John Howard has decided that the race for the United States Democratic presidential nominee needs his input:
Prime Minister John Howard has launched a broadside against US presidential hopeful Barack Obama, warning his victory could destroy Iraq and prospects for peace in the Middle East.
While Howard himself suffering the indignities of questions regarding ’senior moments’, he does seem to have Barack Obama confused with Osama Bin Laden.
If I was running al-Qaeda in Iraq, I would put a circle around March 2008, and pray, as many times as possible, for a victory not only for Obama, but also for the Democrats.
With Obama being a African-American senator from Illinois and Osama being a Saudi terrorist currently who knows where it is very easy to confuse the two as CNN did late last year. Maybe Prime Minister Howard simply misheard a question along the lines of “What are your thoughts about Barack Obama?” Then again, he may be watching just a little too much Fox News for his own good.
I think this could be loads of fun over the next few days. The story’s just a few hours old and it’s already been picked up on the wires by agencies in the US http://news.google.com.au/nwshp?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&tab=wn&ncl=1113518658
Can we expect an interview with Fox News over the next couple of days? If it gets a run on the US networks and fed back here, will this be perceived by the punters as:
a) Further evidence of great Australian Prime Minister dispensing wisdom as he strides world stage covered in glory, or
b) Stupid twat sticking his beak where it doesn’t belong in toadying support for imbecile president nobody wants and embarrassing the hell out of the lot of us?
Following so closely from the GOP playbook, to say nothing of being so presumptuous, surely won’t make for good politics either at home or in the US.
“(AP) – Australia’s conservative prime minister slammed Barack Obama on Sunday over his opposition to the Iraq …”
Its interesting that so many media outlets use virtually the same wording in their introduction.
Shows the power of AP.
The guy’s middle name is Hussien!! I mean, Obama Hussein!! I think a trip to deed poll is advisable.
Wingnuts are already soiling themselves about reports that he went to a Muslim run school for a couple of years when he was an infant. The fact that he’s a Christian apparently didn’t enter the conversation.
A Christian with a name like “Hussein”. Yea rite!
I can’t think what the prime minister thinks he is doing by sticking his nose into politics in another country.
Besides which, Barack Obama hasn’t yet won party preselection, (or whatever they call it there) & is odds on not to.
Couldn’t give a toss either way, except the ABC news on Thursday night used the most reverential tone I have ever heard, to list the virtues of Barack Obama & his forthcoming candidacy announcement.
Anyone who gets such reverential treatment from the ABC absolutely MUST be bad news. I hope for the sake of this world he loses.
Statesman.
Everyone:
The current Australian Prime Minister has just announced to the whole wide world that he hasn’t got a shmick about how terrorists or insurgents think.
In failing to prevent him making such a fool of himself, you have to wonder if his minders, advisors, spindoctors, aides and tame experts were all fast asleep at the time – or, worse yet, they themselves believe the nonsense that Howard came out with.
If – or when – Barack Obama becomes President of the United States, the terrorists will be very, very worried indeed.
Wouldn’t such partisan statements halm the ANZUS alliance if the Democrats won the presidency in 2008? Also is it the sort of statement that might have repurcussions if the Dems with their new power in the Congress and the Senate are encouraged to respond to such partisanship by broadening an inquiry into ethical oversights of a certain single-desk operation.
Also is John Howard going to endorse Gordan Brown, or does a David Cameron victory strengthen Osama the Dill-Witted only a wee-bit.
Musn’t get one’s hopes up, but:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/rudd-rockets-into-big-league/2007/02/11/1171128816464.html
I confidently predict more strangulated, high pitched rantings from Ratty in the coming week.
What a joke. Howard, despite what I think of him personally, could at least pretend to perform the role of leader and statesman now and then. Clearly Obama represents such an ideological threat he feels it necessary to weigh in on the first day of his long presidential campaign trail. There is no dignity in the whole affair, and the net result is that Obama’s position is elevated with more media coverage.
March 2008? What’s the old coot on about? If Obama was elected, he wouldn’t take office til January 2009. He’s calling on Bush to withdraw the troops within a year.
Yes, Christine is right, I think. Ratty is losing it in the face of the poll numbers.
Why would Howard even bother is what I don’t understand. I’m sure the Republicans are quite capable of running the “A Vote For Obama Is A Vote For The Terrorists” line on their own. Why would he even think any American voter would need to know what his opinion is?
And any Democrat voting in the primaries is certainly not going to take any notice either, Obama probably won’t even get the nomination in the first place.
Weird.
Still Sunday in the States, but the lovefest on RWDB blogs like HotAir has commenced:
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/02/10/aussie-pm-howard-vote-for-obama-vote-for-osama
Shouldn’t be too long before that interview on Fox.
