The last days of an election campaign are a mixture of thoughts for what has been done and panic for what is still to be done.
I can only speak for myself, but I can't help but look back over the last six weeks of electioneering from the leaders of our two main parties and wonder 'what was that all about anyway?'
Unlike the 2007 election and others besides, there has been a distinct lack of vision expressed by either party. Sure, they've packaged up their bread and circus type annoncement with grand motherhood statements but they don't speak to me at all about where we're headed as a nation.
On Sunday morning we will probably know who will lead our nation for the next three years. It seems likely that, beit ALP or The Coalition, that the Greens will be a constant thorn in the side of government.
I've said it before, but it's worth a reminder: the ALP/Green pact will probably deliver the Greens the balance of power int he Senate and that, under an ALP Government, we can be almost certain that Rainbow Labor and the Greens will be pushing Gillard hard for a free vote on same-sex marriage.
There are many reasons why a vote for the DLP on Saturday is important, protecting Marriage must surely be the highest.
At this, the eleventh hour, think clearly and soberly about our nation's future and cast your vote carefully.
Showing posts with label DLP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label DLP. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
DLP SA Press Release on Marriage
MEDIA RELEASE
GILLARD NEEDS TO COME CLEAN ON SAME-SEX MARRIAGE
The Gillard Government has been attacked for sending mixed messages about its support for traditional marriage.
SA DLP Senate Candidate Paul Russell responded to comments by Labor heavyweight Graham Richardson, made on the ABC’s Q & A program on Monday night.
“Ms Gillard has stated her personal opposition to same-sex marriage, but with the likelihood that the Greens will hold the balance of power in the Senate after August 21, the ALP leader needs to let all Australians know if she will hold her colleagues to the supposed party line,” said Mr. Russell.
“The Prime Minister’s personal views are simply not enough. Graham Richardson’s comments that ALP support for same-sex marriage is ultimately inevitable make that perfectly clear.”
“Richardson’s remark that Penny Wong would successfully agitate for same-sex marriage highlights that Gillard’s pledge in support of traditional marriage rings hollow,” Mr. Russell added.
The DLP has called on all Labor-minded voters to abandon support for the Green / ALP machine and support a real Labor Party with traditional labor and family values.
The DLP is currently represented in the Victorian State Parliament and is seeking to return to the Senate. Candidates are standing in every state at the Federal Election.
For further comment, contact Paul Russell on 0407 500 881
GILLARD NEEDS TO COME CLEAN ON SAME-SEX MARRIAGE
The Gillard Government has been attacked for sending mixed messages about its support for traditional marriage.
SA DLP Senate Candidate Paul Russell responded to comments by Labor heavyweight Graham Richardson, made on the ABC’s Q & A program on Monday night.
“Ms Gillard has stated her personal opposition to same-sex marriage, but with the likelihood that the Greens will hold the balance of power in the Senate after August 21, the ALP leader needs to let all Australians know if she will hold her colleagues to the supposed party line,” said Mr. Russell.
“The Prime Minister’s personal views are simply not enough. Graham Richardson’s comments that ALP support for same-sex marriage is ultimately inevitable make that perfectly clear.”
“Richardson’s remark that Penny Wong would successfully agitate for same-sex marriage highlights that Gillard’s pledge in support of traditional marriage rings hollow,” Mr. Russell added.
The DLP has called on all Labor-minded voters to abandon support for the Green / ALP machine and support a real Labor Party with traditional labor and family values.
The DLP is currently represented in the Victorian State Parliament and is seeking to return to the Senate. Candidates are standing in every state at the Federal Election.
For further comment, contact Paul Russell on 0407 500 881
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Be careful what you vote for: Green's madness puts SA's future at risk
Recent news that the Greens would stop the $21 billion expansion of Olympic Dam is putting thousands of SA jobs in jeopardy
SA Greens Senate candidate, Penny Wright, told the Advertiser (July 20) that the Greens’ policy was to, "end the exploration for, and the mining and export of, uranium". This would spell the end of the massive Olympic Dam expansion in South Australia’s far north.
Under the Green’s South Australia’s economic future would be bleak indeed. Penny Wright wants South Australians to put her in the Senate where she and her colleagues would put this state to the sword. This is madness!
Much of the planned growth in South Australia is built on the back of our mining success. It’s a great story and one that all South Australians will profit from through thousands of new jobs, new homes, new support industries etc. A vote for the Greens will put all that at risk.
But a vote for Labor in the Senate might bring about the same result. The Labor / Green preference deal could see Penny Wright elected on Labor preferences. Don’t put your family’s future at risk.
A vote for Labor or the Greens in the Senate could kill off SA’s future prosperity. Vote 1, Paul Russell in the Senate to keep our future safe.
SA Greens Senate candidate, Penny Wright, told the Advertiser (July 20) that the Greens’ policy was to, "end the exploration for, and the mining and export of, uranium". This would spell the end of the massive Olympic Dam expansion in South Australia’s far north.
Under the Green’s South Australia’s economic future would be bleak indeed. Penny Wright wants South Australians to put her in the Senate where she and her colleagues would put this state to the sword. This is madness!
Much of the planned growth in South Australia is built on the back of our mining success. It’s a great story and one that all South Australians will profit from through thousands of new jobs, new homes, new support industries etc. A vote for the Greens will put all that at risk.
But a vote for Labor in the Senate might bring about the same result. The Labor / Green preference deal could see Penny Wright elected on Labor preferences. Don’t put your family’s future at risk.
A vote for Labor or the Greens in the Senate could kill off SA’s future prosperity. Vote 1, Paul Russell in the Senate to keep our future safe.
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Health – decentralization is the key
None of us should be in any doubt that health and the growing national health bill will be significant issues for the foreseeable future. The solutions will not be easy, but there are principles which the DLP believes need to be adopted so that we’ve got the basic framework right for the future.
That principle is decentralization or, to use and old word, subsidiarity. This essentially means that decision making should occur at the lowest possible competent level. Put simply: local decisions for local needs.
When he was Health Minister, Tony Abbott made no secret of his desire for the Federal Government to take over the running of our hospital system. The Rudd/Gillard new deal on health is similar, but with a dramatic increase in bureaucracy to boot.
Kevin Rudd was right about one thing: there are problems in the system and that health can and should be delivered more equitably and efficiently. In announcing his policy, however, he did not make anything like a convincing case for a federal takeover just as he failed to show us what the efficiency dividends might be. That’s because, in our opinion, there are none.
Last week Tony Abbott announced that a Coalition government would allow local schools to manage their own Building Education Revolution projects; arguing that this would save costs and provide better outcomes. Sound familiar? Then why not in the health sector?
The DLP, like Abbott on the BER, believes that local is better and that local hospital boards can and should have the opportunity to manage their facilities with the local community in mind.
That principle is decentralization or, to use and old word, subsidiarity. This essentially means that decision making should occur at the lowest possible competent level. Put simply: local decisions for local needs.
When he was Health Minister, Tony Abbott made no secret of his desire for the Federal Government to take over the running of our hospital system. The Rudd/Gillard new deal on health is similar, but with a dramatic increase in bureaucracy to boot.
Kevin Rudd was right about one thing: there are problems in the system and that health can and should be delivered more equitably and efficiently. In announcing his policy, however, he did not make anything like a convincing case for a federal takeover just as he failed to show us what the efficiency dividends might be. That’s because, in our opinion, there are none.
Last week Tony Abbott announced that a Coalition government would allow local schools to manage their own Building Education Revolution projects; arguing that this would save costs and provide better outcomes. Sound familiar? Then why not in the health sector?
The DLP, like Abbott on the BER, believes that local is better and that local hospital boards can and should have the opportunity to manage their facilities with the local community in mind.
Monday, March 29, 2010
It's been more than a week since the last election!!!
No doubt, the title of this post reminds Catholic readers somewhat of their childhood learnings of the Confessional process. Not a deliberate association, I assure you; but one that does give me cause to apologise for those who might have expected a shakedown of the SA State Election a little earlier!
I won't delve into the entrails of slain goats nor the dissections of the psephologists - probably had enough of that, right? I would, however, like to offer a few short comments on the DLP and this election.
Let me begin with a great big 'thank you' to everyone who joined up, donated, prayed, letterboxed, emailed or chatted to friends or stood on a booth on polling day - great effort guys! A special mention to those who came from interstate for the election. In addition to two DLP stalwarts from Victoria, we were gobsmacked when four young fellas made their own way across from Melbourne to help out. Well done!
Major thanks to my upper house running mate, good friend and fellow nutter, David McCabe. Dave's efforts were well and truly above and beyond the call. With work on the following day, Dave was still pulling down posters at midnight the day after the election and had a few more to snaffle before work the next morning!
Mark Freer's commitment as Candidate for Hartley was, likewise, never in doubt. An extra big bouquet to Mark : a political neophite three months ago has now morphed into a seasoned campaignster!
