SA Footy

Geez the best joke ever

Christ, where did you hear that.
Don't get me started.

big press conference today ol son at 6.00pm

Sounds like a reasonable approach to me superficially, but I'll wait for more detail.

Believe it when I see it. Thirteen years of sweet FA and now this. The man hasn't lifted a finger to help with reconciliation from the day he entered parliament. Why should we believe him now? If he does win the election all of a sudden it will become a non-core promise anyway.
Seriously if Howard told me the sun was going to rise tomorrow I'd get a second opinion.

If he gives my dad a mill for being one of the stolen generation I'll re-consider my stance on Mr Howard and his aboriginal policies.
That's about as likely to happen as Port getting within 100 pts of Geelong in a Grand Final.

Reconciliation became a dirty word substituting for giving a white "aboriginal" power group lots of money to misuse. I am for recogniton of their prior occupation of this land in an integrated and equal Australian society, and for better health services to all Australians. The special medical needs of "aboriginal" people do need to be considered.

I put the word "aboriginal" in quotes only because their is plenty of evidence the present group bearing that name supplanted an earlier group of different origin, as has happened all over the world many times, and were not here "from the beginning" as the term implies. 50,000years is a short time in world migration.

Psyber wrote:Reconciliation became a dirty word substituting for giving a white "aboriginal" power group lots of money to misuse. I am for recogniton of their prior occupation of this land in an integrated and equal Australian society, and for better health services to all Australians. The special medical needs of "aboriginal" people do need to be considered.

I put the word "aboriginal" in quotes only because their is plenty of evidence the present group bearing that name supplanted an earlier group of different origin, as has happened all over the world many times, and were not here "from the beginning" as the term implies. 50,000years is a short time in world migration.

Gee I bet your card carrying fellow members in their sub branches in little dusty cwa halls are shitting themselves.Surely If we can have a lovely little preamble in the constitution saying yes maybe they should be acknowledged we can have a serious look at the reducing the continuous occupation walls and making it a real recognition.If 50,000years is a short time in world migration then WTF would 219 years be?. I cant help but think that Honest John may be thinking how he will be looked at in the history books of the future if he does lose the upcoming election. If he wins and it gets voted down well I guess he can say he wanted to but the public has spoken

I've voted Liberal and for John Howard my entire life.
But his views on immigration and aborginals is disgusting to say the least.
I still can't believe he's been allowed to implement a racist policy in the NT when I see much worse parents in lower socio economic areas in Adelaide in the far south and far north.
Anyone who agrees with his policies are either racist or ignorant. But he's smart as that's where the votes are at.

I must admit it looks a little bit cynical, although apparently Mr Rudd thinks it's a good idea, so it looks like we'll be having a referendum to change the constitution to recognise the existence of the original occupants of this country, either way, its taken a long time to get to this point, at least from 1967 when aborigines first got the vote. We've had a number of different governments since then, therefore no party is without shame in this issue.

mick wrote:I must admit it looks a little bit cynical, although apparently Mr Rudd thinks it's a good idea, so it looks like we'll be having a referendum to change the constitution to recognise the existence of the original occupants of this country, either way, its taken a long time to get to this point, at least from 1967 when aborigines first got the vote. We've had a number of different governments since then, therefore no party is without shame in this issue.

Mick, that's where Mr Howard's 'campaign's' been so good. I've been hating this prolonged wait for a date to be announced.

But the longer it goes, the more runs JHo has put on the board.

And all Rudd can do is follow, because Howard's setting the agenda. The old dog is winning back a few more votes each week.

The only positive sign for Labor is that they haven't appeared to get toooooo frazzled and impatient to get the ball rolling.

Time will tell, but I think anything Rudd announces in the first week of the campaign will be crucial to Labor's hopes. I think that week will decide which way many people will vote.

smac wrote:

mick wrote:I must admit it looks a little bit cynical, although apparently Mr Rudd thinks it's a good idea, so it looks like we'll be having a referendum to change the constitution to recognise the existence of the original occupants of this country, either way, its taken a long time to get to this point, at least from 1967 when aborigines first got the vote. We've had a number of different governments since then, therefore no party is without shame in this issue.

I should have added "as well" apparently Rudd has promised bipartisan support. Agree with your assessment Dogwatcher, but Howard is gone....too far behind....somewhere between 8 and 12% to make up.

You know, in many ways if that happens and Howard doesn't get back in, he's still won because he's forced more than one agenda on Labor anddddd he's drawn them closer further to Liberal, which is only going to benefit the blue bloods.

I was referring to the fact that Rudd is agreeing with almost everything.

I think it's clever as it will likely win him office. But damn it's annoying.

That's part of my point mate, Howard's forced his agenda, and it will run in the first couple of years of the term whether he gets in or not.

Sorry, your post wasn't there when I started typing, didn't read it when it popped up after I submitted.

Yes, you are probably correct - unless Rudd has non core promises as well.

smac wrote:I was referring to the fact that Rudd is agreeing with almost everything.

I think it's clever as it will likely win him office. But damn it's annoying.

Not suprising as Rudd is the most conservative Labor leader in the last 40 years or so, he would certainly have more in common with Johnny than say Gough Whitlam. I think Rudd is a clever politician, if he fails it will be because some of his colleagues have put their feet in it

Hmmmmmmmm

redden whites wrote:

Psyber wrote:Reconciliation became a dirty word substituting for giving a white "aboriginal" power group lots of money to misuse. I am for recogniton of their prior occupation of this land in an integrated and equal Australian society, and for better health services to all Australians. The special medical needs of "aboriginal" people do need to be considered.

I put the word "aboriginal" in quotes only because their is plenty of evidence the present group bearing that name supplanted an earlier group of different origin, as has happened all over the world many times, and were not here "from the beginning" as the term implies. 50,000years is a short time in world migration.

Gee I bet your card carrying fellow members in their sub branches in little dusty cwa halls are shitting themselves.Surely If we can have a lovely little preamble in the constitution saying yes maybe they should be acknowledged we can have a serious look at the reducing the continuous occupation walls and making it a real recognition.If 50,000years is a short time in world migration then WTF would 219 years be?. I cant help but think that Honest John may be thinking how he will be looked at in the history books of the future if he does lose the upcoming election. If he wins and it gets voted down well I guess he can say he wanted to but the public has spoken

All I am objecting to is the myth that our immediate predecessors were the first occupiers of the country. Yes, 50,000 years is a short time in the duration of human or humanoid migration, and 219 years is the blink of an eye. There is evidence those who remained in Tasmania when the white guys got here were earlier occupiers of the mainland and a distinct ethnic group, and YES the white guys unworthily finished them off.

I am all for equal and fair treatment for all Australians, much better medical care, and better protection for children. I believe we have neglected our "Aboriginal" people and should do better.

However, I think our ancestors who created the "stolen" generation were often misguided not malicious, and at the time thought they were rescuing them from neglect and early death. In some cases they may even have been right - I couldn't guess at a percentage. The facts have been obscured as both sides of the argument scrabble to distort reality for political ends.