Should someone tell the old codger that votes of registered Republicans aren’t, you know, the ones he needs?
Obama aide: Send more Australian troops if you support the war so much from CNN via FARK (of all places).
Ratty’s jumped the shark.
Howard’s lost touch. He clearly needs bigger ear trumpets.
How beautifully the auguries are aligning ahead of Torture Dick’s downunder dalliance in less than two weeks. The Rodent will feel compelled to abase himself as usual, furthur complicating his chances for another stint at Kirribilli. Events are passing this kneejerk Bushophilic by; Johnny’s polls are in dunny, if the economy even looks like getting the collywobbles then he’s a cert to be dispatched by History’s cleansing flush. Little King Rat will scramble to milk sentiment for a pre-emptive US whacking of Iran as a Tampa come 9/11 opportunity, but you can’t fool all the punters all of the time. Not even with Citizen Rupert in your corner.
Meantime, Obama’s return of serve has been swift and precise.
What the Hell, Australia?
I thought you guys were our friends! Idiot statements like that are bound to kick of anti-Australia feelings in America mighty quickly!
O moon of al-Obama,
We now must say goodbye;
We’ve lost our good old mantra,
And must have Obama, oh you know why!
Okay, now that we’ve gotten *that* one out of the way…
Howard’s referring to the primary ballots selecting the endorsed Democratic and Republican candidates, not the final presidential ballots. He’s claiming that Obama being an officially endorsed Presidential candidate will be a boost for AQ.
Shaun referenced this above, but I just found it quoted by Atrios, and it’s a spanking worth quoting:
Most Americans have no idea that Australia had sent “only” 1400 troops, nor that they’re mostly from our elite regiments (thus performing precision missions, thus our lack of casualties compared to the American troops doing the grunt-work). Mind you, they don’t realise how small the population of Australia is, either.
On second reading, although Obama might have a victory the primaries in March 2008 in the primaries, the Democrats could only have a victory in November 2008 in the congressional term elections, which is also when the presidential elections would happen.
So on second thought I think he got confused between March and November.
More in the “what’s in a name?” department…
Apparently the new president of Harvard will be somebody named Dr. Faust.
Look, one of you folks is gonna have to play with *that* one. I don’t even know where to begin…
j-p-z:
L-O-L
You old devil, you!
Andre:
Don’t blame us Australians …… he’s your current President’s current pet.
Talk to Mr Bush or Mr Cheney about him; we Australians only pay for his feed, we don’t get to take him for walkies
As Chimpo used to be wont to say: “Bring it on!”
Obama got it right. If Ratty is so dead keen to save the world from terrorism, why is he prepared to fight AQ to the last American?
The answer is quite apparent: Ratty is interested in fighting terrorism only insofar as it serves as a wedge issue in Australian domestic politics.
Ratty knows that the issue of Iraq wedges in his favour if and only if Australia suffers minimal casualties.
Obama has given Howard an atomic wedgie. Right now, Ratty’s Y-fronts are snagged at the northern end of his Shatt-al-Arab.
________________
Dr Faust, eh? If he has made a deal with the devil, I hope for his sake that he bargained for more than the presidency of Harvard. Chaqu’un à son goût, but it does seem to stack up very well against an eternity in the Tenth Circle of hell.
[ahem]
I assume you’re referring to Dante’s circle-work in the Divine Comedy, Katz? There are only nine rings of Hell, you’ll find me chilling in the centre.
Faust got his value, no matter what rubbish anyone tries to tell you. Don’t you know the immutable law of Heaven that all parties to a trade benefit ex ante?
The Rodent should put his money where his mouth is. Anyone can see that al-Qaeda is watching and waiting. When they realise Ratty is afraid to send more troops, it just serves to empower them.
Ratty is the best friend al-Qaeda ever had.
“If I was running al-Qaeda in Iraq, I would put a circle around March 2008, and pray, as many times as possible, for a victory not only for Obama, but also for the Democrats.”
Howards really made a cleverly disguised slur on al-Qaeda by suggesting that they might be stupid enough to have someone like himself as leader.
“Dr Faust, eh? If he has made a deal with the devil, I hope for his sake that he bargained for more than the presidency of Harvard.”
This Faust is a she.
DD,
Jodi Picoult added an extra one.
That’s the problem with you medieval representations of the infernal.
How on earth (or anywhere else in the cosmos for that matter) can you be transgressive while remaining shackled to scholasticism.
Don’t you know you’re playing God’s game?
Tigtog – Australia is not that small.
If Howard was prepared to back the Americans in Iraq with actions rather than insults, he’d have 10,000 troops doing circle work in Baghdad instead of 1,000 troops in the desert.
The only two issues he is leading on in the polls are the economy and national security. Hence every utterance in the last week has included some mention of the economy or national security.
