Please outline your reasons for preferring one way or the other.

I'll vote for 'who gives a toss' with my 2nd preference going to 'no I'm not going to change the flag just for the sake of appeasing some whinging leftys'

mellie wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2010 at 1:29pm:


More than not caring, it's more indicative of my dislike of this issue taking precedence over anything, including what I may or may not have for lunch.

Actually, wait. No.

I just don't care.

Can any pro-republican actually out-line the advantages of our becoming a republic, and or changing our Australian flag?

Didn't think so.

... Because this was always more about appealing to specific minority's and targeted focus-groups, than the act of becoming independent itself.

Bill Shorten wants to become Australia's first president, just ask him yourself, he makes no bones about disclosing this fact.

......Though in order to do so, he needed to ride the immigrant/minority vote home, because we wont become a republic without enough of what he requires voting for a republic at his next planned referendum.

His own father-in-law Michael Bryce (GG's hubby)..will be who judges/decides our next Australian flag, as he was last time when they had the temerity of holding an New Australian flag designer contest several months before the referendum, back in 1999 when a majority of Australians opposed it. Thank god!

This is why Labor have been sucking up to minority's, our Indigenous,Greens and immigrants ....  Sorry Bob Brown, there wont be room in a Catholic Bill Shortens administration for a gay senator, contrary to what's been promised by a 'current' Labor government.

Besides, you aren't family, and as we all know, republican administrations like to keep it in the family.


...Think of Australia as though it were a giant Monopoly board game under a foreign-investor bank-rolled Commonwealth Labor government currently in the early transition phase of becoming a Bryce-Shorten (republic) administration.

New flag, new anthem, new style of governance, and possibly even a new name for our country which will only be appreciated by the ruling class, who have their fingers in all manner of things, allowing our nation to more than double it's population by 2050...as per schedule.

If you thought Gillard was serious about a "sustainable Australia", not a "big Australia", then ask yourself, where is her sustainable population policy which was supposed to be drafted by her 'newly appointed' pre-electoral Sustainable Populations minister Tony Burke?

Did it go to the same place as her independent climate forum/panel?

Another pie-crust promise, easily made, easily broken.

This is your ALP

...They promise the world, then give you an atlas once they've passed go and collected their $200.


Enjoy~!i

Yes we should be a republic, our interests lie more with the US and Asia than England, an England giving preference to Europeans over Australians. Mostly symbolic, a clearly independent Australia will stand taller in SE Asia.

Without any ties to the UK crown we need to lose the union jack from our flag—something like the Canadian flag, nice and simple and clean design.

If we are to be a republic our President, who would have the same powers as the GG, has to be elected. No, this won’t be like the US, our Pres is not the head of the executive branch of govt.

Nope keep it as it is.

I don't want Australia becoming involved with Asia other than on an arm's length basis for trading.

Asians are not our natural allies, they have little in common with us other than the coincidence of geography and we are more suited to the common cultural ties we have with Britain.

I am proud of being Australian, I am proud of being British.
Both completely in sync and long may that continue.

Darwin wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2010 at 3:16pm:



Why is it only republicans and the flag haters believe that we are inextricably tied to 'mother england'?

We are an independant country and have been for some time now, you people need to come to that realisation, it'll make you happier in the long run.

We need to retain our identity, before a Bryce_shorten administration makes anymore changes to our existing constitution and finally has it's way.

A Governor General Quentin Bryce should be replaced due to her being in breech of her own oath, and familial conflicts of interest.

We are effectively paying her to destabilise our patriotic country and install a republican Shorten-administration.

And what was her oath again?

....... ...meanwhile, in the background, her son-in-law Bill Shorten sets about transforming us into a republic, as her designer husband Michael Bryce forms part of a judging panel to decide what will be our next Australian flag, minus the Union Jack.

It doesn't get much more disloyal and un-patriotic as this.

Oath of Office

I, QUENTIN ALICE LOUISE BRYCE, do swear that I will well and truly serve Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Her heirs and successors according to law, in the office of Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia, and I will do right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of the Commonwealth of Australia, without fear or favour, affection or ill will. SO HELP ME GOD!

(Quentin Alice Louise Bryce)

Sworn, declared and subscribed by the abovenamed Quentin Alice Louise Bryce at Canberra in the Australian Capital Territory before me on 5 September 2008


(Robert French)
Chief Justice of Australia


http://www.gg.gov.au/content.php/page/id/16/title/oath-of-office