KERRY O’BRIEN: How do you test the mood of your colleagues?
JOHN HOWARD: Well, you talk to them, you talk to a whole range of people. I do that all the time. It’s a constant exercise and…
KERRY O’BRIEN: How do you know the ones who are going to tell you what you need to hear rather than what you might want to hear?
JOHN HOWARD: If you think I’m going to go into that, it’s like asking you to disclose your sources as a journalist (laughs).
KERRY O’BRIEN: But no, I’m not saying names, I’m saying how do you know that the people are going to answer honestly when you eyeball them?
JOHN HOWARD: Kerry, I have an understanding of my colleagues………
Matt Price is strolling the halls of Parliament House.
Comments redirected from an earlier thread:
http://larvatusprodeo.net/2007/09/11/its-the-team-stupid-or-its-1993-or-something/#comment-401852
I don’t believe Howard is the problem with the Liberal Party’s electoral chances.
That is, replacing him is unlikely to make a difference. They stand to lose regardless of who is the leader.
“Howard Deathwatch”??? Catchy…!
“That is, replacing him is unlikely to make a difference. They stand to lose regardless of who is the leader.”
It’s Time.
Dear LP Agony Aunt,
I have a bottle of champagne and a cigar put aside with which to celebrate the hopeful electoral defeat of Howard. If Howard’s time is up before the election, I’m not sure if the pour a drink and light up on that news or wait till polling day.
I should I simply buy another bottle of champers and an extra cigar and double the celebratory fun.
Bolt has gone quiet. Looks like it might all come to a showdown at tomorrow’s cabinet meeting. Probably a mad rush of telephone calls going on now…
The best outcome of this is Howard stays but it keeps happening. If his own colleagues don’t believe he’s the best PM… Having said that, Labor can still paint any switch as cynicism and panic. And Costello would be terrible.
By golly, isn’t there going to be a lot of crow having to be eaten if Howard actually wins the election?
Dead Man Talking (sorry, couldn’t resist it).
What was fascinating about that interview was Howard’s not even attempting to move away from the subject of his impending failure. It was a conversation which could only reinfoce impressions of his weakness, yet he failed to turn it remotely to his advantage. A thousand times before, we’ve seen him avoid questions, make: “Kerry, but the point I want to make is …” statements. Which he could have done, then moved straight into the (few) strong points he has. O’Brien must still be wondering what’s happened.
All Labor needs to do over the next few days is shut up….
Graham Young on why Howard will lose the election but is still their best hope of defending seats:
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=6364
There is a really eerie paradox with this “It’s Time” meme. If it really IS “Time,” then why is Labor being so invisible? If it really is time, why are they not setting out a very bold agenda, for which they will thus have no legitimacy/mandate issues in implementing if they win?
“By golly, isn’t there going to be a lot of crow having to be eaten if Howard actually wins the election?”
There will be, but what are the chances?
According to Centrebet, Labor $1.37, Coalition $3.10.
Howard and Red Kerry? He was just tired. Give the old bugger a break – he’s 68 years old and spent a week on a bender with GWB and Vlad the Impaler. When the berocca kicks in, you’ll get some action again.
On the champagne question: buy a case. Play the “Howard Deathwatch” drinking game in slow motion. Every day the speculation continues, chug and smoke. If Howard is pushed, sober up. If Howard quits before the election, kick the cat. If he makes it to the election and loses, run whooping down the street like I will be, champagne in hand, filling my neighbours glasses. He must face the democratic process – I will not be cheated of election night victory over the bastard.
If he makes it to the election and wins? A big bottle of scotch and a bigger box of kleenex will be required. I’ll cry like a baby.
Hyacinth is off to Bunnings for another pallet of Araldite.
David Rubie, unfortunately Howard hasn’t the ego to be worried by losing an election. He has been around and has had too many knocks to care what anybody thinks.
Not to be confused with a nose (or lack of at times) for what people will vote for. But as far as being kicked out, I would be surprised if he gives it a second thought.
Not only that, but he knows that history will show him to be one of the most successful prime ministers Australia has ever had.
Au contraire, Costello, the second rate barrister would be terrific. It would be the final cherry on top of the rapidly melting confection called ‘conservative Australian ethos’. He looks every bit the spiv he is, and I look forward to Swan puncturing his faux fiscal competence. Costello would clear the air of the smoke from the culture wars fires for just enough time to puncture the legend of economic magicianship. He would be toast at the least sign of a journalist able to master the integration of our little battler bewdy economy down under, with hitherto benign global conditions. While I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for some lazy overpaid journo to actually read anything other than a Press release from some pollie or corporate shill, there is always hope. If Costello is in the frame for the romp to the next poll, it is possible that someone somewhere might bestir themselves to grill him about just how ‘fantastic’ he has been, as spruiker in chief for the laziest economic exhibition seen in this country since, well, since Man of Steal was Treasurer.
Every other political family practically beg their pollie relation/partner to quit and come home.
Howard’s family want him to stay away.
I had been craving him to hang in there so I could savour his electoral defeat, but I think his immediate plunge into political irrelevancy during the remainder of this term and the coming election will be even more satisfying.
The sinking of the Howard ship and all who sale within it is all I ask, that it happen on Sept 11 is just a sweet coincidence.
That is, Oz politics most successful liar and pork-barreller since …
Costello’s failure to challenge Howard demonstrates his lack of true leadership abilities. His approach is as before, “I will be ready when it is my turn”. This is in “the meek shall inherit the earth, if that is alright with you” territory. No backbone. No power.
Price’s latest update:
steve at the pub wrote:
Successful at what exactly? Getting culture warriors appointed to the ABC board? Battling the quixotic windmill of a dying union movement? Turning our foreign policy into an international joke? Keeping Downer off the unemployment roll?
His single, and only success was making eyebrow trimming socially acceptable. You never had it so good, you ungrateful bastards with your neatened facial hair.
Prime Ministers who have spent the shortest amount of time on the job.