He is running scared and has been told to mention “terrorists” alot. It is hilarious that Obama has called him on it, and said what no Australian pollie dare “send more than a token force if you care so much John”.
The Hicks thing is blowing up in their face too. Now that they are making all heavy to get something happening (or at least pretending to) they are being ignored. Makes Howard look like an ineffectual toady. No surprises there then.
This makes Beazley’s ‘Rove’ gaffe pale in comparison.
wbb, I agree totally that Australia is not so small that our 1400 is comparable on a per capita basis to the American contingent in Iraq. But we’re not nearly as big a country population wise as most Americans imagine, either. I’m sure when told “the Aussies are with us” most citizens envisaged many thousands of troops.
Fortunately for our troops, they are all seasoned veterans being used as specialists, which of course is not without its dangers, but they face much better odds than the American newbies on the coalface of peacekeeping patrols. What they do they’re doing well, and I’m sure they have genuine strategic value in places, but they are a token force sent to score political points for Howard here (fighting terrorism) and for Bush there (see, we’re not alone, the Aussies are with us).
Howard knows deep down that there’s no way the electorate here will wear sending thousands of non-specialist troops, including large numbers of newbies full of enthusiasm but lacking expertise, to get killed at any rate approaching the American rate of attrition.
Obama’s called him on his shell-game. Good for him.
Crooks and Liars is carrying the story now http://www.crooksandliars.com/ . Pop on over and post a comment. Let them know the sycophantic little turd doesn’t speak for all of us.
“Barack” does rhyme with “Iraq” after all, especially if you have an American accent (or view on things). So maybe Howard is being alert (but not alarmed).
What got me was the way he connected al-Quaeda with Iraq and his mention of praying “several times”, which made me think of Muslims with their multiple daily prayers and the original reason for going to war, the so-called connection between Iraq and terrorism.
It is difficult not to see Howard’s soundbyte as another example of insidious manipulation, building on the fear and vague misgivings that he seems to love to reinforce at every opportunity.
Intersting comments at ‘Moderate Voice’
and DCLC
For some reason I had always thought Oz’s troop contribution to Iraq was considerably less than the USA (per capita)
On Mr Obama’s numbers the Ozzi contribution is (per capita) way higher than the USA’s.
satp – 300 million / 140,000 is a lot greater 20 million / 1,400
Howard refuses to support he US War on Terror. He gives great comfort to Al Qaeda.
It mystifies me that Howard is said to be winning in the polls on the matter of security. Our involvement in Iraq is putting Muslims offside here and elsewhere in the world. It has increased our exposure to terrorist reprisal. The Brits learned this with the London bombings. Why isn’t he losing on security?
That is the numbers as I understood them Wbb. Perhaps I was reading a misprint. Am unimpressed with Obama’s “how about YOU send 20,000 extra troops”. This is a much less statesmanlike comment than John Howard’s statement. I begin to see why the ABC is fawning over Obama.
You are possibly the only person to say that John Howard refuses to support the US war on terror. I can’t decide if that comment is stupid or obtuse. Probably the latter.
It bears pointing out that more than half of our ‘Iraq’ commitment is logistical/naval and hence is in Kuwait. Aussie troops on the ground account for about 600, 500 of which are training the next wave of Shia militia… er, the Iraqi Army in Umm Qasr province, while the rest are guarding the Embassy in Baghdad.
I’ve long held that this pretty much a token commitment, and its withdrawal would have next to fuck all impact on anything, but the media likes the ‘1400 troops’ number and Ratty and co like to pretend that our 600 or so grunts on the ground are the glue that holds the Coalition together (nevermind that the Poms are getting the hell out in the next half a year or so…)
Howard’s rhetoric and his actions are worlds apart.
Just like there’s a huge difference between threatening to shoot someone and actually having the gumption to follow through on it.
Actions speak louder than words, in some cases much, much, much louder.
It gets better. Republican Senator tells Howard to butt out of US politics:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21209258-2,00.html
And the Democratic response:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21210392-2,00.html
Why not both, satp? Please explain.
John Howard has never supported the War on Terror. All he has ever supported is his little buddy in the Whitehouse. As yesterday’s partisan spit proves.
Senator Barack Obama’s question is valid. If John Howard truly gives a fig about Iraq, rather than merely the political position of his retarded mate, then he should commit a real fighting force to the defence of Baghdad. It is the front-line in the Global War on Terror. Where else should our soldiers be fighting the most serious threat to Western Civilisation – one which will go on for decades.
Anybody with a fridge magnet knows this much (aka The Fridge Maginet Line).
Steve at the pub – obviously you’ve been imbibing:
It’s derived from the Arabic for “beautiful”. In itself, it doesn’t have any specifically religious meaning.
