certainly seems like he'd go to war with North Korea if they went far enough.
Let's not forget that he used to be friendly with the Clintons. They were at his wedding to Melania, and he used to play golf with Bill. Now he's inciting chants of 'Lock her up', and on the campaign he got a number of Bill's mistresses on stage to throw shit at him.
I could go on. I don't mean to pick on you, but that triggered me. Convictions? You must be kidding.
You could say the exact same thing about Trump(minus the convictions part, because he has none). He is all ego, and everything he does is for his own good or that of his family.
Are you kidding? I'm sorry for what's about to come, but I can work up a head of steam too.
The man has NO convictions. He was a New York Democrat(meaning socially liberal and fiscally in favor of whatever benefited the wealthy) until about ten minutes before he ran for President as a Republican.
He is on video stating emphatically, in the 90s, to be pro choice. Now he's pro-life? People's views can change but that's not what happened here.
The whole campaign he promises over and over that if he's elected healthcare will be better and cheaper for all those blue collar types who voted for him, then celebrated with Republicans from the House of Representatives after they passed their version of a bill that would be absolutely awful for those very blue collar types, and then spent that last two months begging Senate Republicans to do anything that had to do to pass their version of a bill that would be even worse for those blue collar types than the House version. Because he doesn't give a fuck. All he wants, ALL he wants with regards to healthcare, is for anything with the word 'repeal' in it to pass so he can go on TV, claim a win, and brag about how great he is. It doesn't matter that the bill, had it become law, would've probably done the opposite of what he said he'd do for those peoples' healthcare.
During the campaign, he says how great he's going to be for LGBT people, how much they're going to love him(which actually wasn't all that hard to believe since, like I said before, he's been a socially liberal Democrat for most of his adult life), and now he's trying to remove Transgender people from the military. And he's only doing it to get the social conservatives to cheer for him and to attempt to distract people from the Russia investigation.
He spends the whole campaign raging about Mexicans and how he's going to build the wall, and now is this transcript with the Mexican president, he admits to the guy that he doesn't actually care that much about the wall. Oh and by the way, apparently his rage against Mexico in general stems from a business deal he made with Mexican businessmen that went bad, after which he took them to court and didn't make out as well as he wanted. It seems that he allows personal grudges to dictate his worldview. Like how some suggest his hatred of Obama stems from when Obama made fun of him practically to his face during a White House Correspondents' Dinner.
He spends the whole campaign purporting to be the voice of the little guy and then assembles the wealthiest presidential cabinet ever, which is obviously what presidents who want to fight for the little guy do.
He claimed to be anti-interventionist but now he certainly seems like he'd go to war with North Korea if they went far enough.
Let's not forget that he used to be friendly with the Clintons. They were at his wedding to Melania, and he used to play golf with Bill. Now he's inciting chants of 'Lock her up', and on the campaign he got a number of Bill's mistresses on stage to throw shit at him.
I could go on. I don't mean to pick on you, but that triggered me. Convictions? You must be kidding.
You could say the exact same thing about Trump(minus the convictions part, because he has none). He is all ego, and everything he does is for his own good or that of his family.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Part of what makes Trump so vile is that we don't know what he stands for, or if he has any true convictions. It's why it's so easy for him to lie about even the smallest things, or the most obvious of things.
That statement was mind boggling.
That statement was mind boggling.
cobl04
45:33
Yes, good points Ruckman. Strength of his convictions was not correct. More that.... you know who/what he is (ie a snake), so when he does backflips or says all this outrageous shit, it's not that surprising. But points taken!
BoMac
Self-righteous bullshitter
OMG after all these years I finally understand his username.
cobl04
45:33
I don't know what it means though, because it has a very specific meaning in Australian sport, but I don't know how else it could be used.
corianderstem
Blue Crack Distributor
LOL "understand" as in his username is his (likely) last name backwards.
namkcuR
ONE love, blood, life
I don't even know what the Australian sport thing is. I had to look it up just now. I've never watched a second of Australian rules football in my life.
It's my surname. Upon registering, I was trying to think of something that wouldn't become outdated or whatever, and I just typed my surname backwards on a whim. I didn't know I'd still be posting here 13 years later or I may have gone with something else.
I like it though.
It's my surname. Upon registering, I was trying to think of something that wouldn't become outdated or whatever, and I just typed my surname backwards on a whim. I didn't know I'd still be posting here 13 years later or I may have gone with something else.
I like it though.namkcuR
ONE love, blood, life
Winner.
BoMac
Self-righteous bullshitter
I meant I finally "get" his username. Get it? ?
corianderstem
Blue Crack Distributor
I don't get BoMac.
(Well-played!)
(Well-played!)
cobl04
45:33
why the fuck would that be most likely? 
Time to sort that out. It's the best sport in the world.
Signed,
A New Zealander
why the fuck would that be most likely?
Yeah, it's definitely an unusual last name. I hope he has mates called Fullforward, Tightheadprop, and Legspinner.
- Status
Similar threads
