An Aboriginal woman of note arrives for a major engagement in Canberra. Instead of the impressive venue used previously for similar events, however, she is shown to a much smaller room.
Nevertheless, the young woman speaks at the engagement, as had been arranged. A photographer is there. He takes many excellent, expressive shots of the woman as she delivers her speech and answers questions from the crowd.
But the photograph his newspaper runs the next day on its front page doesn’t show the Aboriginal woman.
-
Latest Posts
- Another attempt to ‘save democracy’ brought to you by the CIA
- There are times when an undertaker really has to be on the ball
- Jacinta The Less
- Bulletorial
- You’re gonna need a bigger Bushmaster
- She’s too valuable to be rushed by right’s habitual messianism
- New from feminine jurisprudence: the somewhat credible bitch
-
Recent Comments
-
TCL Archive
- October 2023 (3)
- September 2023 (84)
- August 2023 (74)
- July 2023 (89)
- June 2023 (81)
- May 2023 (88)
- April 2023 (90)
- March 2023 (118)
- February 2023 (84)
- January 2023 (101)
- December 2022 (62)
- November 2022 (72)
- October 2022 (83)
- September 2022 (81)
- August 2022 (82)
- July 2022 (83)
- June 2022 (113)
- May 2022 (80)
- April 2022 (114)
- March 2022 (117)
- February 2022 (120)
- January 2022 (126)
- December 2021 (116)
- November 2021 (112)
- October 2021 (126)
- September 2021 (84)
- August 2021 (6)
-
Post Categories
- Art, music, letters
- Australian police state
- Climate hoax
- Culture
- Defence and national security
- Economics and the economy
- Education
- Elections
- Ethics and morality
- Fake conservatism
- Fake news
- Fake science
- Federal politics
- Foreign policy
- General
- History
- International
- Left-wing extremism
- Left-wing hypocrisy
- Legal affairs
- Media
- Politics
- Religion and faith
- Rule of law
- Science and technology
- Social media
- Sport
- State politics
- US politics
- War and peace
- War on Christianity
- Whatever
-
A truly moving speech.
Thank you for posting this C.L.
The reaction by the few facts media suggests that her observation about the continuation of class conflict is real and an abomination, the left hasn’t really learned from their support of Jim Crow, the white Australia policy, the KKK, they still have no truck with an uppity black person and will treat them according to the lefts view of their station, less than human, apparently.
Is it hyper-bowl to say that Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price would be a great Prime Minister?
Her handling of her current portfolio would indicate she is capable of the top job.
Price would have to step down from the senate and stand for the HoR as a liberal party leader. And why would she want to join that lot, let alone lead them?
I picked the following up from another blog, and am interested in what CL posters / readers think….
So far as we can see, the proposed ATSI Voice to Parliament has no provision for the people on The Voice to be Aboriginal or TSI. The rationale claimed for this lack of clarity is that an explicit command would be against the Racial Discrimination Act, and that the actual rationale is to load the Voice up with white billionaires, and other ALP mates since indij ethnicity/race is not an explicit pre-requisite.
Just a dog’s breakfast of F’wittery!
That picture is even weirder than Tim describes it. The main point for the Age is that it shows an indignant aboriginal woman proclaiming and gesturing over the heads of a seated trio of bemused white villains. Without context, you’d think that they are being put in their place by a righteous black woman. Now, I’m relying on a single report I heard at the time, and could have garbled this completely, but my understanding is that that woman was speaking in order to denounce the Voice. She wasn’t heckling Price or the white villains. Can’t be bothered checking, but I’m guessing the Age left that detail out.
That picture was chosen to give a false impression.
Agree with cuckoo’s comment.
Heartening to read Tim Blair’s words of support for Jacinta Price.
Thank you.
Good point, Mantaray at 8.17
We already have Labor politicians in Victoria and SA who are “ aboriginal” but have no identifiable aboriginal ancestors.