Everbody remembers…
Forde-8 days
Fadden-1 month and 9 days
Page-20 days
Watson-3 months and 21 days
McEwan-23 days
…and nobody could forget Prime Minister Costello who lasted 1 month and (insert days).
http://www.aph.gov.au/library/parl/hist/primmins.htm
Adrian and GregM, from the previous post, I reckon, if it happens, it’ll likely be Turnbull, too. He is truly the only one who has any chance of winning from here.
Costello wouldn’t want it – to go down in history as the man who destroyed the Liberal Party? No way. Downer might be arrogant and follish enough to want it, but his colleagues wouldn’t be follish enough (would they???)
Turnbull might just be the ‘circuit breaker’ they need. He could waltz in, ratify Kyoto, water down workchoices (but stay business’s friend), block the Pulp Mill and commit to pulling out of Iraq and all of a sudden take the wind right out of Rudd’s sails…
It could happen.
On the other hand, my bet right now is Howard’s superhuman fingernails will hold strong.
Tim: Turnbull would be leading the Liberal Party, not the Greens.
Shaun,
Buy another bottle of champagne and cigars.
Shortly off to watch the bloodsport of Question Time.
Anybody care to join me?
Given that Howard is still there for Questions, is the show is over for today?
I suspect the Cabinet will fall in behind the PM (leave your pride at the door, gents) and this little item will be top of the agenda for tomorrow’s Cabinet meeting. Show of hands and then… either a new PM or maybe a reshuffle?
I’ve got ten bucks riding on it!
Turnbull would be interesting – as it may improve his chances in Wentworth. But they have to come up with someone who’ll actually challenge Howard and they’re all gutless spivs. To quote someone who must also be breaking out the champagne and the cigars.
That’s right SATP, he’d be leading the Liberal Party, not Howard’s New Tories. Turnbull is philosophically aligned with all these positions. And I forgot to mention the Republic, of course!
Turnball has not appeared competent in the media spotlight – especially his recent stoush with that other rich prat.
However it is very hard to see who else would step up to the plate from this amazingly talentless front bench.
How many of his troops would be, though?
The interesting thing about all this is that Howard has at the same time demonstrated that you can turn an entire political party into craven crawlers and that when they turn against you, they’re too weak to do it properly – only further driving the whole caravan into the mud.
Gummo: Howard has been very successful at Pork Barrelling and Lying. Who else could have got away with the “never ever” GST and “non-core” promises and maintained electoral credibility? (state politics not included)
And under Fraser he was responsible for retrospective legislation (which should have given the nation a clue as to what he would be like as Prime Minister)
But I was meaning his stewardship of the nation. Everything Howard has done has happened properly. We are rich, disarmed, our dollar is now sky-high so we can travel overseas, we all have jobs, etc etc etc.
David Rubie: The Union movement was indeed their own worst enemy, however prosperity and a determined government were very important to stopping the union rot.
The ABC board is the biggest side issue in history. The ABC news & current affairs is biased to high hell, & getting more like SBS every month. But the board has little say in that. As a national issue, the board of the ABC rates alongside the variety of tea offered in the parliament house dining room.
Our foreign policy is far from a joke. It is taken deadly seriously by our neighbors. East Timor, Solomans, Afghanistan and Iraq all show that Australia is likely to plonk troops on your doorstep if you play up.
Think of how Fiji reacted to the presence of Australian ships off their coast at the time of the Blackhawk crash.
Howard may indeed be hated (rightly or wrongly), but he was not in any way an administrative, legislative or political incompetent.
All this talk of Turnball makes me chuckle.
Certainly, on paper, he’s an appealing choice, but people seem a littler o’ereager to ignore party structure when it comes to his incipient leadership.
Costello, Downer, Abbott, etc. You think these cabinet dudes are gonna stand idly by and say, “Oh yes! Let’s give the leadership to this guy, a possible billionaire (makes Costello’s lack of common touch look positively prole), who has been in parliament for not even four years whilst we, who have been waiting for decades say hurrah!”
Will never happen, never in a million years. Sides, as already pointed out, talk about a poison chalice. Turnball (if he was smart, and apparently he is) wouldn’t want it in a million years.
Here’s what it’s come down to:
If Costello challenges Howard, the leadership is all but his.
If there’s no challenge, Howard will remain Prime Minister and contest the next election.
I’d be amazed if Costello challenged Howard. Why would he take on the leadership knowing the government is on the cusp of electoral oblivion and looking at, at least two terms in opposition?
David Rubie
For Howard’s faults you would have a time getting away with this
Come on, do you really think more than 23 people give a damn about the ABC Board. I couldn’t give a flying fuck about it! As for our international standing. A joke? WHO is laughing, exactly? From where I sit, Australia’s global stature has never been higher than under Howard, and it is in another galaxy compared to the mire of the Keating years.
That’s spot on, delrio.
Without being aggressive about it (I’m actually seriously interested) could someone hazard a guess as to the positives that Howard could be noted for in historical texts? Apart from the fact of having a long tenure, what would a positive political assessment look like?
My Fellow Australians, shall we be saying a year from now, that “Nothing became John Winston more than the manner of his departing”?
He was so lacklustre in the chair with Kerry on 7.30 Report, I interpreted it as the PM having a private conversation with his Ministers and backbenchers, broadcast nationally. Saved a few $ on phone calls
It sounded like he was up at the whiteboard at a dreaded “workshop”, brainstorming possible rhetorical ploys he might use with the voters, ummm, I could talk about the next 3 years, … ummm
Making Kevin look sparkling, and golly that’s quite an achievement, Mr PM!
Jobby,
Whatever the background forces that were in play, he WAS Prime Minister when Australian troops went in, after so many years, to assist East Timorese who preferred independence.
And he DID attempt to improve Australia’s ‘gun control’ laws. He stared down a hostile crowd of farmers & ‘sporting shooters’ at Sale (Vic) during the ensuing uproar. Supposedly wearing a bullet-proof vest, but good luck to him.
These two I count as positives.
cheerio
Steve: I rekon global commodity prices have more to do with our current level of affluence than anything Howard has done. And there are screwups, care to look deeply at health care and education. Hell even that arch lefty Rupert Murdoch was telling the government years ago they weren’t investing enough in tertiary level education.