Clearly we did not win a seat in the Upper House. The eleventh position went to D4D's Kelly Vincent - enough said if you read my last post! Put simply: in a polarized election and with virtually no media attention what we achieved was outstanding - even if not quite enough.
We staffed something like 35 booths out of approximately 500 across the state; we ran one lower house candidate from 37 possible - yet we still polled better than many candidates! Imagine what we could achieve with a larger presence!
I guess that's a good point to finish on: If you've appreciated what we've begun in SA and what the DLP is doing, why not get on board. Put the 'U' back in Labor and help the DLP work for the issues that really matter!
I won't delve into the entrails of slain goats nor the dissections of the psephologists - probably had enough of that, right? I would, however, like to offer a few short comments on the DLP and this election.
Let me begin with a great big 'thank you' to everyone who joined up, donated, prayed, letterboxed, emailed or chatted to friends or stood on a booth on polling day - great effort guys! A special mention to those who came from interstate for the election. In addition to two DLP stalwarts from Victoria, we were gobsmacked when four young fellas made their own way across from Melbourne to help out. Well done!
Major thanks to my upper house running mate, good friend and fellow nutter, David McCabe. Dave's efforts were well and truly above and beyond the call. With work on the following day, Dave was still pulling down posters at midnight the day after the election and had a few more to snaffle before work the next morning!
Mark Freer's commitment as Candidate for Hartley was, likewise, never in doubt. An extra big bouquet to Mark : a political neophite three months ago has now morphed into a seasoned campaignster!
Clearly we did not win a seat in the Upper House. The eleventh position went to D4D's Kelly Vincent - enough said if you read my last post! Put simply: in a polarized election and with virtually no media attention what we achieved was outstanding - even if not quite enough.
We staffed something like 35 booths out of approximately 500 across the state; we ran one lower house candidate from 37 possible - yet we still polled better than many candidates! Imagine what we could achieve with a larger presence!
I guess that's a good point to finish on: If you've appreciated what we've begun in SA and what the DLP is doing, why not get on board. Put the 'U' back in Labor and help the DLP work for the issues that really matter!
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Anti-euthanasia Rally - my speech
Folks I gave this speech at a DLP Rally on the steps of Parliament House, Adelaide on Sunday the 7th of March.
Euthanasia Rally speech
Euthanasia from the Greek and meaning a happy death
It is at best a misnomer to describe the deliberate killing of a human being as ‘happy’.
As with the prosecution of so much of the agenda of the anti-life progressives, the first assault comes in the form of a corruption of language.
“Death with Dignity” they cry. As though these ghoulish death peddlers were simply benevolent players bringing dignity to death where none previously existed. What rubbish!
“Compassionate Choice” they say. There is no compassion when the object is dead because compassion means ‘to suffer with’ and is not a synonym for killing. ‘Choice’ itself has now become a sacrament unfettered by truth and convention. It is never licit to choose a lie over truth.
We see this in other areas:
“Pro-choice” sounds a lot nicer than ‘pro-death’ doesn’t it?
The squeaky wheel of the progressives demands to be greased but when the still small voice dares to speak truth into this confused world it is drowned out in a cacophony of empty shibboleths and the messenger is pilloried and demonised. Sounds familiar doesn’t it? God Bless you Trevor Grace!
“Freedom of Religion” has been sacrificed to the god of tolerance and diversity – an unholy deity of deceit and weasel words.
Clearly, language is important. No progressive agenda could succeed without control of the lexicon. Slogans and the subversion of language serve to camouflage the truth. Paraphrasing Jack Nicholson’s character in A Few Good Men: THEY CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH! Nor can they accept, for the sake of their agenda, anyone else using the language of truth lest they be exposed for their hypocrisy.
There are absolute truths which the pro-death brigade acknowledges in the breech. The Truth convicts; they know it; they can’t deal with it – so they suppress it.
Since when was deliberate ending of a life akin to palliative care? That’s the line Green’s MLC Mark Parnell tried on us last year. Though it is entirely obvious to any reasonable person that the twain shall not meet, a significant number in the Upper House of this parliament either couldn’t or wouldn’t see the blindingly obvious.
That is the danger before us at this moment. A change of heart by one courageous MP at the eleventh hour was all that stood between the status quo and defeat in November last year. Progressively the calibre of our elected MLCs has deteriorated. The major parties offer us, at best, a mixed bag while many others are either programmatically pro-euthanasia or subversively so.
I’ve said it hundreds of times now and we need to hear it, we need to heed it and we need to act on it.