Of more concern – there is no process that I am aware of for a credible selection of the 24 members – no electoral roll based on race, no secret ballot. The chosen 24 will just appear organically, and I guarantee we will all recognise the names – the same connected insiders who have been steering the aboriginal bus into the ditch for the last 30 years.
Dog’s breakfast, you say? This proposal originated at the other end of the puppy.
Keg Gravis thinks that the ABC is for the sole use of the “Yes” campaign.
Megan Davis blasts the ABC in deleted tweet for platforming Voice No campaigners.
Albo’s Nazis:
Video captures protesters hurl abusive slurs at Liberal Senator outside No campaign launch in SA.
https://twitter.com/SenatorAntic/status/1703709559171547484
Stephen Conroy:
“I think Jacinta Price gave a speech last week which (she will) be embarrassed by when she sits back and reflects on it.”
Michael Mansell is a strong NO:
‘Doesn’t make sense’: The Aboriginal leader opposed to Voice referendum
‘It’s frankly a waste of your time’: Birmingham rebukes protestors at No rally.
I hear voices… many voices… 36 of them.
The Voice referendum: Everything you need to know about Marcia Langton’s proposed 36 network of Voices across Australia if the Yes vote wins.
Jacinta Price gave a speech which would see her abused. Is Conroy satisfied?
The embarrassment is all Albanese’s and his deluded followers’; they should be doing the reflecting, after claiming the referendum would unite Australians.
I think Michael Mansell may have a better grasp of the constitution and law than the supposed attorney general “shadow”!
Shorter Mansell: There is no point having a referendum when we could just do everything we want to do with the voice through a simple majority in parliament passing legislation.
Which is of course exactly what will happen anyway when the Voice is sent deep into the forgettery.
Re Senator Price’s courage, ability, and potential be PM, Michael de Percy writing in The Spectator says:
This week, Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price demonstrated her credentials as a potential Australian Prime Minister. She is a member of the Country Liberal Party, so there is no reason she cannot lead the senior party of the federal Liberal-National Coalition, nor is there any real impediment, other than convention, to a Prime Minister also being a Senator. To be sure, it would be awkward to lead a government from across the hall, but there is no actual legal impediment. And given Senator Price’s courage, she certainly has the fortitude to make it work. And she would be a political leader because of sheer competence rather than any deference to intersectionality. Which leads me to my ‘sliding doors’ moment – what would I do if I were as brave as Senator Price?
He’s spot on. Imagine defying convention!
No senators should be any kind of minister, or even be able to submit legislation for consideration, or the senate self initiate committees. They should be a house of review only, where members sit on set committees looking at Bills passed by the HoR, and keeping government departments in line on expenditures. Oh, and no getting paid extra to be on a committee.
Here’s the ABC foaming at the mouth about a ‘far right podcaster’ appearing at a meeting chaired by Warren Mundine:
Hypocrisy on steroids from that shrieking sectarian propaganda organ of the Rhiannon Stalinist wing of the Greens. Or is Rhiannon’s unstinting, diehard support for the Soviet Union, right to the very end, somehow not ‘extreme’?
You bet your arse it will. It will be the WA heritage laws on steroids once these vindictive bastards get scorned at the ballot box.
Logically there is something else they want which has not been openly mentioned to the public. For example: treaty powers or veto powers could only be achieved by creating some additional constitutional entity.
When you hear a story that doesn’t make much sense … often that s because you haven’t heard the whole story.
There’s no rule that prevents the Prime Minister being a Senator … although there’s no precedent for it either. The Constitution of Australia does not even define what exactly a Prime Minister does, although arguably there’s tradition from Westminster to fall back on.
You’re forgetting John Gorton, Tel.
However, there is a convention that the Prime Minister be a member of – and be answerable to – the lower house. That’s why Gorton – as PM – resigned from the senate and successfully contested Harold Holt’s seat.
I think this convention is bullshit in the modern Australian context. Our senate is not a house of lords and there is no reason a senatorial PM wouldn’t be accountable to ‘the people.’