SA Footy

Have been seeing a number of their signs up around our way, I had a look at their website and interestingly they claim to be neither right wing nor left wing which got my interest as they seem not unlike the original Democrats party.

Most likely I will vote for Tony Zappia Labor in the lower house, yet refuse point blank to vote Labor or Liberal in the upper house and have ruled out the Greens and Family First also for the reason of them being at the extreme end of each political spectrum. So political observers, are the DLP really a Centrist based party, and do they have any real chance of actually winning a seat this time around?

http://www.dlpforsa.org/

Google Bob Santa Maria and see what you make of it. As I understand it the DLP were started by Catholic ALP members who were scared the ALP were being run by communists (this was in the reds under the bed era), and promptly gave their preferences to the Libs helping keep Pig Iron Bob in power for many years. Touch too much of the religion for my liking.

Make of this what you will.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._A._Santamaria

Didn't even know this party existed.

Interesting reading! - The current DLP claim to be a different party re-started by former DLP members. I think they seem on the Conservative side although not as Conservative as the Liberal party. Having won a seat in Vic has probably given them enough publicity to win some more votes!

Yes, the current DLP is not at all like the DLP of Bob Santamaria. That was very closely aligned the the National Civic Council, a very conservative body that had connections with Opus Dei.
Cheers

bulldogproud2 wrote:Yes, the current DLP is not at all like the DLP of Bob Santamaria. That was very closely aligned the the National Civic Council, a very conservative body that had connections with Opus Dei.
Cheers

yes bring back self flagulation......

Strange, I thought Tony Abbott would be tied up with this mob- being George Pells' best mate and an arch conservative catholic.

Marriage
Marriage is the union of one man and one woman entered into freely. No other form of relationship can be considered a Marriage. The DLP asserts that is not discriminatory in a negative sense to reserve Marriage to 'one man and one woman'. It is Marriage and the family that springs naturally from that union that is the first society, the school of virtues and the only certain way of preserving society.

Euthanasia
The DLP believes that every human life has equal dignity. Euthanasia creates a society where the aged, the infirmed and the disabled are devalued. Once we chose to devalue some within our community, all life is devalued.
The DLP is firmly opposed to any attempts to legalize euthanasia or assisted suicide.

Abortion
No-one really believes any more that a foetus is simply 'a bunch of cells'. And yet, somehow, we still tolerate something like 4800 abortions in South Australia every year.
The DLP stands with the vulnerable and the weak in our society - the unborn child is surely the most vulnerable. We stand with every pregnant woman in crisis, recognising their difficulties but knowing that abortion is not the answer.

Children and the Family
The DLP is deeply concerned that economic pressures are increasingly requiring both parents to be out of the home (in paid employment) with the attendant increasing reliance on childcare.
The first school of learning is the family home. Children's early social development and their first formative experiences in morals and virtues come from within the family. That's where parents naturally want to be.

There is no easy answer. The DLP recognises the stresses experienced by many young families and will support any initiatives that give parents more opportunity to spend more time with their children.


Nothing centrist about these policies. Thet are straight out the Liberal Party playback (Think Lyons Forum)

Looks pretty much the same as the old DLP to me.

Agreed, they are kidding themselves if they believe that their views are "centrist"!

mick wrote:Looks pretty much the same as the old DLP to me.

Yes it does.
They were rooted in the old conservative Irish Catholic Labor movement that gave us the White Australia Policy.
After the split the remaining ALP, thus cut loose from their conservatives, went radical, spendthrift, and madly PC, and only in recent times have they learned to hide that from the voters to some extent when elections are on.

You are right. They do seem to be somewhat like the old DLP. I guess I did not look at their policies enough, just their media releases.

looks like they have a seat in the Senate in Vic!

Almost fell over when I saw 'em listed on the Senate paper. I had thought they had diappeared completely.

It brought back a spot of nostalgia recalling watching my first ever election count with my father. He always a a soft spot for the DOGS (Defense of Government Schools).

On 5AA this morning they had Gozu's mate Lord Monkton on giving a few thoughts on the Carbon Tax, - at one point LM was asked what people should do to stop the Carbon Tax, LM replied that they should go to an election and vote against both the ALP and the Liberal Party because both are in favour of Carbon schemes. He then endorsed support for the DLP which he says is one of the few parties that completley opposes any type of Carbon tax scheme. Byner replied that the DLP are a fairly insignificant party with little likelihood of winning anything, LM replied along the lines of "well there is one way to change that then".

Having never heard him speak before it was interesting to hear him this morning. He stated that its actually a very good thing to produce Carbon Dioxide emmisions into the atmosphere because it encourages the growth of trees and so on and he suggested that all enviromentalists should actually be in favour of rasing the levels of Carbon Dioxide in the air and that "The trees would thank you for it"! - Would like to hear a debate between him and someone from the other side of the argument at some stage!

Why do they give him this publicity?

He's never had a scientific paper peer reviewed and published ever.

He continues to claim he's a member of the House of Lords. They've written a letter saying this just isn't true.

The vast majority of the world's climate scientists vehemently disagree with him.

It's a poor reflection on the standard of the Australian media and political debate that he's given this much publicity.

redandblack wrote:Why do they give him this publicity? ...

I assume somebody is making money out of trotting him around..
Should we be helping them by giving him publicity and on line hits from here now we know he is a fraud?

Good point, Psyber, but unfortunately there are those who believe him, due to the support he gets from the likes of Andrew Bolt and The Australian's anti-Climate Change agenda.

Credit to you, though, for your view on this.

"Climate Change Skeptics" seem to be the group running him around, not sure if they are actually making money out of it though, which begs the qestion of why they would do that only to have him give endorsement to the DLP?