- Joined
- 28 August 2022
- Posts
- 7,035
- Reactions
- 11,391
A cruising number with his backside well entrenched in one of those very comfy lounge chairs!!!!
A cruising number with his backside well entrenched in one of those very comfy lounge chairs!!!!Dutton really is a grub, use the poorest and weakest group in our society to point score (Coalition normally stand in front of around 30 plus Australian flags each time they BS the cameras to totally prove they are tossers)
Other than locking up little girls and their parents (costing $30 mil) what is it Dutton stands for?
That's the only reason Albo is safe, you should be encouraging him. LolDutton really is a grub, use the poorest and weakest group in our society to point score (Coalition normally stand in front of around 30 plus Australian flags each time they BS the cameras to totally prove they are tossers)
Other than locking up little girls and their parents (costing $30 mil) what is it Dutton stands for?
@sptrawler with a fine pair of duds sitting opposite and leading an equal conga tine of duds what real hope is there.That's the only reason Albo is safe, you should be encouraging him. Lol
Dutton really is a grub, use the poorest and weakest group in our society to point score (Coalition normally stand in front of around 30 plus Australian flags each time they BS the cameras to totally prove they are tossers)
Other than locking up little girls and their parents (costing $30 mil) what is it Dutton stands for?
Why Peter Dutton is right to fly one flag for unity
In politics, there is what Canberra talks about and then there is what the electorate picks up. Sometimes they are one and the same thing, but often they’re not. That’s because unless the modern politician works hard at keeping their feet on the ground and their ears listening (as opposed to their jaws flapping), there can be a real disconnect between what our leaders think is important and what we care about, what we talk about and what motivates our vote.
The same is true of the media and the elites that run our big businesses, cultural institutions and sporting organisations.
On Monday night on my show, I said to Peter Dutton I’d noticed he stands in front of only one flag at his press conferences. I then asked him, if he wins the upcoming election, would he continue that practice as PM, and he made it very clear that he would. The Opposition Leader’s response was a defining moment.
Those who don’t get it tried to say this was “divisive”, “a backward step in terms of reconciliation”. Some even said there was no public support for change. Clearly, these people just underscored my point about those who talk and those who listen because the reaction from my show, and the media that followed, highlighted just how strongly Dutton’s position resonated in the real world.
I would go so far as to say it could be our version of Donald Trump’s killer ad: “Kamala is for they/them. President Trump is for you”. Because when it comes to the flag, it’s always been clear where voters stand. And it’s not with a prime minister who’s clearly embarrassed about our flag and the history it represents.
In addition to his very first words after winning the election, that he would implement the Uluru Statement “in full”, Anthony Albanese has never had a formal media event in Australia without standing before all three flags.
As well, the PM, his ministers, and officials begin every formal proceeding with an Acknowledgement of Country (often repeated, one speaker after another) and where it is an event, there’s usually a taxpayer-funded Welcome to Country from a local elder that’s no longer a short set of words but invariably a lengthy speech with heavy political undertones.
Yet in an election campaign where he stressed “safe change”, Albanese hardly even mentioned the voice, let alone his intention to elevate the Indigenous flags to co-equal status with our national one. Nor have the Australian people ever been asked to vote on whether Indigenous flags should always be flown alongside the national flag; parliament has never considered it; and to the best of my knowledge, partyrooms have never debated it.
And if it ever were put to the public, my sense is they would overwhelmingly reject it. After all, what other country routinely flys three flags rather than just one; and in what other countries do aircraft routinely land to an announcement that the relevant airport belongs to a particular ancestral tribe? Yet flying the Aboriginal flag has crept in by stealth, as has the practice of routine acknowledgments of country.
At one level, this could be portrayed as mere courtesy: a bit like the PM’s presentation of his failed Indigenous voice as a gracious acknowledgment of the place of Aboriginal people in modern Australia. But just as the voice, properly considered, was profoundly subversive of our system of government, by giving some people an extra say based on how long their ancestors had been here, the presence of three flags every time our PM makes a formal announcement, and the ubiquitous welcomes and acknowledgments, are implicit concessions that modern Australia must make permanent atonement for the original sin of British settlement.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, Richard Marles and Matt Keogh hold a press conference at Parliament House in Canberra. Picture: Martin Ollman
Maybe, prior to the voice referendum, most of us were prepared politely to acquiesce in this fiction that Aboriginal clans in 1788 were somehow sovereign “nations” like France or Spain. But after the resounding defeat of the voice, everyday Australians feel empowered in numbers to say we need to put all the guilt rituals behind us.
Inevitably, the eruption of modernity onto an ancient continent was initially devastating for the original inhabitants. And almost inevitably, there were episodes of violence, injustice and racism as two very different cultures tried to come to terms with each other – despite officialdom’s constant injunctions that Aboriginal people were entitled to the full protection of the law.
