Vote NO To Stop The Bastards … AGAIN

4 Jun

Screen shot 2013-06-04 at 10.30.01 AM

Here we go again.

I encourage all readers to visit the website, and learn why you should vote NO to the referendum question that will be included with your ballot papers at the September election.

Has this referendum been proposed before?

Yes. Similar referendums were put by the Whitlam government in 1974 and the Hawke government in 1988. The 1974 referendum lost by 53.15 per cent of the total vote and
was only successful in New South Wales. The 1988 referendum lost with 66.39 per cent of the total vote and lost in all States. At both referenda the Australian people rejected Canberra’s power grab.

The fact that both of the major political parties support this referendum proposal, is yet another reason Why People Of Conscience Cannot Vote For Abbott.

4 Responses to “Vote NO To Stop The Bastards … AGAIN”

  1. bushbunny June 4, 2013 at 12:25 pm #

    Can you explain what it is all about? And the implications?

    • The Blissful Ignoramus June 4, 2013 at 12:38 pm #

      Much faster for you to visit the No Power Grab website and read all about it there, bushbunny.

  2. geoff June 4, 2013 at 2:08 pm #

    In 60 years on electoral roll I have only votes yes to 1 referendom. The one to recognise aboriginies as legitimate Australians. Every other one, regardless of how much the main item was commendable, it was bundled with things a thoughtful person would not touch with a 40 foot pole

  3. Kevin Moore June 5, 2013 at 4:22 pm #

    “No method of procedure has ever been devised by which liberty could be divorced from self-government. No plan of centralisation has ever been adopted which did not result in bureaucracy, tyranny, inflexibility, reaction arid decline Unless bureaucracy is constantly resisted it breaks down representative government, and overwhelms democracy. It is the one element in our institutions that sets up the pretence of having authority over everybody, and being responsible to nobody”
    – – President Calvin Coolidge of the United States in 1926.
    “The Leader”, Longreach,(Queensland) of July 6, 1973, carried the headline:
    The report underneath quoted at length the comments of the Queensland Labor Party’s shadow Minister for Local Government, Mr. Ted Baldwin, at the annual conference of the Western Queensland Local Government Association. Fabian Socialist Society, a movement which since the days of its pioneers, the Webbs, George Bernard Shaw and others, has preached that the Marxist objective of the Socialist State can best be reached along a road of gradualism. Mr. Whitlam and his fellow Fabian Socialists are well aware of how most direct assaults on the Federal Constitution-Dr. Evatt’s 1944, 1946, and 1948 referenda, and Bank Nationalisation-were failures. A strategy had to be devised for by-passing the Constitution, of eventually making it appear irrelevant. “Regionalisation” is one of those concepts which has an attraction
    Mr. Baldwin said that the establishment of Regional Councils would result in the States being “phased out”. He said that “State Governments are a luxury which Australia can no longer afford”.Mr. Baldwin’s statements were a frank outline of the Whitlam Government’s strategy of by-passing the Federal Constitution and destroying the States by the creation of Regional Councils financially subservient to the Canberra bureaucracy. At the 1973 Premiers Conference, Prime Minister Whitlam used the Commonwealth’s financial monopoly to deny the States the money they were entitled to receive, informing the Premiers quite frankly that he was withholding this money in order to use it to take over areas which were traditionally State responsibilities.
    The essence of Socialism is centralisation of all power. The Communists proclaim Socialism as the first necessary step for the creation of the Communist State. As a Labor Party candidate for Parliament, Mr. Whitlam, like his colleagues, was required to sign the pledge to “support and advocate at all times the party’s objective-the socialisation of industry, production, distribution and “exchange”. “The Sydney Morning Herald” of July 26, 1972, quotes Mr. Whitlam as having said that “It would be intolerable if a Labor Government were to use the alibi of the Constitution to excuse failure to achieve its socialist objective- doubly intolerable because it is just not true that it need be.”
    Mr. Whitlam is a member of the Fabian Socialist Society. If only looked at superficially, it enables a programme of gradual centralism to be fostered under the guise of decentralisation. And it shrewdly seeks to exploit the desperate financial situation of Municipal Government, increasingly burdened with both debt and inflation. “.
    It was following the defeat of Dr. Evatt’s 1944 Powers Referendum that the Fabian-Socialists started to turn to regionalisation as a major strategy for by-passing the Federal Constitution and eroding the powers of the States. The great Lord Acton, famous for his axiom that all power tends to corrupt, and that absolute power corrupts absolutely, also observed that”Few discoveries are more irritating than those which expose the pedigrec of ideas.” The pedigree of the Whitlam Government’s regionalisation strategy goes back to the days when Dr. H. C. Coombs, a long-time Fabian Socialist, a product of the notorious London School of Economics, was Director of the Commonwealth Department of Post-War Reconstruction.
    In 1949, just prior to the change of Government at Canberra, when the Menzies-Fadden Government replaced the Labor Government, the Department of Post-War Reconstruction issued a publication, “Regional Planning in Australia-a history of Progress and Review of Regional Planning activities throughout the Commonwealth”. These and similar publications, some never publicly circulated, provide the blue-print for current Labor-Socialist strategy, which aims at replacing Local Government with centrally-controlled Regional Governments-in reality, Departments of the Commonwealth Government – and then vesting such regional bodies with responsibilities currently belonging to the States………………..”

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: