Bernadi’s decision to do the robocalls is a strange move given all the feigned outrage over the ‘Yes’ campaign’s text message.

Dear Paul,

«I could not understand your logic for voting in the first place, given your stance on government intrusion in peoples private lives.»

Mitigation. Preventing a bad situation from getting even worse.

Also a strategic vote, so that disappointed 'Yes' voters will turn instead against the whole institution of legal/state-sponsored marriage.

«The "No" campaign is equally intrusive as the "Yes" mob.»

Yes, I have learned about it yesterday and I'm sorry for helping them.

The means are at least as important as the goals!

«One side wants the law a certain way, the other side wants it another way, but they both want a law.»

Yes, but I was hoping that the disagreement between them can result in the cancellation, rather than the replacement of the current law.

«I can't understand the logic of that joker, Senator David Leyonhjelm who claims he is for the rights of the individual.»

To the best of my knowledge, the Liberal Democrats support individual freedoms, rather than rights.

When first entering office, Leyonhjelm promised that he will never support any legislation that further encumbers on individual freedoms or increase taxes. In practice, life is much more complicated and parliament is full with horse-trading/pork-barreling. What to do for example when government brings forward a new piece of legislation which repeals some restriction on the freedoms of 70% but imposes new restrictions on 10%? It's a very difficult situation and I wouldn't want to be doing that dirty work myself.

«"The Liberal Democrats believe government have neither the expertise, nor the rights to tell people how to run their lives."»

Yes, so do I, but they have only one representative in parliament, so it comes down again, to mitigation.