Delrio,
He’d do it (Costello) because that is what taking responsibility is about, that is how true leaders are forged. Let’s just see if he is a leader or a wimp. Tomorrow.
Dear Steve at the Pub
YOu have made a broad sweeping statement that ABC News and Current Affairs is biased – well, I used to work in the complaints area of ABC and know that 98% of the time there is no evidence for this – most of the 2% is factual incorrectness so I would insist that you do not make sweeping statements like this when you have no evidence to back this up.
There has to be values in everything – true bias is not someone to the left or right of where you are – one has to critique from somewhere. Your personal politics, and ideological stance is the angle of bias that you come from. If you are rightwing, then someone else could say, well, you are coming from a right wing bias.
I think at the end of the day you just need to know the values involved…on a overall values basis, ABC news and current affairs barely moves from the middle, I would say -3 to the left in values output so you just need to know the values. Australia and America have the worlds most one sided to the right media. If the ABC and SBS were to outweigh the 0 to plus 40 to the right of the rest of the media you would have to make them both socialist organisations. Believe me, the ABC is far from that. In future, before making grand sweeping statements with no evidence to back them up, I suggest you start complaining about the lack of ideological diversity in the mainstream media – the famous double standard of the media is people who are centre/left leaning bend over backwards to be fair to provide ideological diversity and party political independence, when it comes to the right, the same respect is never offered. But of course, the right is always right isn’t it, so there is no merit to the myriad of other positions you could take, and that’s before you get to the middle.
Thanks Ambigulous and SATP.
Gun control, East Timor, some economic issues (general prosperity, unemployment, etc.) What else is missing? Surely the list can be bigger than this. What about the expansion of free trade or something?
The problem is obviously eliminating the contentious context from all the issues. For every potential point anyone makes, it’s very easy to contexualise it in a number of ways (eg. gun control was a populist move following the Martin Bryant shootings, economics aren’t under government control as it’s all part of the global economy, unemployment is only artificially low, etc.)
But it’s still pretty interesting to at least attempt to view the past decade or so of Howard in a sympathetic light … probably because it’s one of the last things I’d be likely to do in day to day life.
John Greenfield wrote:
The ABC board thing IS a joke Greenfield – which is why being successful at stacking it is so informative about the priorities of the Howard years.
Our foreign policy is widely regarded as a joke – between our “big Iraq” involvement of 5 blokes and a dead sniffer dog, to the “mini Iraq” over in East Timor to rip off their oil and gas. Throughout it all, the constant bumbling, fumbling and stupidity of Lexie Downer (just read what they think of him in the Taipei Times for an example) which culminated in the solomon islanders giving us the middle finger. The only thing the Fijiians are scared about is our useless helicopters falling out of the sky which they regularly do. Face it – it’s eleven wasted years of shameless opportunism and fiddling and farting about in useless endeavours like the culture wars. Conservatism needs a good thrashing to make it relevent again.
I’m with Delrio @ 1.59pm
Um…. why would anyone want to make a list of Howard positives? But as long as you are trying, you might want to educate yourself a little bit about our colonial incursion into oil-rich East Timor, which has achieved nothing at all for the people there. Sure, Howard stared down the Indonesian militants, and the domestic gun-lovers too, but as ever only because there was something it it for him and his powerful Big Business mates.
Jobby, what is ‘artificially low’ unemployment? Is it the flip-side of ‘artificially high’ wages?
BBB
Intellectual exercise, a good way to consider the past decade in a different light, and in doing so, perhaps gain some insight into how his supporters think.
Yes, of course I’m aware of the oil debacle in East Timor. There’s a debacle or contentious argument involved in absolutely every single positive you could list. But I find it genuinely interesting to attempt to get a list of ‘positives’ together, and attempt to view it as one might view a historical text of an unfamiliar leader. It’s an exercise that disjuncts normal mode of thought in order to cast new light on it I suppose.
Never mind.
Cheers
BBB
I was referring to the argument that the current unemployment figures are low because ‘unemployment’ has been redefined (i.e. currently, people working 1 hour per week or more aren’t included in the unemployment figures as opposed to the whatever-the-hell-it-was-previously).
Are the Indonesians still there, then? Well if Pilger is your authority I guess that you’d be prepared to believe they are.
“Um…. why would anyone want to make a list of Howard positives?”
Because it is really easy. It is a very short list.
I do think gun control would be viewed as a positive.
GST may very well be viewed as a net positive in the future also.
Depend on what happens if Rudd gets in, people may very well look to Howard as someone who started the death of federalism, which could be seen as good, or bad.
Senate majority will be seen as a rarity, if not a positive.
GST and related could go under the category of ‘taxation reform’ I suppose. It’s hard to see it as a positive from where I’m sitting, but it would definitely get a mention.
What about broader issues though? The ‘tone of the nation’ kind of thing. There’s been a lot of commentary about how Australia has become less egalitarian and more ‘aspirational’ in the past decade. What would be the positives that could be mentioned in this area?
I think I made the comment on another thread, but these comments tell their own story. The fact that people have moved on to discussing how Howard will be perceived in the past tense and how Rudd will handle various issues (and it’s happening in the MSM too) really does show where the whole thing is at.
BilB wrote:
Challenging Howard, at this point, could hardly be characterised as an act of courage. Howard is ripe for the picking. Unfortunately for Costello, the Liberal leadership has been reduced to a disease infested carcass. Only a fool would go near it.
And if, for argument’s sake, Costello does challenge, his motives would have nothing to do with taking responsibility. Costello sees the Prime Ministership as a trophy. It’s all about craven self-interest.
gandhi,
I think independence for Timor Leste was worth achieving, regardless of either the ensuing difficulties, or the motives for the intervention. BTW, in characterising the intervention as a ‘colonial incursion’, are you implying that the Indonesian ‘incursion’ in 1975 was NOT colonial? In your book, is ‘colonial’ something only Anglo countries do?
Piffle!