And as if a name stops someone from being any particular religion. We don’t pick our names, but we can pick our religion. Obama is a goes-to-Church, God-has-spoken-to-me type Evangelical Christian – and for you to suggest he’s lying about his publically-stated religious beliefs based purely on his name reeks of anti-Arab bigotry.
That’s a good one actually: “A Muslim with a name like “Johnson”. Yeah right!” Steve, Joe Biden you and Howard are jumping the shark over Obama, and it’s amazing watch…
‘to watch’ even…
The PM is referring to Obama’s Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007, which calls for withdrawal by March 2008.
Others have already pointed out that it’s connected with the campaign. Assuming the Iraq war is unwinnable, anyone wanting to be the next president would prefer it to be lost by the current administration.
Seems to me that Obama was given an opportunity to rise to Howard’s challenge with statesmanlike seriousness, and invite the leader of a key ally to a frank exchange of views about what the best way forward might be; instead, he chose to shoot back with a zippy one-liner. Tough call to make on which course woulda made more political hay, though. BHO gets points in the short-term for having a snappy comeback ready, to be sure. But that’s not such a great long-haul methodology. Nor is it terribly, as it were, patriotic. Both countries find themselves allied in a highly problematical military cause. The patriotic (and sensible) thing to do would be not to snark about it, but to invite all the really serious players to put their heads together and figure out what the best plan is, given where things stand today.
Oh, and sorry to wander OT for a sec, but one more thought about Harvard’s own brand-new prez, Dr. Faust (CUE CREEPY HORROR-MOVIE ORGAN MUSIC). I had a look at an overview of her CV, and to my mind she seems roughly qualified to run a small-to-mid-size liberal arts college in say Colorado; dunno about her qualifications to preside over a Death Star-sized university complex that is richer and more influential than Eastern Europe. Not that it has to matter, strictly; people often rise to these challenges brilliantly, after all. But one can’t help wondering here whether a decisive qualification is her lack of a penis, after Larry Summers was run out of town on a rail for celebrating diversity (of opinion). My question is: should feminists be glad that a woman got the nod, or annoyed that an arguably underqualified woman did?
j_p_z,
You have some affinity with Australia (some day perhaps you could explain it) so you are more likely than most Americans to prick up his ears at the mention of John Who?.
Would you say that this Howard/Obama spat is achieving any traction in the great what-the-hell-is-Australia-and-who-the-hell-John-Howard public space?
This story, I predict, will take on iconic status in Australia.
But I imagine that it has barely registered in the US.
Mummy, Mummy, Mr Howard has no clothes on, Mummy, Mummy!
Absolutely wrong. He smacked down a pretentious, overblown statement from a political pipsqueak (in terms of the US) who’s joined at the hip with Bush, and equated BHO with supporting terrorists.
It didn’t deserve a serious response, and the smackdown has impressed some of those who really count: registered Democrats and potential voters.
jpz zed: “BHO gets points in the short-term for having a snappy comeback ready, to be sure. But that’s not such a great long-haul methodology. Nor is it terribly, as it were, patriotic. Both countries find themselves allied in a highly problematical military cause. The patriotic (and sensible) thing to do would be not to snark about it, but to invite all the really serious players to put their heads together and figure out what the best plan is, given where things stand today.”
That’s assuming Australia is a “really serious player” but as other commenters have pointed out, our only use to the Americans is as propaganda value, to flesh out the supposed ‘coalition of the willing’.
The patriotic and sensible thing to do would be to withdraw troops from Iraq, not escalate as the Americans are currently doing. But you’ll find few neocons think (or care) that the situation is “highly problematical”.
Oh, and sorry to wander OT for a sec, but one more thought about Harvard’s own brand-new prez, Dr. Faust … But one can’t help wondering here whether a decisive qualification is her lack of a penis, after Larry Summers was run out of town on a rail for celebrating diversity (of opinion). My question is: should feminists be glad that a woman got the nod, or annoyed that an arguably underqualified woman did?
As a feminist, I don’t think of women as being defined by their “lack of a penis”. As an Australian, I have no opinion on the appointment to head an American university.
Absolutely. You seem to be forgetting what he was responding to, j_p_z: someone who accused him of being al-Qaeda’s choice for US President.
Just finished watching question time. Howard was running a not very plausible argument. Remember his statement was:
He now tells us that this statement in fact does not contain any negative reflections on Democrats other than Senator Obama. Rudd read the statement back to him a few times, eliciting some Hilaly-esque talk about the context of the last bit.
It just gets better and better:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21211187-1702,00.html
It’s good to see the Rodent doing his bit to put a Democrat in the White House.
Bullet, meet foot.
Problem is – he does speak for all of you. Just as the shrub speaks for us. You guys vote there correct? We do too and unfortunately, whether our last two elections were frauds or not, just about half of our population did vote for King George. What’s y’alls excuse?
