Foxy,

You were blathering and it had nothing to do with grammar, merely statements that are untrue.
I don’t criticize your use of ‘infinite’ on a grammatical basis but on the basis of historical fact.
Likewise your opening sentence, anyone with half a brain can see that it is factually wrong.

You haven’t yet said if you support helping your fellow Australians to enjoy a better life before spending money on pushing republicanism.

Is Mise,

I was blathering?

You are quibbling!

So we're even.

I thought that my meaning and ideas and thoughts were
quite clear in my post. Had I written:

"The Queen has reigned during MY entire life and the
office she holds is MUCH older."

You still would have
found fault. That's what you do and most of the time
that is why I find that you're not worth the argument.

I've told you in the past - it's like playing chess
with a pigeon who craps all over the board, knocks
over the pieces, then flies off claiming victory.

You jolly well know, that there is a strong level of
support in Australia for the sitting monarch. The Queen
celebrated 70 years on the throne over the past week-end.

The reality is, we've ALL grown up with her. We ALL grew
up with incessant, constant images of the royal family,
the comings, goings, divorces, deaths, marriages
through all that.

As for the new government's priorities? And what I do or
do not approve of?

I made it clear in my earlier post
about the new government's priorities. A republic is not on their
first term in office. They face many
challenges. Give them time - and see what they do before
jumping the gun and criticizing them. They've only been
in for a few weeks. A republic is not on their agenda
and it may never even happen. It will be up to the Australian
voters to decide. I suspect at a later time when the Queen either
hands over the reigns or passes. It will be a natural progression.

Foxy,
Had you written your revised statement at the start then no one could quibble.
You still avoid saying weather the homeless etc., should come before spending public money on pushing republicanism, Matt the Thistle in Waiting, is already part of that expenditure and he’ll be spending on that theme during the next three years; if he isn’t going to push republicanism, what is his role?

Its a matter of Australia's development as a nation. Do we need a family of British dysfunctionals as symbolic leaders of our country. This notion that "problems" are some kind of ordered shopping list, and all focus must be on a single issue, on a one at a time basis is nonsense. I will agree that there are more pressing issues at this time than the republic, but we should not lose sight of the probability that when the dear old dear of Windsor is no more, and Charlie has become our titular head of state, Australians may hold a different view about the monarchy, republic, and who should be our head of state.

Hi Foxy, you have fallen into the echo chamber of old fartism, they are all in there, be careful.

Hi Issy, I believed you were born during the reign of George III.

.

Dear Is Mise,

.

You wrote in the introduction to this thread :

« I really do think that we should seriously consider the Republic question, after we solve the lack of National defence capability, the electricity generating problem, the housing problem, the homeless problem, the condition of our roads , water rights etc. etc. »
.

You are certainly not alone in thinking that, Is Mise. It’s the sort of thing our politicians have been thinking for the past 121 years, ever since our forefathers created the Commonwealth of Australia on 1st January 1901.

Unfortunately, the short term of office (3 years) of our political representatives induces a short-sighted view of what can be achieved.

Our old colonial constitution is still in force and has proven impossible to adapt to all the major changes and evolutions that have taken place over the past 121 years.

Of course, we need to “solve the lack of National defence capability” that you mention – not just from our increasingly hostile external environment – but also due to the vulnerability and lack of protection afforded by our hopelessly outdated and irreparable colonial constitution.

Personally, I see no reason why the federal government could not set up a task force to lay out a plan for a smooth and orderly transition to an independent republic including the draft of a new constitution to be submitted to the national electorate at a referendum.

We have a number of excellent constitutionalists in Australia who could participate in such a task force alongside some of our most eminent, highly experienced politicians.

There is no reason why this should distract our parliamentarians from all those other important tasks that you mentioned.

.

Dear Banjo Paterson,

A voice of reason.

Thank You.