I’m sorry, gandhi, with the gun control, I just can’t see how there was “something in it for him and his powerful Big Business mates”. Rich pastoralists and their employees use guns on their huge farms. Gun and ammo manufacturers, importers, etc are businessmen. I think that in this instance your characterisation of the PM and his motivations are cartoon-like in their simplicity…. or were you satirising that old Top-Hatted Capitalist imagery??
Howard responsible for the high dollar, says Steve at the pub. You’re kidding right? The $A is strong, because the $US is weak, because commodity prices are the best they’ve been in 50 years and because our interest rates are among the highest in the OECD.
Like the other economically illiterate Howard lovers who don’t understand the difference between causation and correlation, you continue to suppose the electorate is dumb enough to give Howard credit for an externally generated boom.
As to John Greenfield’s nonsensical claim about Howard winning respect through his foreign policy, how do you rationalise as a positive signing up Australia for the biggest debacle since the Vietnam war?
Opposition to Howard’s foreign ‘policy’ (in effect a blank cheque to Bush) isn’t some fashionable trendy left position, unless you think the Democratic-controlled US Congress is full of latte drinkers.
The fact is Howard will go down in history as the most divisive, most radical prime minister this country has ever known, and as someone who wasted a once-in-a-century boom on keeping himself in office.
A pox on this miserable, mendacious little man. But please let him stay on so we can saviour seeing him rejected by an electorate finally determined to rid the country of the filty stench he has created.
GregM
Sorry, I didn’t see you had already answered that East Timor bit. Viva Timor Leste!
cheerio
Ambigulous,
Oh yeah, I forgot: if they are bad, then we MUST be good. Just like Al Quaeda. Viva el Wedge!
Gun control was a huge vote-winner, which helped keep Howard in power. The kanagroo-shooters vote for him anyway and they still have all their guns.
patrickg & Jobby,
I was initially suspicious of GST on the grounds that sales taxes are regressive [hence, for example, in the Federal Tax Enquiry, circa 1974, it emerged that those at the bottom end of the income scales were paying very high % tax rates* because they spent all their earnings and high excise on ciggies, grog, and some sales taxes, all hit them hard]
But now, several years on, I’m not sure about GST. Any economists care to comment?
A possible GST side-effect was the eventual wrangling in Democrats Parlt. Party (that issue and their Leader’s cave-in on it, was hot hot hot in the Dems, they say)
* at the time, a friend got angry about this and wrote to the Treasurer Dr Cairns about it. He replied that low income earners received higher social security payments, so it wasn’t really so bad [here endeth the paraphrase]
Looks like they’ll have to pour several bottles of red into Pistol Pete if they want to get him to take Howard on: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/09/11/2029653.htm
Huh? In what world would it be seen as a positive?
It will be a hollow election night if it is PM Turnbull conceding defeat.
If it’s Costello, that will be half as good as seeing Howard do it.
The one good thing that will result if the Liberal Party commits rat-icide and turfs Howard is that for years to come the Howard loyalists will feel a deep sense of betrayal and they will engage in a ruthless jihad against their enemies in the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party could be unelectable for half a generation at least.
Exaggeration? There are powerful forces today in the British Conservative Party who are still embittered by the coup delivered to Margaret Thatcher in 1990.
Mr Denmore
The issue is Australia’s “international reputation,” which has absolutely nothing to do with whatever your views on foreign policy might be.
,
He’s up against quite some competition there. Gough might feel that the mantle of being the most radical prime minister belongs to him and Malcolm Fraser was considered pretty divisive in his time. Then, looking back a bit further, there is Billy Hughes.
Christine Milne:
http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/detail.asp?class=news&subclass=general&story_id=1051523&category=general
@Mark, yes almost everyone has moved on haven’t they. And deep down all the Howard acolytes know it too.
Now they just want him to go but don’t really know how to make it happen. Betwixt and between. Their unquestioning following over the past few years has left the party a hollowed out shell totally unable to think for itself because Howard has done all the thinking for them.
gandhi
Are you for real? Dude, it’s 2007.
Well, Question Time looks like a dud – Labor is not even pushing the leadership issue early on.
But Tony Abbott refuses to say that Howard has the full backing of his cabinet.
C ya tomorrow!
gandhi, … mahatma, maaaate !!
Indonesia invades half an island. Bad.
A group of nations kicks them out, after too long a delay, a referendum supported by UN. Good.
I’m certainly NOT saying that everything Australia does is “good by definition”. Just that the Timor intervention seems to me, on balance, to have been worth doing.
And I have to admit that JWH was PM when we did it, and that the Australian public, after apparently being somewhat indifferent to events in East Timor, supported the intervention STRONGLY. And hundreds of individual Australians, dozens of charities have given time, $, etc since.
Are you blinded by oil? Wipe it out of your eyes, gandhi. It seems to be obscuring something sweet and lovely.
Dont reckon Turnbull has a hope in hell of getting australia to back him. All you need is any of the vision of his arrogant, concieted, self serving ARM lectures that sabotaged what could now have been the Republic of Australia!
Whoever was responsible for the high $A until the other day, I’d like to thank them very much.
Jus’ sayin’…
I before E, except after C.
Now please come with me to the holding cells, sir.
The GST replaced an extremely regressive and illogical sales tax on goods (in which fine distinctions were drawn between say, chocolate-confectionery taxed at one rate and chocolate biscuits taxed at another) and spread the burden of taxes to cover services, thus levelling out and per item taxed reducing the tax burden on goods. Its introduction also led to the repeal of a whole raft of other regressive taxes, such as stamp duties, mainly levied by the States, which impeded economic activity. At 10% it is a fairly low consumption tax by OECD standards and it probably would have been better (if politically unfeasible) to have introduced it at 15% and to have done away with other taxes on economic activity, especially payroll tax.
A very unlikely rat deserts the sinking ship:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22395985-7583,00.html
(my emphasis)
Exactly. And that was when I resigned from the Liberal Party and have never voted for them since in federal or state elections.
And, no, I was not involved in the bottom-of-the-harbour scheme but strongly against the principle of retrospective legislation.
