Voicers have to get back to what they do best, says Nasty Noel

Much of the debate about the referendum has centred on the Voice, but Pearson declared the Yes campaign must shift its attention to explaining the need to recognise First Nations people in Australia’s founding document and moving towards reconciliation, which he feared would be doomed in the long term if the referendum failed.

“I think that message has got to be even more prominent than the Voice. The Voice is just the means; the core of the reform is recognition,” he said in an interview, “and our argument is that the Voice is the best means.”

“Give our people a Voice to the parliament, to the government, and you will give us the best means of recognition. But the main point here is that we achieve recognition. That was the original motivation. When John Howard kicked the ball off in 2007, it was about recognition”…

Pearson, who is a director of the Yes23 organisation, also acknowledged he had erred in engaging in multiple verbal stoushes this year, saying the movement’s most valuable asset was its unifying essence and “people like me need to realise we can’t be drawn by our opponents into obscuring that promise.”

“I think that’s a mistake I personally made … some of the fights and the frustrations about that and so on. Our strongest suit is unity for the country.”

Executive summary: Hide the apartheid, freshen the “recognition” bait and act cuddlier in public.
This entry was posted in Fake news, Left-wing extremism, Rule of law. Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Voicers have to get back to what they do best, says Nasty Noel

  1. NFA says:

    What do we want?
    When do we want it?
    NOW you white scum

  2. Christine says:

    “the fights and the frustrations…and so on”. All in the past.
    How long will that last?

    Recognition and reconciliation and unifying essence…and so on
    If he isn’t the most blatant…

  3. Lee says:

    Nastiness is inbred in the Yes camp, particularly among the likes of Pearson and the race-stirring activists.

    Personally, I was always going to vote against institutionalised racism and divisiveness anyway.

  4. Mantaray says:

    As always on this topic….I’m a bit conflicted…..

    On the one hand I’ve done very well in non-Indij Oz, and have never met, or heard of, any part-Aboriginal person who went to live out bush in the traditional Aboriginal way and who stayed there= as it’s all fake-nostalgia for a non-existent once-was-paradise fantasy, I’m firmly in the NO camp. However…

    On the other hand, as a 1/8th or 1/16th PROUD WAKA bloke now into Uncle Mantaray territory, I will probably get multiple millions from non-part-Aborigines for all the suffering someone went through sometime in a pub someplace in central Qld…. and lotsa goodies…… if the dickhead city-slickers decide I deserve them.

    It’s not easy barely getting by with numerous properties, cars, boats etc, which means I will have to reconcile myself…like Marcia, Noel, Stan, Adam, Lidia etc etc… to greedily hoovering up all those lovely superfluous tax-dollars should they rain down on me.

    Even better; my descendants (1/16th to 1/64th PROUD WAKAs) will be set-for-life without wasting the usual amount on Gold Lotto Jackpot saturday quick-picks.

    It’s win-win for us proud boys, city suckers!

  5. Jannie says:

    The establishment has already decided on this. The rest is theatre.

  6. Petros says:

    That’s the thing now, Mantaray. People with a smidgen of aboriginal heritage are using that to get into university etc. It’s a way to leapfrog over others, including immigrants and their recent decendants. Their will be a chunk of slightly aboriginal voters who will know this and vote for self-interest.

  7. Buccaneer says:

    I’m confused why they keep telling us that John Howard kicked this off, Howard fairly clearly opposes the abortion they have proposed here, even if he might have originally suggested some words in the preamble.

  8. calli says:

    I love the graphic you have chosen for this story C.L. Sums it up perfectly.

    Let’s hope they just can’t shut up. We need more, much more convincing “dialogue” with optional head thumping.

  9. C.L. says:

    Let’s hope they just can’t shut up.


    Please keep fighting the good fight, Noel!

  10. Crusader says:

    Are there any specific groups in Australia subject to laws that apply only to them? Yes. How was this established? By referendum. Do those people have any Constitutional right to be heard on that legislation? No.
    Is this the apartheid you’re on about CL?

  11. vlad redux says:

    Megan Davis has said that the Voice is crucial to getting a Treaty. I would encourage her to say this often and long.


  12. Shy Ted says:

    Um, no. But look how happy they are. Um, no, again.

  13. Boambee John says:


    Stupid even by your low standards. Still, now that you have demonstrated that the need for the InVoice is minimal (aborigines have the right to lobby politicians and ministers just as other Australians do), why not just pull your head in?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *