SR,

Mate, you don't need me to challenge you, just idiom and logic seems to have you floored with this one. That Arnold S shrugged off an assault reflects well on him not the assailant and using your logic would imply that a husband that beats his wife is exonerated if the wife forgives him?

However AJ mangles an idiom, and you want him fired? This is the same crap that has got Rugby Australia in such hot water.

As for being fragile, your side of politics is so deep in crap with donations of cash in shopping bags etc, that you comment is laughable.

Dear Shadow Minister,

So some kid breaking an egg on a pollie's scone is the equivalent to someone beating his wife? It is a very binary world you live in old chap.

As to 'my side of politics' this old Australian Democrat left the party primarily because they started taking political donations from corporations. Never joined another.

SR,

I'm not sure whether you are simply trying to be obtuse or pretending to be illiterate. I never equated the common assault of egging someone with the aggravated assault of wife beating, just shone a light on your faulty logic of claiming that assault is OK if the victim does not complain.

Secondly, I mentioned your side of politics not your ex party. Given that the labor party is the asylum of most left whingers they are definitely your side of politics.

P.S. Since I have never joined any political party, what is the "my side of politics" to which you referred?

Dear Shadow Minister,

The equivalence you are trying to orchestrate is calling they both “criminal physical assault”. I don't accept that of the egging at all.

As to Jones he didn't mangle anything, he weaponised an old saying and meant every word of it.

If you truly are not a member of the coalition then why on earth are you in complete lockstep with everything they do even to the point of defending things they have apologised for?

SR,

sorry but you overreach in a sad attempt at desperately trying to make/win your point/s.
Jones is whatever he is, no matter what you or anyone else thinks.
He's a "shock Jock" and he's good at it.
He gets it right most of the time.
As for Arnold taking an egging and moving on; it's called "POLITICS 101"
Where-as Anning says and does it like it is.
He got egged by a smart-arse little glory seeking you-tuber, and I and millions of others are sorry that Anning was stopped by smashing this arrogant piece of scum into oblivion.
I would have settled for just one decent full-on in the face hammer hit, that would have rendered him requiring urgent medical attention.
Now that's a valuable life lesson the kid sadly missed out on because of the soft cocks in the world today.
His "minders" were just people, some were helpers, NO MINDERS, NO BODY GUARDS!
Now you need to soften your stance on backing the wrong horse.
You invest too much in semantics and foolishly believe that the readers cannot see through your egregious attempts at making mis-leading and incorrect comments, and your cunning ways of manipulating and distorting the truth by "bearing false witness".
A VERY BAD TRAIT.
One that is abhorant and divisive in life's interactions between people, assimilating to the much maligned PC language.
SR, shame on you!

"As to Jones he didn't mangle anything, he weaponised an old saying and meant every word of it."

What if he really did mean it?
I mean what if he genuinely 100% wanted ScoMo to cram that sock down her throat?
Who cares what's the big deal anyway?
He didn't say HE was going to do it, and people have minds of their own and are responsible for their own actions.
- No matter what AJ says, doesn't give anyone else justification to actually break the law.

Or are we frightened that he will encourage some low level morons that are incapable of controlling their own actions?

Newsflash: 'The daily blabber reports than a steady stream of people have been arrested trying to rush the NZ PM with socks. It's thought these people were trying to carry out Alan Jones call for the PM to have socks placed down her throat...'

I mean where the freaking hell are we? Pre School?

Why is he NOT permitted to say whatever he thinks?
- All he said was what many of us were already thinking or saying anyway -
What is this a bloody law on what people are or are not permitted to think now?
Might as well be.

'Weaponising' is what they've done to our democracy, with all this anti-hate, anti harm, minority-majority social justice, PC bubblewrap crap.