Grahame Young’s “…Costello might be good in Parliament, but only John Winston Howard has shown he can cut it on the stump…” – How does he now how good or bad Costello is? No one has given him a chance – Heck Costello himself hasn’t given himself a chance. For all we know, this change of leadership might result in a reflowering of public support for a face-lifted Coalition.
Somehow I won’t be surprised if the nervous Liberal nellies upset the apple cart. But it would be a bit disappointing to see Ratty kicked into the toilet bowl at the last minute, instead of being skiddled under the wheels of the oncoming election like he damn well should be. I’ve been singing Howard’s defiant battle song for a while now “We’re going to fight to the very last man!” – a la Rose Tattoo and was looking forward to the stoush.
He’s had some very wonky moments and kicked some own goals in past election campaigns, Megan.
Anyway, my money is on Howard surviving. All he needs to do is call for a spill tomorrow, and I bet none of the gutless wonders in the party room will put their hands up.
The shorter John Heard? Howard’s job is done, we’re all conservatives now.
“Howard may indeed be hated (rightly or wrongly), but he was not in any way an administrative, legislative or political incompetent.” Oh come on SteveAtThePub, what was AWB and Iraq if not supreme examples of administrative, legislative and political incompetence?
Howard pushed out with the boy scout’s backpack and Prime Minister Downer plummeting to a fiery end would be a lovely way to work through the champagne collection.
As to legislative incompetence, have a look at how many amendments they have to move to their own badly drafted bills, or the confusing and incoherent morass that is WorkChoices, media regulation legislation and the Tax Act, to name but a few.
But credit where credit’s due.
Mr Howard knew what his pivotal invented constituency of aspirationals wanted to hear.
He milked their credulity down to the last drop.
Well I don’t know about those Liberals in the party room Mark. After all Margaret Thatcher’s band of yes-men all turned on her when it was evident that she was losing it. You just have to watch those gutless wonders ask themselves: Is it going to be our beloved leader or my very own seat/public office? Anyway, if they were really that gutless it would mean that they would be in such a state of jelly-like funk that they would contemplate throwing absolutely anything off the ship to stay afloat, including the fabled and much-treasured Ratty. Thinking clearly and strategically – definitely NOT!
I’m not saying I see it has a positive. But many, many people I talk to do see senate majorities as a positive (sadly), and, if nothing else, they are testament to JWH’s campaigning skills/luck, if not his popularity.
Have just come from watching what passed for Question Time. Reflections on that in a moment.
Re Howard’s schievements – and bear in mind I hate Howard with a passion – sending Australian troops into East Timor to stop the chaos after the independence plebescite. The ALP was so far up Indonesia at the time they would never have done it.
While in principle I agree with Howard’s gun control measures, I wonder ultimately how wise it was. We relied on rural people especially, with their guns, to form guerilla units in WW2 in the event of an imagined Jap. invasion. What wiould we do if ever we were under serious threat of invasion again, with the civilian population unarmed.
Back to the thread. What a display of Liberal political cowardice Question time was. Only about 17 minutes of it went to air, ostensibly because of a dinner for the Canadian PM. And then Howard delayed coming into the chamber as long as he could. John Stonewall Howard. I won’t even start on the Conservative Canadian PM’s disgustingly partisan speech. It surely is a sign of being in the death throes when you have to get foreign leaders to talk up your electoral prospects.
Indeed, Megan, but I imagine when it comes to the crunch Howard can stare them down. They’re mostly his creations (and creatures) after all.
Christian Kerr remembers Russell Cooper:
http://www.crikey.com.au/Blogs/Canberras-answer-to-Russell-Cooper.html
RE: East Timor intervention. Howard had to be dragged kicking and screaming into that one by overwhelming public opinion. He did not want to do it. Any claim to the contrary is historical revisionism.
If I recall correctly, the ALP being in favour of the intervention before Howard was.
Hilarious. Phillip Ruddock or Wilson Tuckey? (no one else might take the poisoned chalice)
Seriously, the Coalition is in the worst position it could have possibly imagined – it might not even have thought that it’s current position was possible.
Ambigulous: “at Sale (Vic) during the ensuing uproar. Supposedly wearing a bullet-proof vest,”
Wasn’t that at Gympie, QLD? My memory can’t be failing me, as that’s been seared into my perception, rightly or wrongly, of Gympie for ever. Then again…
I’d like a November 3 poll with Howard at the helm please. I’ll be catching up with some mates and want to share his final rejection by the Australian people.
How does one milk credulity from an invented constituency, Katz? Howard was good, but not that good, surely.
BBB
Sincere apologies to the ALP if I got their position about East Timor wrong at the time of the plebescite.
Don’t remember the Keating Government making lots of noises defending East Timorese independence. Do remember him signing a military pact with Suharto, though, and letting Indonesian Army thugs who were constantly comitting human rights abuses in East Timor train with the Australian Army. Or is that historical revisionism as well.
A new constituency is a collectivity who members once identified themselves as members of other collectivities.
Howard tipped old wine into a new bottle labelled “aspirational”.
Hence an invented collectivity.
A good point re the legislative incompetence, Mark. Now, Senator Bartlett has noted that amendments are being planned for the NT intervention laws as well, so add it to the list of legislation developed and driven by the Howard Government that they have failed to get right before enacting.
On the leadership front, the coalition might wish they had switched sooner, but I can’t see Costello taking the hospital pass that is assuming the leadership now. If he didn’t have the confidence to fight for the job within the party, I can’t imagine he would want to have to fight against an ~15% margin in the polls. But I would imagine we’ll know by this time tomorrow – either it’s going to happen or someone will have to defuse this thing. The worst possible case is that the speculation drags out for more than two days, at which point the entire party is sunk.
Laurie Brereton turned around the previous Labor policy.
Hiker,
Whether he was dragged into it kicking and screaming or not, he was PM when Australia did it.
Some ALP supporters hate him for that, especially as they considered national policy on East Timor from Gough onwards, a disgrace. To have had John Howard (of all people) snap us out of that nightmare, is just horrid!
[Gareth Evans toasting the Indonesians in a plane over the sea under which oil riches lay, that we divvied up with Jakarta.... Every Australian who remembers those years must have their own special memory... was it the Santa Cruz shootings for you?]
If they’re not already, Ptobias. But yep, agree. Maybe they should have a party room meeting tonight. The longer it goes on the worse it looks. But whatever happens, I reckon they’re worse than terminal now.
GregM
Thanks for the technical detail: yep, it’s less arbitrary, and falling on services as well as goods, it’s probably less regressive. I like the way the wealthiest can’t avoid paying their 10% (up from a previous very low base of 2%??)
cheerio
“These two I count as positives.”
Wow! I’m impressed! A whole TWO positives in ELEVEN years. Must make his mum so proud.
Mark L
Maybe he wore a vest at Gympie too.
I’m pretty sure he spoke at Sale, and the vest story appeared in Melbpourne papers the next day. Sale’s in Gippsland, east of Melb, not far from Longford where the Bass Starit oil comes ashore.
BestHeCanDo
yeah, it took a deal of cogitation to come up with them. Posters may be right to say another PM would have done similar things, but he actually DID them, and if we’re sending a report card to his parents we have to think of SOMETHING to write….
A favourite cartoon years ago: the inscription on the plinth of a city park statue -
“Joe Blow,
Statesman, Patriot
Inspiring Leader
but Always a Disappointment to His Mother”
Yes, once again trying the retail politics of the local Chamber of Commerce, as a credible argument about the real state of the economy. Well may SATP and the rest of the tragics like Greenfield and the rest, crap on about ‘left wing bias’ on the ABC, and ‘latte sippers and chardonnay slurpers’ in the inner city, and their cousins, the post modern maoists in the teacher’s unions. This is the political equivalent for the Right of some member of the Socialist Alliance crapping on about ‘building the movement by exposing the trade union and ALP bureaucrats to the masses’.
Fact is, Aust Inc was supposed to deliver high pay rates, plus job security, plus overtime, and low interest rates to boot. That was the story pre Serfchoices, and it looked good, it really did for a while. The punters never factored in that it was only so long as a few small ‘l’ liberals of the now quite dead Deakinite peruasion, controlled the Senate, that the whole rather messy contradiction could hold up. Trying to explain the Workplace Relations Act 1996 was an uphill battle, but Serfchoices, ah it was a doddle! Suddenly the sting in the tail of the golden stream of ‘prosperity for all’ became clearer, as it became my pleasure to explain things such as the ‘market clearing rate’ , and the business cycle in the context of Serfchoices. I have never enjoyed work so much. The greatest and boldest piece of social engineering attempted for a very long time, concentrated minds wonderfully, and the conversations became very interesting indeed.
While it is true that the nice Mr Rudd is in no great hurry to ‘rip it all up at once’, the problem for the Right and the more adventurous youngsters in the Think Tanks that pumped courage into the political representatives of ACCI, the BCA, and a couple of well connected law firms, is that the punters are now both alert and alarmed, and the name of the H R Nicholls society, although comparatively little known outside, shall we say, ‘specialist’ circles, now has a recognition factor far wider than even the most optimistic member of that organisation could have hoped for. Problem is, the widened circles don’t see things quite the way the members of that organisation see things. Family stories are a great way to share information about the ‘real economy’, and it is surprising how well connected the ‘welfare bludgers’ really are with quite well paid (in the scheme of things of course) members of the sober and employed working class. Like, they are family and friends. Suddenly, people get it, they really do. You only get a Serfchoices once in a generation or two, and we have had ours..
Mandatory detention, HECS, intervention in aboriginal communities etcetera, are all Labor policy, proving that your hatred of Howard is totally irrational.
I’ll make this simple for you guys: solar panels don’t work at night and wind mills don’t turn when it’s still, i.e. a Rudd government will have to one day bite the bullet and start looking towards nuclear energy.
In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if he adopts the Pacific Solution in his first weeks as the boats begin to arrive.
Bookies Suspend Betting…
Two bookmakers have reacted to the renewed speculation about Prime Minister John Howard’s future by temporarily suspending betting on the upcoming federal election.
“The Age” online, 3.15pm, 11th September
Look, equine flu was bad enough, but you voters have just gone too far this time. Your antics have interfered with one of this proud nation’s proudest industries. Shame on you all!
Hilker, just a quick one: do ya reckon, just maybe (go with me here), that ‘overwhelming public opinion’ had something to do with the ALP’s support of the intervention? They hadn’t exactly covered themselves in glory up until that point, what with Gough’s initial nod, mid-air champagne sipping after the TGT carve-up and an intriguing entry into the apparently lucrative piggery caper. But look, they saw the light eventually so let’s not dwell on the past, eh?
Mark, Brereton sniped at Howard/Downer for not being hard enough on the ABRI in 1999. The shamelessness of it all was simply breathtaking.
BBB
Howard’s end is occupying a huge amount of media bandwidth – and won’t being doing his prospects in the next polls much good. Looks like a death spiral to me. Now they are speculating about the speculation. They can’t find a circuit breaker, and the rats are very nervous, to mix metaphors.
As to legislative incompetence, look at the size and complexity of the racist of the 214 page Northern Territory National Emergency Response Bill 2007 – that doesn’t even contain the words “child” or children”. They need some amendments to correct this minor detail they overlooked while skilfully crafting their land grab, power grab and authoritarian mish mash.
I don’t think this is accurate. Clearly there are people with strong view both way on the issue of gun control. And the gun control advocates probably even have the numbers. However for those that support gun control it is not an issue that tends to swing their vote whilst for most shooters it generally is.
See a discussion on whether Kevin Rudd is good for shooters at the following link:-
http://ausgunowners.wordpress.com/2006/12/11/is-kevin-rudd-good-for-shooters/
I like the idea of thinking about Howard in the past tense. It even makes the challenge of finding positives worthwhile!
Hmm… the TL intervention was good if very late, but rather undermined by us screwing the new government out of their own oil reserves (remember, they were the poorest nation on the planet at the time, so their bargaining position was rather weak).