We stand upon a precipice. We lose two anti-euthanasia stalwarts from the Upper House to retirement at this election. God Bless Rob Lawson and Caroline Schaefer. The Liberal Party has offered replacements that, it would seem, do not hold the same firm opposition on euthanasia. If we don’t stand against this black tide of death in a concerted and organised way then we may see, in the next parliament the passage of a VE bill in the Upper House that will send shock waves across the western world.
It’s a hard but necessary sell when I tell you that with this knowledge you are duty bound to act with all the effort you can muster in your individual circumstances.
Let’s look at what’s on offer at this election in the Upper House:
Liberals: A mixed bag.
Labor: ditto the Liberals.
In the Lower House our Candidate for Hartley is standing against the current Labor member Grace Portolesi who has openly declared her support for euthanasia. Mark’s doing a great job and is likely to ensure that this seat changes hands. On ya Mark!
The Greens: Pro-euthanasia. As Lord Monckton said to me a few weeks ago, the Greens have traffic light syndrome: They’re Green but too Yellow to admit that they’re Red!
The Democrats: Pro-euthanasia – who can forget Sandra Kanck’s euthanasia efforts. The current Lead Candidate is cut from the same cloth.
Independent David Winderlich: Supported Parnell’s bill last year.
Independent for Voluntary Euthanasia: enough said
Independent for Legalised Voluntary Euthanasia: ditto – nothing like diversity!
Independent Christians for Voluntary Euthanasia: That’s like saying “Christians for Atheism!” I really don’t get these people.
Those above who have made their preference for voluntary euthanasia known have, at least not hidden their position. For this we should be grateful.
I reserve, however, my harshest criticisms for Dignity for Disability and, as a father of a disabled child; it pains me to do so.
The Dignity for Disability Lead Candidate is in favour of euthanasia. He actually spoke at a SA Voluntary Euthanasia Society rally on this very spot not four months ago representing D4D. He was quoted in hansard by two pro VE MPs.
How can it be that the lead candidate for an organisation created to serve the needs of some of the most vulnerable people in our society support euthanasia when we know both from common sense and the data from places such as the Netherlands that these same people are amongst those most at risk from euthanasia – often without consent?
It is no accident that in Holland both palliative care and disability services are amongst the most underdeveloped in the western world. Why would they put additional strain on their health budget when the old, the infirmed, the depressed and the disabled have –quote-unquote- “other alternatives”?
In January the prestigious US Journal on Health and Disability devoted an entire issue to discussing assisted suicide, euthanasia and the disabled in terms of public policy and risk. Every single contribution in that edition recognised the significant risks that voluntary euthanasia presents for those living with disability. It concerns me that well meaning people either with disabilities themselves or a heartfelt desire to help the vulnerable in their family may find their genuine voting intention turned against them should the D4D candidate take a spot in the Upper House.
On the positive side of course, there are a number of independents who share our views. I’ve already mentioned Trevor Grace and we need to mention our friends at Family First. They will see Rob Brokenshire returned to the Upper House. This is so important. However, even that success would leave us in the minority on VE in the Upper House after this election.
That’s why the Democratic Labor Party’s rebirth at this election is so significant and that’s why it is so important that you support the DLP.
Our focus is on keeping the eleventh and final upper house seat in the hands of an anti-euthanasia candidate. This is absolutely imperative. Your vote for the DLP is not only a vote for an ethically sound pro-life party, it is also a vote for a party that’s preferences will also work towards this good end.
The Democratic Labor Party was born by the sacrifice of those who put principle ahead of prestige and position. We are the only party with such a history. The modern DLP honours this tradition.
We will not compromise.
We will not do dodgy deals for the sake of preferment.
We will stand against the tide
We will not bend
Stand with the DLP.
Make a commitment to make a difference. If every person here took the time over the next 2 weeks to speak to 50 people about the DLP and to explain briefly why we need the DLP we would be so much closer to success. That’s about 4 people a day. People you meet at your work, your school your Church, your sports club, your gym – wherever.
The Democratic Labor Party – because South Australia deserves better!
Thank you
Euthanasia Rally speech
Euthanasia from the Greek and meaning a happy death
It is at best a misnomer to describe the deliberate killing of a human being as ‘happy’.
As with the prosecution of so much of the agenda of the anti-life progressives, the first assault comes in the form of a corruption of language.
“Death with Dignity” they cry. As though these ghoulish death peddlers were simply benevolent players bringing dignity to death where none previously existed. What rubbish!