My point here is, if “the people” don’t begin to take some responsibility for what their leaders do and say then we have effectively thrown up our hands and abdicated responsibility for the evils perpetrated in our name.
I say this with all respect because I am very fond of the several Aussies I know personally and the “no worries” Aussie attitude in general but… He does speak for you – what are you prepared to do about it?
The truth is it doesn’t really matter at this point whether Obama or any of the other faux liberals we have to choose from are elected or not. The United States is lost. If you lived here and were fully aware of our culture you would understand this. You might want to consider making some changes and cutting dead weight before your leaders drag you down with us.
.
Rudd weighs in per smh:
Ratty replies:
Of course some of us find it difficult to forget how Ratty ratted on the majority of Australian people by going to war against their will.
Shorter Ratty: As Australia’s No.1 HypocRat, I reserve the exclusive Ratty right to bind Australians in perpetuity for a rat decision which ratifies my rationale for rationalising bush- rats who I support in any premptive rat-a-tat-tat, which ratchets up my ratability with neo-rats.
It just gets better and better:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21211187-1702,00.html
Good to see the little bloke doing his bit, however slight, to ensure a Democratic victory.
Foot, meet bullet.
re The top story on the ABC news was new evidence linking Iran to weapons used to kill American troops in Iraq.
Here we go again – “evidence” = WMDs. When will they ever learn?
suz check out the ‘Informed Comment’ blog to see evidence to the contrary.
Juan Cole makes a powerful argument.
A comment from Vancouver BC
I’m sorry but when I saw that weird funny looking creature you elected for a PM, who by the way looks like a mouse or something, on our news here I just about wanted to kick in my TV set. I am fuming right now and wish I could say what I really want to about you people down there. Australia used to be the country I loved the most. Now I hate it and there is no way I’m visiting the US or Australia again or the UK for the matter until all these fascists are jailed and the world becomes safe again.
The obvious question is how did a leader with kangaroo shit for brains ever get elected PM in the first place? The next question is why he is insulting Americans who are adept at insulting themselves well enough and don’t need Howards help? Finally why did they “pull” World Trade Tower #7 a 50 story skyscraper which was not hit by a plane and how did they get the explosives in there in 3 hours amidst all the chaos in Manhattan? It takes weeks to set enough explosives to bring a building like that down.
Answer these questions and you will raise holy hell down there until Australia becomes the “lucky country” again instead of the Loser Country.
PLEASE HIT THE WEB SITE ABOVE
ONCE A JOLLY RATMAN CAMPED BY QUEANBEYAN
UNDER THE SHADE OF A SMELLY PIECE OF CHEESE
AND HE SANG AS HE SHOVED THAT CHEESE INTO HIS TUCKERBAG MOUTH
THEN JUMPED LIKE A COWARD INTO THE BILLABONG
“YOU’LL NEVER CATCH ME IN IRAQ” SAID HE.
Something like that.
No more Australian PM, John Hunt, now it’s Ron Howard.
Hot off Huffpo:
“Barack Obama v. Ron Howard
Do you think we need advice on our choice of a President from a second-string Bush lapdog? That would be Australian PM ….”
I so hope Monday’s Daily Show covers this.
It’s a rat, kanuck.
Raty ratface (Shit ,no joke he is an ugly fucker,Id love to know if Janette ever gets an ear hair stuck on her tongue when they are full on canoodling? It’s probably more like a iron filing,after all he is the man of steel)Howard is unbelievable,I mean am I the only bastard who sees the method in his madness?
What worries Howard is the fact that a black man may get into the Whitehouse(is that an oxy moron?) so,now dig this,we could end up with an Aboriginal as P.M. Howard reckons if we got an Aboriginal in the lodge he might set fire to all the chippendale furniture making a camp fire.And on it goes,yous take Howard to serious,can you imagine him doing something difficult like house conveyance?perish the thought,leave him alone he is doing a stirling job.
Ive been laughing about this one all day. What a demented old coot! No wonder he’s rushing through those no-deposit nursing home places.
The ALP can ride this one for days, months. Say, people of Australia, Do we still want a relationship with the US if one of the Democrat frontrunners wins government? Well, Howard doesnt!
Shit Enemy Combatant, was that the one headed ‘Howard cashes in on Anna’s Death’? http://www.tmz.com/2007/02/11/howard-cashes-in-on-anna-s-death/
The opportunist little prick has absolutely no shame…
What is Howard’s opinion on Anna Nicole Smith? I mean, he has a “view” on everything else.