The gun control stuff I have to give him credit for. Definitely in the ‘only Nixon could go to China’ category. But that was in ’97 I think, which is ten years ago.
I’m really struggling after that. I’m not sure his record of higher wage growth is really attributable to him, and certainly the only legislative or policy move he made in that area is WorkChoices, which was specifically designed to LOWER take-home pay! So that rather undercuts that.
Seeing the light eventually and shifting a lot of foreign policy focus back to Asia, and successfully negotiating massive deals with China, were good achievements, but nothing one wouldn’t expect from the ALP if they had been in.
…I’m getting stuck after that. Can we count his comments about Barack Obama, which gave him good exposure in the US media, as a Howard positive?
I disagree, BBB. I think Brereton showed a lot of courage in taking on Gough and PJK to get the ALP to adopt a good policy on Timor.
+1 on Brereton, Mark. Brereton’s lonely work on ET redeems his reputation in equal amounts to Gough’s disgusting support for the invasion and murders of Australians besmirches his. Sorry about the syntax.
Lightfoot accuses the Minister for Merchant Banking of trying to jump the Queue.
The Smirk has gone underground:
Not that he could ever win my vote, but Costello could regain a bit of respect by either stepping up and calling Howard out or ending the speculation by publicly stating his support. Leaving it for other Ministers and the media to do the hatchet job makes him look sneaky and wimpy.
While I can appreciate and agree with much written here about TL, gun control, and ‘Shock and Awe in Arnhem Land’ the fact is, that none of it ever made the slightest bit of difference, with the exception of ‘Shock and Awe’. What saving the kiddies did, was remind people of the government’s by now, well known and well worn, MO. Look! Look over here! People speaking Muslim, kids learning radical things from commie school teachers, the FLAG, the TROOPS, the bludgers not pulling their weight, showing ingratitude, to you, you hard working aspirational battling heart-of-gold real deal aussies you!
But it’s no deal. Once the penny drops, the bells keep ringing. Everything just reminds people, all the time, that the Man of Steal tried to make the government, HR Manager in Chief, to the Nation. The yuk factor at having the legally blond Babs dealing with matters close to the heart of the real as opposed to Fin Review economy, is now beyond rescue.
The gigs up for the blatant social reengineering designed by those clever people who tell us all the time how less for you and more for ‘them’ is good for everyone, equally. People want a rest from the eternal struggle to be even freer from the ‘old deal’. It works for a while because nothing very bad happens, and then, well something bad actually happens, and well, the government should do/shouldn’t have done, the thing that made it happen. it seems it will take another heroic round of ‘War from above’ to finally extinguish that good old meme. Seems practically impossible in the short term, you know, like the next eight weeks. I look forward to Co$$ie trying to explain it though, if he gets his chance.
No chance they will switch leaders now. That would be hairbrained. No chance could Costello get established in that time.
They should have pre-empted and changed a year ago. But people were to caught up in the idea that Howard was eternally powerful.
Fair enough, Mark and Hal9000. But you shouldn’t let him off the hook for six years of complicity just because he was able to shift ALP policy when it didn’t really matter and when the weight of public opinion was well and truly behind it. That is hardly courage.
Anyway, this issue is more relevant than might be apparent at first glance. Rudd apparently fought hard against Brereton’s shift and against East Timorese independence more generally.
Cheers
BBB
Looks like my previous attempt at this comment was eaten, so here it goes again. The Smirk has gone to ground:
Not that he (or any of the Libs) will ever get my vote, but he could regain some respect by stepping out of the shadows for this one. He should either make an appearance tonight and announce that he’s calling for a spill, or he should come out in support of Howard leading to the election. The speculation is not going to end until he does, and at the moment he just looks like a wimp.
I don’t think it’s a question of guts. It’s a question of brains. It’s stupid to challenge if you don’t have support.
Baha! Inconclusive leadership challenge talk.
This is straight out of the how to self destruct election playbook.
Plus Beatties again highlighted certain leaders failurte to know when times up.
Bring on the anhhiliation!
Mark L, Flak Jacket Johnnie certainly work a bullet-proof vest at sale. Photos published in the bulletin Magazine showed the outline of it.
What possible protection would a bullet proof vest be against someone who can shoot?
Because he was told to,SATP, Howard and his advisers wouldn’t know a .22 from a .44 or a 410g from a 10g., let alone know what us bush reared types can do with a fire arm. Imagine a .17 in the right hands, …….
Oh Bum! An article has just appeared at the Govt. Gazette affirming something to the effect that Ratty is here to stay, for now. And Matt Price has just finished his blog with a face-saving ‘this isn’t over by a long shot…’ – just when I was warming to the idea of Ratty getting suddenly kicked into the toilet bowl. Oh well, maybe that means an election will be called shortly….
SATP: a lot of protection if the person shooting assumes you aren’t wearing one, and aims for the easiest target.
Lang Mack: I think you might find the government at the time had been tracking extreme right wing groups and knew exactly what they “can do” with a .17 “in the right hands”. I don’t think the boys and girls who track this sort of stuff for the government are quite as enamoured of the superhuman capabilities of armed countryfolk as some of the gun nuts are. But nobody needs to hang onto delusions of their own power more than the backwoods survivalists…
Howard has always said that he will remain for as long as he has “the confidence of his party”.
If what see hear on the news today is true, it is possible this confidence, or at least, outward displays of it, may be fading.
It is not impossible that in these circumstances John Howard will step down and leave them to it. “You want me gone? Wish granted!”
Be wonderful to see the looks on the faces in the Libs party room if that happened.
Speaking of bets, and sorry if it’s already mentioned, i haven’t read all posts:
“Two bookmakers have reacted to the renewed speculation about Prime Minister John Howard’s future by temporarily suspending betting on the upcoming federal election.”
No, that is historically accurate. And I agree with the critics of Keating, Evans, et al, they sold out East Timor.
As do many conservatives.
And he may have been PM, but he is not entitled to claim the bulk of credit for it. That belongs to the Oz population for forcing his hand.