None of this has stopped modern Australia from being among the most colourblind and least racist of countries, with Aboriginal people fully accepted and respected as the first Australians. And analysis of our parliament shows the respect voters have for strong Indigenous voices (provided they do not abuse our institutions like Lidia Thorpe). It’s hard to recall a swifter and more emphatic public response, at least among those who watch Sky News or read News Corp papers, than that to Dutton’s declaration that, as far he was concerned, it would be the one and only Australian national flag front, centre, and foremost should he become PM.
After all, there is only one flag protected by its own special act of parliament, (The Flags Act 1953), and that’s our national flag; all others have merely “official” status. In reaffirming his long-held commitment to the Australian flag, Dutton didn’t deny the place of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island flags, as some have tried to suggest; he said they were important, along with the state flags and the armed forces flags; just that they were the flags of some of us, not the one flag for all of us.
My instinct is that this is the tip of an iceberg of millions of Australians, full of goodwill towards their Indigenous fellow citizens, yet nonetheless sick of the separatism implicit in flying distinct sub-national flags and official acknowledgments implying that some are more entitled to be here than others.
Peter Dutton visits the Adass Israel Synagogue, meeting with members from the Jewish Community. Picture: Brendan Beckett
Showing that she’d learned little from the voice verdict, Uluru Dialogue co-chair Pat Anderson said: “It’s deeply disappointing and disturbing that some people have extended the ‘no’ to all things … This is yet another remark from a man who’s made a career of using First Nations matters to not only invoke hatred but as a deliberate and inflammatory political move in his quest for the top job.”
Others accused Dutton of “whitewashing” history.
Labor accused him of being “divisive”. But hang on: how can it be “divisive” to insist on the pre-eminence of the one flag that represents every Australian – and to revert to the practice of every previous prime minister, Labor no less than Liberal?
In announcing there would normally be only one Australian flag, front and centre, under his government, Dutton wasn’t just establishing a clear contrast with Labor but also differentiating the Dutton Coalition from the Morrison one. As prime minister, Scott Morrison dismissed what he called the “culture wars” on the basis that arguing over the flag and over Australia Day would not create a single job.
But cultural issues aren’t irrelevant just because people mostly vote on bread-and-butter ones. Creating jobs is not the be-all-and-end-all of effective government. National pride matters too and we’ll never keep it if our prime ministers are indifferent to our flag and our history.
As a wise person once said, when politicians start waving the flag of patriotism or a social agenda, you know that they have lost the plot in the real world.Why is Peter Dutton a grub?
"Those who don’t get it tried to say this was “divisive”, “a backward step in terms of reconciliation”. Some even said there was no public support for change. Clearly, these people just underscored my point about those who talk and those who listen because the reaction from my show, and the media that followed, highlighted just how strongly Dutton’s position resonated in the real world."
In my 57 years on this lovely earth, I have never seen Australia so divided.
When we were one nation, we all got along and got it done, we had our problems, but they were workable, and we got on with fixing it.
Once we started to create a second nation within our great nation the problems started, it opened the door for the minorities to loudspeaker their views and bring in changes from the elites of the media, universities and minority MPs.
First, we had a shared flag, then we had our own flag, now we have an aboriginal flag which is meant to represent the hundreds of aboriginal nations across the country, we have the Torres Straight islanders' flag, each state has a flag. We see the Aboral flag flying next to the Palestinian flag, and any other flag that likeminded protesters care to share their blame and aggression with.
Dutton is saying 'no more'.
And as it so happens I, and many people that I have spoken agree. We don't think that Dutton is being divisive and playing the race card, we believe that it is the YES elites that are the divisive ones, they are the ones that want to change our political system to include a race-based section that only a few can vote and support.
So, why do you think that Dutton is a grub?
For the majority it is One people, One country, One flag.
As a wise person once said, when politicians start waving the flag of patriotism or a social agenda, you know that they have lost the plot in the real world.
People don't care about this stuff really, they are more concerned about cost of living , whether they or their kids will have or keep their jobs , whether they can pay their mortgage and their shopping bills.
Dutton is playing his usual distraction politics, going off on a tangent on rides to nowhere on issues that don't really matter. He's now trying to distract from his ridiculous nuclear policy because it knows it will bankrupt the country for little in return.
He and the LNP is as useless as ever. Labor need to lift their act as well and the Greens have to stop blocking. But this is all wishfull thinking, politics doesn't change that much. It will take a disaster for either side to get them back on track.
My disenchantment with LNP is well known here, I will not be voting for either of the majors, but on this point I believe he is right on the money.I don't see the patriotism flag being flown, I see a political leader expressing the views of a large proportion of the public - people are tired of all the political correctness.
Last night I attended a dinner function at my local football club for sponsors and the fund-raising group, these are smart successful people, with opinions that are fairly mainstream. After finances, team performance, next seasons news, etc, the discussion on the floor was pretty much what Dutton has been saying, people agree with him.
As I was walking one person next to me said "If they play welcome to country again, I am walking out". I thought to myself, 'looks like you'll be walking, because they always do the welcome to country'. To my surprise, there was no welcome to country, just a welcome to all who attended.
