Sensational-Adelaide.com

Is there any reason why Government House can't be lifted, in one piece, off its current site on North Terrace, big rigged up the road a bit, and placed in North Adelaide on the old Le Cornu site? The Governor might feel more at home there amongst the hob knobs, instead of exposed to anti-monarch sniping in the original location between a TDU cycling circuit, a war memorial, a parade ground for war, and Jamie's ristorante (I haven't been yet, is it alright?).

That would free up the North Terrace KWS corner for the new city train station, plus other shit people complain about. If J. Rau offered me a bobcat, I'd dig tunnels along the train lines from west of Morphett St Bridge to under original Government House for an unbelievable, very modern underground experience. Entrance to the subterranean train platforms would be sensational, world class, diverse, with vending machines and all sorts of other world class draw cards such as trains arriving and unarriving. Tourists would come from all over the hills to enjoy the 800 metre subway extravaganza.

This move would open the current city train station up for rejuvenation as a big empty site for 16 years. Or controversially, as a brand spanking new panda exhibit, where the two bamboovores could battle it out for sexy times on a brand new mattress purchased at the closing down sale of the Anzac Highway Le Cornu.

Then, people catching the train for games at Adelaide Oval might use the Festival Plaza as a thoroughfare, instead of a navigating through, over, around construction sites for the next ten years as Walker refuses to pick his pace up for at least some self-respect.

madelaide wrote:Is there any reason why Government House can't be lifted, in one piece, off its current site on North Terrace, big rigged up the road a bit, and placed in North Adelaide on the old Le Cornu site? The Governor might feel more at home there amongst the hob knobs, instead of exposed to anti-monarch sniping in the original location between a TDU cycling circuit, a war memorial, a parade ground for war, and Jamie's ristorante (I haven't been yet, is it alright?).

That would free up the North Terrace KWS corner for the new city train station, plus other shit people complain about. If J. Rau offered me a bobcat, I'd dig tunnels along the train lines from west of Morphett St Bridge to under original Government House for an unbelievable, very modern underground experience. Entrance to the subterranean train platforms would be sensational, world class, diverse, with vending machines and all sorts of other world class draw cards such as trains arriving and unarriving. Tourists would come from all over the hills to enjoy the 800 metre subway extravaganza.

This move would open the current city train station up for rejuvenation as a big empty site for 16 years. Or controversially, as a brand spanking new panda exhibit, where the two bamboovores could battle it out for sexy times on a brand new mattress purchased at the closing down sale of the Anzac Highway Le Cornu.

Then, people catching the train for games at Adelaide Oval might use the Festival Plaza as a thoroughfare, instead of a navigating through, over, around construction sites for the next ten years as Walker refuses to pick his pace up for at least some self-respect.

Think I would rather see the governor up at Carclew house at north adelaide and an underground rail station under Victoria Square

somebody suggested an idea of a museum of modern art, kicking out the useless gov general, building a modern expansion onto the governors house, and having a world class MOMA.

I personally loved this idea.

I am saddened to hear you refer to Hieu Van Le as "the useless governor general" (sic). He is actually a man to be admired, and has probably achieved more than you or I ever will, though you may think that the role (which is actually Governor, not Governor General) is no longer required. A little thought before posting would go a long way.

Back it up rhino. Hieu Van Le is an admirable person, for his personal achievements.

Irrespective of who holds the role of Governor, it is pretty useless anachronistic position. The sooner we are a republic, the better.

[Shuz] wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 20, 2017 4:05 pm

Back it up rhino. Hieu Van Le is an admirable person, for his personal achievements.

Irrespective of who holds the role of Governor, it is pretty useless anachronistic position.

Which is the point I made, Shuz.

Refering to "the useless position of Governor" is an attack on the position/role.

Refering to "the useless governor general" (sic) is an unjustified attack on the man.

As I did not name him specifically, was referring to the role, and also made a mistake in saying "gov general" and not just simply "governnor", I feel I have nothing to apologise for at this time.

Thank you.

HeapsGood wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:46 pm

As I did not name him specifically, was referring to the role, and also made a mistake in saying "gov general" and not just simply "governnor", I feel I have nothing to apologise for at this time.

Thank you.

You don't have to apologise to anyone if you don't want to, but I can't believe you seriously don't see any difference.

If you referred to "our useless prime minister", would you be referring to Malcolm Turnbull, or would you be suggesting that we don't need a prime minister any more?

Considering I have already expressed what I had said, and this is getting off-topic, I have no interest in continuing this discussion with you at this time.

rhino wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:57 pm

I am saddened to hear you refer to Hieu Van Le as "the useless governor general" (sic). He is actually a man to be admired, and has probably achieved more than you or I ever will, though you may think that the role (which is actually Governor, not Governor General) is no longer required. A little thought before posting would go a long way.

What's he done to warrant my taxes paying him his significant salary of $315,608? assuming he hasn't been given a pay rise since last year.
Have we gotten value for money?

That $300k+ would be better spent on schools. Or even on providing better services for the disabled.

rev wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 09, 2017 12:19 pm

rhino wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:57 pm

I am saddened to hear you refer to Hieu Van Le as "the useless governor general" (sic). He is actually a man to be admired, and has probably achieved more than you or I ever will, though you may think that the role (which is actually Governor, not Governor General) is no longer required. A little thought before posting would go a long way.

What's he done to warrant my taxes paying him his significant salary of $315,608? assuming he hasn't been given a pay rise since last year.
Have we gotten value for money?

That $300k+ would be better spent on schools. Or even on providing better services for the disabled.

It's part of government and democracy. If we didn't have a governor we would need something else, like a president or a republic governor, depending on the form of republic we choose to take in the future.

If you want to save money, let's just have a dictatorship. At least then the NIMBYs won't get a say.

put something on that site, even if its just an open grassed area, it is pathetic that its been sitting there for over 30 years vacant

Norman wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 09, 2017 4:02 pm

rev wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 09, 2017 12:19 pm

rhino wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:57 pm

I am saddened to hear you refer to Hieu Van Le as "the useless governor general" (sic). He is actually a man to be admired, and has probably achieved more than you or I ever will, though you may think that the role (which is actually Governor, not Governor General) is no longer required. A little thought before posting would go a long way.

What's he done to warrant my taxes paying him his significant salary of $315,608? assuming he hasn't been given a pay rise since last year.
Have we gotten value for money?

That $300k+ would be better spent on schools. Or even on providing better services for the disabled.

It's part of government and democracy. If we didn't have a governor we would need something else, like a president or a republic governor, depending on the form of republic we choose to take in the future.

If you want to save money, let's just have a dictatorship. At least then the NIMBYs won't get a say.

A monarchy is not democratic.
The Queens representatives, be they state governors or the governor general, are remnants of a bygone era.
What are we, the colonial dominion of the British Empire still, or an independent nation state?

Honestly, you guys.

So you don't think we should have a Governor - that's fine. My point (now old) is that the wording used did not attack the role of Governor, it attacked the man, who does not deserve the attack, whether or not you think the position of Governor (which was bestowed upon him, he didn't run for it) is warranted.

Words are important - they're how we communicate. If you use the wrong words, you portray the wrong image. Don't say one thing and expect people to understand that you meant something else.

End of rant.