“Compassionate Choice” they say. There is no compassion when the object is dead because compassion means ‘to suffer with’ and is not a synonym for killing. ‘Choice’ itself has now become a sacrament unfettered by truth and convention. It is never licit to choose a lie over truth.
We see this in other areas:
“Pro-choice” sounds a lot nicer than ‘pro-death’ doesn’t it?
The squeaky wheel of the progressives demands to be greased but when the still small voice dares to speak truth into this confused world it is drowned out in a cacophony of empty shibboleths and the messenger is pilloried and demonised. Sounds familiar doesn’t it? God Bless you Trevor Grace!
“Freedom of Religion” has been sacrificed to the god of tolerance and diversity – an unholy deity of deceit and weasel words.
Clearly, language is important. No progressive agenda could succeed without control of the lexicon. Slogans and the subversion of language serve to camouflage the truth. Paraphrasing Jack Nicholson’s character in A Few Good Men: THEY CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH! Nor can they accept, for the sake of their agenda, anyone else using the language of truth lest they be exposed for their hypocrisy.
There are absolute truths which the pro-death brigade acknowledges in the breech. The Truth convicts; they know it; they can’t deal with it – so they suppress it.
Since when was deliberate ending of a life akin to palliative care? That’s the line Green’s MLC Mark Parnell tried on us last year. Though it is entirely obvious to any reasonable person that the twain shall not meet, a significant number in the Upper House of this parliament either couldn’t or wouldn’t see the blindingly obvious.
That is the danger before us at this moment. A change of heart by one courageous MP at the eleventh hour was all that stood between the status quo and defeat in November last year. Progressively the calibre of our elected MLCs has deteriorated. The major parties offer us, at best, a mixed bag while many others are either programmatically pro-euthanasia or subversively so.
I’ve said it hundreds of times now and we need to hear it, we need to heed it and we need to act on it.
We stand upon a precipice. We lose two anti-euthanasia stalwarts from the Upper House to retirement at this election. God Bless Rob Lawson and Caroline Schaefer. The Liberal Party has offered replacements that, it would seem, do not hold the same firm opposition on euthanasia. If we don’t stand against this black tide of death in a concerted and organised way then we may see, in the next parliament the passage of a VE bill in the Upper House that will send shock waves across the western world.
It’s a hard but necessary sell when I tell you that with this knowledge you are duty bound to act with all the effort you can muster in your individual circumstances.
Let’s look at what’s on offer at this election in the Upper House:
Liberals: A mixed bag.
Labor: ditto the Liberals.
In the Lower House our Candidate for Hartley is standing against the current Labor member Grace Portolesi who has openly declared her support for euthanasia. Mark’s doing a great job and is likely to ensure that this seat changes hands. On ya Mark!
The Greens: Pro-euthanasia. As Lord Monckton said to me a few weeks ago, the Greens have traffic light syndrome: They’re Green but too Yellow to admit that they’re Red!
The Democrats: Pro-euthanasia – who can forget Sandra Kanck’s euthanasia efforts. The current Lead Candidate is cut from the same cloth.
Independent David Winderlich: Supported Parnell’s bill last year.
Independent for Voluntary Euthanasia: enough said
Independent for Legalised Voluntary Euthanasia: ditto – nothing like diversity!
Independent Christians for Voluntary Euthanasia: That’s like saying “Christians for Atheism!” I really don’t get these people.
Those above who have made their preference for voluntary euthanasia known have, at least not hidden their position. For this we should be grateful.
I reserve, however, my harshest criticisms for Dignity for Disability and, as a father of a disabled child; it pains me to do so.
The Dignity for Disability Lead Candidate is in favour of euthanasia. He actually spoke at a SA Voluntary Euthanasia Society rally on this very spot not four months ago representing D4D. He was quoted in hansard by two pro VE MPs.
How can it be that the lead candidate for an organisation created to serve the needs of some of the most vulnerable people in our society support euthanasia when we know both from common sense and the data from places such as the Netherlands that these same people are amongst those most at risk from euthanasia – often without consent?
It is no accident that in Holland both palliative care and disability services are amongst the most underdeveloped in the western world. Why would they put additional strain on their health budget when the old, the infirmed, the depressed and the disabled have –quote-unquote- “other alternatives”?
In January the prestigious US Journal on Health and Disability devoted an entire issue to discussing assisted suicide, euthanasia and the disabled in terms of public policy and risk. Every single contribution in that edition recognised the significant risks that voluntary euthanasia presents for those living with disability. It concerns me that well meaning people either with disabilities themselves or a heartfelt desire to help the vulnerable in their family may find their genuine voting intention turned against them should the D4D candidate take a spot in the Upper House.
