Paul, thanks for the kind words and accolades.
I am and have always been whatever/whoever I am.
I know who I am, and I am proud of who I am.
You on the other hand are having problems trying to come to terms with who I am so you have fabricated this imaginary me, in your mind, and that's OK.
I am pleased that you find me interesting and worthy enough to concern yourself and comment/discuss, about/with me.
I happily go about my business without any hang-ups or draw-backs, in the knowledge that I see the world as it really is, and accept all the foibles and idiosyncrasies unless they are harmful and a threat to anyone physically or financially.
I do not recognise emotions as there are too many emotional people of low or no conviction and maturity, who will complain or whinge about the most stupid, innocuous and pathetic of things.
And so it is that I am who/what I am, I don't heed nor heel, to the whims of lesser weaker people.
I am a MAN, and I expect a certain amount of responsibility and demands on me for being a man.
I do not reject or regale in being born to this role, so mock away, I am what/who I am, and you are something of a curiosity by comparison.

Foxy,

The case against Shorten has not been dealt with. According to the police, the case was dropped due to insufficient evidence in that the word of one person against another is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt which is exactly the point I argued in the Pell trial which the High court agreed with me.

With regards to Porter, there is not even a police case because not only is there no evidence whatsoever, there is no complaint to the police and not a shred of evidence. If the Shorten case has been dealt with then even more so has the Porter case.

The left whingers are trying to reanimate a non-existent case for Porter while trying to pretend that Shorten is immune to the same treatment. An inquiry into the rapes will include a full statement by the woman Shorten allegedly raped.

" which is exactly the point I argued in the Pell trial which the High court agreed with me."

SHONKYMINISTER, I hope you were wearing your wig and gown at the time, Gee some people kid themselves. As a Legal Eagle I suspect you're more the Dennis Denuto type.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMuh33BMZYY&ab_channel=thecomputerdude24TV%26MovieClips

ALTI,

No one sees the world complete as it truly is, not even you. We see things through our own eyes, applying our own perceptions, beliefs, values, prejudices and judgments. You might think you have come to your position of "reality" through clarity of thought, in isolation from outside influences that would create biased thinking on your part, that you are some kind of "free thinker", devoid of unhealthy influences, you are wrong if that's what you believe. It is obvious from your posts you are heavily influenced by conservative Judeo-Christian beliefs, that being the society you grew up in, in your intuitive years, you accepted such beliefs with little questioning of their correctness. There is nothing wrong with that, although other more progressive people will disagree with your thinking from time to time as their values and beliefs are different to some degree from yours. Come, come, ALTI at the end of the day your opinions are just as influenced by experiences, just as valid, as those of everyone else.

Paul, even though I may agree with much of what you say, I disagree with your suggestion that I cannot see the world as it is.
I am sensitive to wrong doings, and because of this, find myself always questioning EVERYTHING!
I had a very strict and disciplined up-bringing.
Because of this, I have always questioned beliefs and more, and still do to this day.
This is why my beliefs are not influenced by others, and especially changes in trends or what you describe as "progressive" people.
I completely and utterly reject what I believe you are promoting as progressive people and the direction of society.
I have always believed in the basic values of life, such as the traditional family unit.
Seeing as my up-bringing was one of discipline, respect and rules, I can see the difference.
I respect those worthy of respect.
I dis-respect and attack, condemn even, those who are clearly dis-respectful, as you've witnessed.
Your idea of "progressive people" is not progressive at all, when you consider the lifestyle of people today.
In my world, everything is either black or white.
I have not allowed myself to be swayed by the debauchery and lascivious behaviour and lifestyle of todays "progressive people".
You may think of me what you like but I have followed a much disciplined, cleaner, and simpler lifestyle than your progressives of today.
I do not accept so many things that are considered the norm today, and so it is that I DO have a clear un-biased and open mind, but not open to things which are obviously in contradiction with nature or reason.
So it is that the direction people are heading today will eventuate in a "day of reckoning", and if people don't stop and take stock, and change their ways, it will come sooner and harsher than it would otherwise.
Anyone can be as perceptive and aware as myself, if they reject all the childish, immature influences in life and focus on their own betterment instead of the disgusting and irresponsible lifestyle as is being described going on in parliament house

Good Morning Paul,

I agree that judgements are conclusions based on our
own personal values to a given situation. They are
subjective. They often leave little room for other
people to share their experiences. The fact is we
tend to fuse with our judgements and perceive them
as reality. And often we can't tell the difference
between what our opinion is and what the reality is.
In the end our perception becomes our reality. We end
up believing our thoughts/judgements and take them as
facts.

Instead of seeing our multitude of judgements as a
perception or as a lens we put on situations, we
see it as a truth. By doing this we create a situation
and a lack of acceptance of other's beliefs.

Hi Shadow Minister,

Paul Kelly writing for The Australian sums things up
rather well. He tells us that ultimately, this
situation with Porter will be resolved by Scott
Morrison. It will be sorted within the political
system, and this is where it should be sorted.
It is about ministerial behaviour and cabinet
standards.

If you have the time the article is worth a read.