Oh happy joy! Li’l Johnny has finally lost his ability to judge the public’s sentiment. Bush is on the nose for the mess in Iraq and the more Li’l Johnny reminds us that there is a war going on the deeper he digs his political grave. All we need now is a complete backbench revolt to roll the lying stinking rodent once and for all. What a fun few months we have in store. The government has so many running sores from AWB to Qantas to Hicks and IR…and Rudd has got him well and truly spooked! Howard is looking like an embattled Macbeth beseiged in Dunsinane while Birnam wood approaches. Lay on MacRudd!
Be careful what you wish for, Peter. The bloke in power by the end of Macbeth is called Malcolm.
Oh hello, what’s this? Is Andrew Bolt wriggling around trying to reposition himself?
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/the_howard_obama_slug_fest/P120/
We’re months out from the election. What’s happened to the love? Where’s the passion? Marriage is supposed to be forever, isn’t it?
The question must be asked: Is Andrew Bolt sleazing around back-alleys and cheating on John Howard?
Bolt has denied in the past that he intends to run for Parliament either for the Liberal Party or the Labor Party.
I imagine that he’s trying to brown nose his way into the Andy Landy faction as we speak…
Has Barack signed up Josh Lyman yet?
That would be a mistake Kim. After the appalling way he’s treated Donna, Malkin will be all over him.
True, Christine. He’s probably working for Al Gore anyway.
Amy Gardner then!
*Swoons* Kim, you HAVE to watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bg3xoNGwOmI
I think he should also consider Lou Thornton.
Woohoo!
Bring back Weeds!
To all the yanks commenting on the war in Iraq, America started the war, now they can finish it. But it sounds like they are going to put ther tails between there legs run just like Nam, wich I might ad they dragged Australia into aswell. and as for Howards comments, I don’t see the Yanks too concerned about butting into other countries business when it seems fit for them to do so. but we all know the yanks think they rule the world. what a laugh.
CK: (1:42 pm) “Absolutely wrong…”
then, (2:40 pm) [cites] The American media largely viewed the Obama-Howard story as a baptism of fire for the senator… “In this, his first full day as an official candidate, Democratic senator Barack Obama got a taste of the rough and tumble world of presidential politics…â€? …Mr Obama had found “himself in a sparring match on the international stageâ€?.
Well, I’d certainly know how to play this hand, if I were, say, a certain Mr. Karl Rove. But if BHO continues in this vein, he’ll be gone long before he ever gets a seat at that table. If he proves to have any staying power without raising his game, my guess is it’ll be largely because people just don’t like Hillary personally, view Edwards and crowd as ciphers, and continue to see BHO as a sort of polar opposite of Bush.
Obama’s grade for witty repartee: A-. Not bad at all. Grade for international statesmanship in time of war: C/C-. Of course compared to the Bush crowd, that still leaves him at the top of his class.
Like a man said,
“You know better, but I know *him*.”
Johnnie this, Johnnie that. Have a listen to yourselves, all that hate and bad vibes.
Love him or hate him, John Howard has done a lot for this country. Certainly more that the last two efforts, Bob”No child will live in poverty” HAWKE and that crooked snake, Paul “the big picture(Mufti Man)KEATING.
I am old enough to remember the scary years when the likes of Beazley was the defense minister bringing some of labour’s greatest hits such as the Collins class’rock show under water’submarines and the great ‘Seasprite’ helicopter fiasco (the ones they are about to scrap before we even get an operational airframe)
To me, the federal labour party is like a big scary monster waiting to come out of the closet, ready to pander to every minority group and fringe dwellers (the usual whingeing long haired, soap dodging types)out there. Yes, I remember fantastic government spending ideas on grants such as Twenty Six thousand dollars to ‘develop a surfboard for women’ and paying some ‘poet’ a full time wage to go around reading poetry to workers on building sites to improve union perceptions in the community.
RUDD may well be our next Prime Minister, even though after years in opposition and the current perception of the liberal government, Labour still does not actually have any policies to speak of. RUDD could never be effective because like any labour leader, he now owes so much to different labour factions that he will be ham strung to make a decision.
And what is with GILLARD? I have seen more charisma and felt more warmth from a tent peg.
And for Michael from Canada: I always remember my late father use to say: “Son, what is the definition of a Canadian?”
Answer: “An American with his brains kicked out”
And don’t knock are troops. Their contribution is more than substantial. Australian soldiers are a force multiplier in those regions, with their fighting abilities, reliability and ethics and ethos, they are stand outs in the crowd. Just ask those American soldiers that had their ass in a sling in Afghanistan a year or so back. An Aussie soldier (SAS) won a military medal for saving a lot of fellow soldiers. Look back further to the Aussie involvement in recent times in Iraq, Timor and Somalia. Remember, HOWARD actually put soldiers on the ground in Iraq. In the first ground war in the Gulf, Bob HAWKE and Labour sent the NAVY!