@JohnDe Though i generally don't agree with most politicians I certainly am in agreeance with wana-be PM Dutton.Why is Peter Dutton a grub?
"Those who don’t get it tried to say this was “divisive”, “a backward step in terms of reconciliation”. Some even said there was no public support for change. Clearly, these people just underscored my point about those who talk and those who listen because the reaction from my show, and the media that followed, highlighted just how strongly Dutton’s position resonated in the real world."
In my 57 years on this lovely earth, I have never seen Australia so divided.
When we were one nation, we all got along and got it done, we had our problems, but they were workable, and we got on with fixing it.
Once we started to create a second nation within our great nation the problems started, it opened the door for the minorities to loudspeaker their views and bring in changes from the elites of the media, universities and minority MPs.
First, we had a shared flag, then we had our own flag, now we have an aboriginal flag which is meant to represent the hundreds of aboriginal nations across the country, we have the Torres Straight islanders' flag, each state has a flag. We see the Aboral flag flying next to the Palestinian flag, and any other flag that likeminded protesters care to share their blame and aggression with.
Dutton is saying 'no more'.
And as it so happens I, and many people that I have spoken agree. We don't think that Dutton is being divisive and playing the race card, we believe that it is the YES elites that are the divisive ones, they are the ones that want to change our political system to include a race-based section that only a few can vote and support.
So, why do you think that Dutton is a grub?
For the majority it is One people, One country, One flag.
In principle I agree with one flag and do away with welcome to country.@JohnDe Though i generally don't agree with most politicians I certainly am in agreeance with wana-be PM Dutton.
One Flag for everyone and everything, thankyou.
In principle I agree with one flag and do away with welcome to country.
But do these things really matter in the wider scheme of our nation's issues?
As I said, distraction politics.
#Sir Rumpole. In the wider scheme not one iota but three flags, give me a break, and how many more in the offing.In principle I agree with one flag and do away with welcome to country.
But do these things really matter in the wider scheme of our nation's issues?
As I said, distraction politics.
Who wrote the article you quoted?"do these things really matter in the wider scheme of our nation's issues?" Of course they matter, those things are designed to change the core of our Australianism.
But cultural issues aren’t irrelevant just because people mostly vote on bread-and-butter ones. Creating jobs is not the be-all-and-end-all of effective government. National pride matters too and we’ll never keep it if our prime ministers are indifferent to our flag and our history.Take the Referendum for example, if the majority of voters said Yes, we would have a different form of Parliamentary processes. Instead, the majority looked carefully and asked questions and decided to vote No.
Now we have those in minority that ended up losing the referendum continuing with the process of bringing in change that the majority do not want.
The flag, the welcome to country, the insistence that the No voters were tricked, calling anyone with an opposing view a grub, a racist, ignorant, etc. It is all designed to shame people into believing the minorities want for change.
If we do not stand our ground and say enough is enough, we will witness the formation of a country that we may not like.
After all, there is only one flag protected by its own special act of parliament, (The Flags Act 1953), and that’s our national flag; all others have merely “official” status. In reaffirming his long-held commitment to the Australian flag, Dutton didn’t deny the place of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island flags, as some have tried to suggest; he said they were important, along with the state flags and the armed forces flags; just that they were the flags of some of us, not the one flag for all of us.My instinct is that this is the tip of an iceberg of millions of Australians, full of goodwill towards their Indigenous fellow citizens, yet nonetheless sick of the separatism implicit in flying distinct sub-national flags and official acknowledgments implying that some are more entitled to be here than others.
Who wrote the article you quoted?
There is no author mentioned there.Check my first post for today on this thread
There is no author mentioned there.
At a guess, Peta Credlin, yes or no?
There is no link in the heading. Why not just say who it was?Click on the heading, I’ve included the link
Possibly, but if someone wants to stand up for their rights and their beliefs, the first thing they should do is not accept handouts.In principle I agree with one flag and do away with welcome to country.
But do these things really matter in the wider scheme of our nation's issues?
As I said, distraction politics.
The flags thing is purely symbolic. I can take it or leave it, I always mute welcome to country on the tv.Possibly, but if someone wants to stand up for their rights and their beliefs, the first thing they should do is not accept handouts.
Constantly spitting in the hand that feeds you, always ends badly, ask any parent.
If there is a seperate nation, how is it funded? With land rights and many projects later the indigenous are still completely dependant on welfare, apart from those who seek employment.
Not trying to be be critical, but if you want to be independant, come up with a way to do it, that is sustainable without outside funding.
Bouganville is having the same issue, in PNG.
Therein lies the problem, why should one flag be more allowable, than another.The flags thing is purely symbolic. I can take it or leave it, I always mute welcome to country on the tv.
The symbolism costs nothing, as long as we don't end up flying the rainbow flag or the Palestine flag or the Jewish flag to please a few people. That would be going too far.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?