On the positive side of course, there are a number of independents who share our views. I’ve already mentioned Trevor Grace and we need to mention our friends at Family First. They will see Rob Brokenshire returned to the Upper House. This is so important. However, even that success would leave us in the minority on VE in the Upper House after this election.
That’s why the Democratic Labor Party’s rebirth at this election is so significant and that’s why it is so important that you support the DLP.
Our focus is on keeping the eleventh and final upper house seat in the hands of an anti-euthanasia candidate. This is absolutely imperative. Your vote for the DLP is not only a vote for an ethically sound pro-life party, it is also a vote for a party that’s preferences will also work towards this good end.
The Democratic Labor Party was born by the sacrifice of those who put principle ahead of prestige and position. We are the only party with such a history. The modern DLP honours this tradition.
We will not compromise.
We will not do dodgy deals for the sake of preferment.
We will stand against the tide
We will not bend
Stand with the DLP.
Make a commitment to make a difference. If every person here took the time over the next 2 weeks to speak to 50 people about the DLP and to explain briefly why we need the DLP we would be so much closer to success. That’s about 4 people a day. People you meet at your work, your school your Church, your sports club, your gym – wherever.
The Democratic Labor Party – because South Australia deserves better!
Thank you
Friday, March 5, 2010
count down to the 20th March
15 days to go to the SA election.
David McCabe and I are fulltime campaigning at the minute. There's a great deal of organising to be done. The mainstream media have been ignoring us. The Independent Weekly posted a 30 second clip on youtube recently which was appreciated. I'm beginning to wonder if I don't need to run naked down Rundle Mall to get some attention! Maybe I should start one of those blogs: Donate here if you DONT want Paul to do a nudie run!
I was completely outclassed the other day by the DLP future member for Harltey, Mark Freer's new blog. Take a look. A great effort from a great candidate. http://mark4hartley.wordpress.com/ And there's some great music courtesy of Mark's recordings!
Mark learnt today that he's in the 'donkey' position ont he Hartley ballot paper (number one). Not a reflection on Mark's looks nor physique at all! Go Mark!
In the Upper House, the DLP is box 'O' which is in the second row above the line and the third position from the left (no ideological reflection). We're directly below the ALP which is precisely the reverse of Mark's ticket positin in Hartley.
I really wonder what effect it will have upon voters when they're given the white ballot paper with so many boxes to choose from. Let your friends know, the simple way out of the dilemma is to place a '1' in the 'O' box for the DLP.
Remember folks, there are very serious and might I say diabolical consequences afoot for this state at this election. It is imperative that we make this vote count on euthanasia - all our votes. As David pointed out today: Of the 23 Parties/Groups contesting the upper house, 7 are Pro-euthanasia, 13 have no interest either way and 3 are anti-euthanasia.
This does not include a further 12 candidates who are standing as independents. The numbers are against us!!!!
David McCabe and I are fulltime campaigning at the minute. There's a great deal of organising to be done. The mainstream media have been ignoring us. The Independent Weekly posted a 30 second clip on youtube recently which was appreciated. I'm beginning to wonder if I don't need to run naked down Rundle Mall to get some attention! Maybe I should start one of those blogs: Donate here if you DONT want Paul to do a nudie run!
I was completely outclassed the other day by the DLP future member for Harltey, Mark Freer's new blog. Take a look. A great effort from a great candidate. http://mark4hartley.wordpress.com/ And there's some great music courtesy of Mark's recordings!
Mark learnt today that he's in the 'donkey' position ont he Hartley ballot paper (number one). Not a reflection on Mark's looks nor physique at all! Go Mark!
In the Upper House, the DLP is box 'O' which is in the second row above the line and the third position from the left (no ideological reflection). We're directly below the ALP which is precisely the reverse of Mark's ticket positin in Hartley.
I really wonder what effect it will have upon voters when they're given the white ballot paper with so many boxes to choose from. Let your friends know, the simple way out of the dilemma is to place a '1' in the 'O' box for the DLP.
Remember folks, there are very serious and might I say diabolical consequences afoot for this state at this election. It is imperative that we make this vote count on euthanasia - all our votes. As David pointed out today: Of the 23 Parties/Groups contesting the upper house, 7 are Pro-euthanasia, 13 have no interest either way and 3 are anti-euthanasia.
This does not include a further 12 candidates who are standing as independents. The numbers are against us!!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