CK, from Weeds: “….if you can eat it you can beat it”. Proto-CJ’s delivery was to die for. Sickeningly cool.
Guess Toby will have to take the scraps and go with Edwards.
Jim, I really enjoyed your in depth analysis. What’s a “force multiplier”, mate?
While I respect the charitable work that Australian Prime Minister John Howard has done for the 12-step support group called “Irrelevant Balding Albino Conservative and Unexpectededly Outspoken for No Particular Reason Current Australian Prime Ministers Anonymous,” I’ll say this: “Hey, John Howard, how ya doin’ bro? Cool? Cool. So listen, I heard you made some negative public comments about Barack Obama’s Iraq war policies. I’m with you man. That’s totally messed up how Obama wants to save American lives and taxpayer money by cutting the funding and troop levels for the illegal war in Iraq. I mean: WTF was he thinking!? I mean, some people!
Some people think he’s going to be a good president because he focuses on the priorities of honest mainstream Americans and everyday voters. If you want to believe it, those people represent roughly 65-percent of the U.S. population!
I tell you this Prime Minister Howard: why don’t you worry about the totally awesome commenwealth of Australia and forget about what’s going on in a place you have no official say or influence.
As a blowhard, innefective and lame-duck leader you certainly need to be a pack animal in a world of big dogs who you share nothing in common with, other than political ideology, in order to get noticed. But as a brazenly outspoken neo-conservative with nothing intelligent to say, it would be better if you kept your mouth shut and focused on the issues that face Australia. Barack Obama is not one of those issues.
“Look back further to the Aussie involvement in recent times in Iraq, Timor and Somalia.”
# Um, Jim? Howard was dragged into Timor by popular sentiment. He didn’t want to go. He didn’t ‘lead’. And Somalia was not a shooting war but a UN deployment. Both Timor and Somalia would have seen us deployed irrespective of which PM was in. Yes, even Hawke and Keating.
“Remember, HOWARD actually put soldiers on the ground in Iraq. In the first ground war in the Gulf, Bob HAWKE and Labour sent the NAVY!”
# Yes, the conversatrion went like this. PM: Hi, the US, we would like to help.
Pres: Do you have self supporting mechanised infantry brigade?
PM: No.
Pres: What do you have?
PM: Ships. And some F-18s and tankers.
Pres: We’ll take ‘em.
Jim, the British SAS had to fight tooth and nail to get a part in DestertStorm. Australian troops had no way in hell of being included. We simply weren’t going to send enough for it to be worth the administrative and logical effort. Whereas ships are easy.
I thought it went:
“Son, what is the definition of a Canadian?�
Answer: Someone, who when they were invaded by the US in 1812, defeated them and captured a vast swathe of US territory that they then gave back.
Sorry you guys are stuck with such a lapdog, piece of refuse like Howard.
We are stuck, however, with the original article, Bush. I can only empathize. . .
Just know there are many progressives, even in the southern United States, who are working our bums off to dump our conservative government. We finished half the job with this past year’s congressional elections, and we’ll finish the job when we elect Obama president!
Ahh, Jim. You crack me up.
You seem to have forgotten about this Little Rubber Johnny’s government spending $20b on aircraft that will cost a hell of a lot more than $20b now that the Yanks have cut their order from 1760 to 700, which will be delivered late resulting in a $3b purchase of “Super Hornets” to allow us to have some form of air defence (an aircraft which is only used by the U.S. Navy because the Brits and Israelis can spot a used- car salesman a mile away), and will be slower and more visible to radar than the fighters the rest of our region are buying up. Forget a couple of billion taxpayer dollars on dodgy submarines, we’re about to get the mother of all Datsun 120Y’s dropped on us at a cost of (at the very least) $1,000 per capita.
And there’s no need to worry- no-one here has forgotten that it was HOWARD who put Australians on the ground in Iraq. That is the problem a lot of people here have with the runt, in case you missed it.
I’d rather have a Labor leader hamstrung by Australian factions, than a Liberal leader hamstrung by an American agenda.
PHILDO!
You were sensational. Provocative, innovative, outspoken and mildly retarded.
Amongst all that cleverly constructed verbal flatulence, I spotted a word of truth, being the words “current Australian Prime Minister�
Our 25th and longest serving Prime Minister (let’s see, elected the 11th of March 1996 -)mmm, not bad for a blowhard, ineffective and lame duck leader. He has managed to win a few elections……………
And for harry…look at the future for the ADF today, raising two (2) more battalions, new equipment etc. Not the sorry state of affairs that Labour left in 1996. Sure there is a lot of work to be done, and I was talking about the traditions and performance of Australians (especially Somalia-Baidoa)in those theatres in response to leftist pinko unwashed types that commented about Australian forces earlier.
Some F-18’s and some tankers…….that my point, forces that actually did something, not the safe position that labour took.
“Our 25th and longest serving Prime Minister.”
Oops
I would like to add at this point that “Howard the redneck & Co” have turned the front-bench into a self-protecting hierarchy, not unlike some well-known Christian churches.
Also, do not overlook the racist aspect of Howard’s recation; Obama is not a good, ol’ Anglo-Saxon/Celtic name.
Check out the Howard ministers’ portfolios for the absence of ethnics.
Such an enlightened world!
harry: “[a Canadian is someone] who when they were invaded by the US in 1812, defeated them and captured a vast swathe of US territory…”
Are you sure you don’t mean a “redcoat”? You can claim that the US invaded Canada; we tend to think that we attacked the British Empire, for its outrages (impressment, tyranny over shipping, &c. &c.). While the Canadians fought tol’ably well, it was –guess what– the British Army that defeated the US, until of course that unfortunate incident down in Nawlins.
But all that’s a long time ago. I’ll offer a compromise. These days, a Canadian is like a teenage girl who comes home after her freshman year in college and says, “Daddy I hate you! You’re stupid because you’ve never read Edward Said and Paul Ricoeur.” FATHER: “If I’m so stupid, how come I’m the one who’s able to pay for your whole tuition?” “Just for that, I’m becoming a lesbian!!”
Wouldn’t you say he redeems himself in Season 7?
Michael Brissenden last night on the 7.30 Report said Obama’s campaign so far has been like a script from the West Wing.
In today’s NYT concerning the Iranian IED evidence, this little snippet is revealed:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/13/world/middleeast/13weapons.html?hp&ex=1171342800&en=807e1132fc3d3585&ei=5094&partner=homepage
WTF is the Chairman of the JCS doing here? Cheney in a couple of weeks. What’s going on?
Oh, spring’s coming in the Northern Hemisphere. Attack season.
Yes, it appears Ratty may be conspiring with US war criminals to embark on another aggressive war, this one with the potential to develop into a nuclear war.
Have a listen to yourself, all that hate and bad vibes.
Shaun and Everyone:
American Republicans and Democrats brawl with each other in elections but stand shoulder-to-shoulder when dealing with non-Americans.
The way in which Howard attacked Obama made absolutely no political sense whatsoever ….. unless he acted on a suggestion to do so from the White House or the G.O.P. However, if such a hint was indeed dropped to him, Howard would have been very foolish to act on it. This is an old trick and the Americans are very adept at using it ….. as, for example, Saddam Hussein found out to his cost when he THOUGHT the Americans had given him the go-ahead to invade Kuwait. What if the Republicans and Democrats, in their usual bi-partisan way of dealing with foreign governments, had lured Howard into a position from which he could not retreat without serious cost?
Republicans and Democrats both realize that the situation in Iraq is getting worse and I’ll bet the word “Stalingrad” has been spoken behind closed doors. It was bringing AMERICAN troops home – during what presumably will still be the Bush presidency – that Obama was talking about; he wasn’t talking about bringing Australian troops home, was he? He wasn’t talking about bringing Australian troops home. Howard rushed in …. let’s hope it wasn’t “on-script” ….. and his only way out now for Howard is to give the Americans a commitment to increase Australian troop numbers in Iraq – most likely by conscription – to replace American troops as they withdraw from Iraq.
Howard may be skilled at playing politics and at scaring a gullible public with phantom terrorists (what about the real ones???) ….. but he has just shown that he is a real novice when he tries to mess around with a nation of winner-takes-all poker players and cunning wheelers-and-dealers.
j-p-z said that Obama ….
No, not a zippy one-liner …… it looks more like good old American bi-partisanship in dealing with foreign governments …. and it looks like Howard got himself into an ambush..
I believe it was Cheney who primed Howard to attack Obama. (Cheney will be here next week.)
No, that’d be just too bizarre.
However, it would be a delicious irony.
Howard thinks he’s channelling Menzies. In fact he’s channelling Billy McMahon. (He’s got the stature, pate, and voice for it, when it’s all said and done.)
Howard’s only Menzian features were his eyebrows, which he has tamed with a particularly savage plucking.
Katz:
That’s nowhere near as bizarre as what has happened already!
“Conscription to fight The Terrorists” would be a dream campaign slogan that would surely get Der Verr….. errrr… Whatshisname re-elected on a landslide. You can just hear the shock-jocks losing their bladder-control over it “It gets all those dole-bludgers off the streets”, etc., etc., ad nauseum. …. The objections of the business community and the ADF would be as unheeded as were those of the legal community when so many of our traditional protections and safeguards were torn up.
Besides, it would give Emperor George II The Inept part of The Surge he needs to win more and more Glorious Victories in Iraq ….. for free …. and without having the bother of having to face an angry Congress over it.