Then there is the susequent appalling bully boy behaviour of the government towards extremely poor East Timor over the gas fields. Left a very nasty taste in a lot of people’s mouths, and did us no favours at all diplomatically. We will regret that one day.
BBB
No argument. See above.
I do think that Laurie Brereton deserves considerably more credit than he gets for dragging the Labor party around.
Danny, Bookies suspend betting here
“… Howard and his advisers wouldn’t know a .22 from a .44 or a 410g from a 10g., let alone know what us bush reared types can do with a fire arm.”
OMG! You’ don’t really think that safety had anything to do with him wearing that vest? You don’t think it was just a presentation of his courage and conviction for folk in the cities and suburbs? Awww, you’re so cute…
d
Maybe now we’ll see more of this from some of our own economists
There are two sides to that story. Peter Galbraith’s arrogant, disgraceful, undiplomatic and counterproductive behaviour as negotiator on behalf of the East Timorese did them no favours at all. They live to regret it to this day. You do not embark on a course of deliberately trashing the party you are negotiating with, especially where they come to the negotiating table with sentiments of goodwill, without their attitude to you hardening rapidly.
As for ourselves, no one important diplomatically in the world really cares at all how we treat the East Timorese. They’ve all done worse, and with a great deal less provocation than we faced, in their dealings with other nations.
You should read up on how those negotiations unfolded.
“But you shouldn’t let [Brereton] off the hook for six years of complicity just because he was able to shift ALP policy when it didn’t really matter…”
I don’t think that’s fair on Brereton. You’re confusing the actual shift in ALP policy with the thankless (and actively opposed) work he did before the issue became ‘hot’. I don’t think history will look kindly on any of our political leaders over the period of the Indonesia occupation, but Brereton should get a favourable footnote.
d
Hope that’s got it.
My goodness that image at the top of this thread has nothing to do with steel , its a image of clay from a era now passed held together with very weak mortar , will it survive the storm !!!
For you sandy:
I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand,
Half sunk, a shatter’d visage lies, whose frown
And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamp’d on these lifeless things,
The hand that mock’d them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear:
“My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!”
Nothing beside remains: round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.
Percy Bysshe Shelley (1818)
Howard has always said that he will remain for as long as he has â??the confidence of his partyâ??.etc, etc, says Steve.
SATP was completely on the mark when he thus spoke, with his usual subtle comments, that turn any available thread into a discussion about the pressing need for more guns in our community. Brilliant.
I’ve got something to share, as well.
I had a dream, during my lunch time nap today, of Howard walking down a corridor and someone tapping him on the shoulder. He looks around and Lexy, Merchant Banker and Mr Smirk are all standing there.
They are all pointing at each other. How spooky is that?
While East Timor was being invaded by Indonesia, with the approval of the USA and the UN, as they did not want a rogue communist state developing in the area. Indonesia was anti communist, so the powers that be let it happen. The Whitlam government was being held hostage in the senate by the Fraser opposition.
When Fraser took over the government reigns in December 1975 and then defeated in 1983, that’s 8 years. What did the coalition government do about East Timor? NOTHING.
East Timor would not have had it’s independence if Indonesia did not allow it. Yes, Howard had to be dragged into East Timor when the USA finally said they would stand by if required.
Now we have our very own soldiers, killing rioting (demonstrating) East Timorese people. Howard has been given too much credit for the affair. If he was fair dinkum he would be doing something about Papua New Guinea. Instead Howard has promised that we would not interfere.
AS a country New Guinea should be 1 country united and Independent.
GregM
There are two sides to every story, true. But that doesn’t mean that both sides are equally valid.
And agree that Galgraith was, umm, a problem.
But the real issue is that none of that justifies the blatant and unjustified resource grab that Australia indulged in, using the extreme poverty of the East Timorese to bully them into accepting a substandard offer that no other states would have accepted. You cannot possibly blame Galbraith for that. Or are you arguing that our diplomats and negotiators are such sensitive delicate creatures that a few harsh words from Galbraith was sufficient justification to screw ET in retaliation? You’re kidding me.
Not to mention that anything that holds up the economic development and independence of ET is going to be a potentially serious problem for Australia in the future. Not only was our behaviour unethical, but it was just plain dumb.
“Not only was our behaviour unethical, but it was just plain dumb.”
should read
Not only was our behaviour unethical, it was also plain dumb.
zorronsky, your link doesn’t work. Was this the one you were after?
My God, what a miserable pack of losers the whole Cabinet are! How is it possible that we once-proud Aussies have subjugated ourselves to these fools for over a decade?
If this whole sorry episode has not killed their re-election once and for all, then I am moving to Norway, building myself an igloo, and taking a vow of silence while I meditate on human nature and try to cool my seething outrage. I mean, really! How deplorable!
When I sit with my family of tribes so diverse how on earth can I have any urge not to love a fellow like GM
PS Ambigulous,
The people of East Timor are still living in grinding poverty, violence and political instability. The fact that many Aussies feel good about what they were shown on TV is neither here not there. Sure, Howard can chalk this up as an “achievement” – right next to Iraq and Afghanistan.
Hilker, you haven’t informed yourself on the negotiations. They weren’t a few harsh words from Galbraith. It was his negotiating strategy to trash Australia. If you were a professional negotiator faced with such a strategy you would know what to do. You pursue your national interest which is to get as much of the oil as possible. So yes, you would screw East Timor in retaliation. You would not be a professional otherwise. Whatever East Timor’s interest, you represent yours. So what if their poverty stricken people miss out on the $20 billion in oil revenue that’s up for negotiation. They don’t get it. You do.
Tough for them that they engaged the idiot who decided he’d grandstand at their cost. They’re an independent nation (thanks to us) and as they make their choices they have to live with them. Welcome to the real world.
PPS: Mark et al, after Downer’s astonishing half-pike with full backflip, perhaps a post-speculation thread is in order?
What a fizzer the whole thing was. Is it just a bunch cooked up bunk to put Costello in his place? Will the Liberals hit Mr Magoo with a bit of Mr Sheen and wheel him out again? Or is he a corpse twisting in the wind that nobody has the guts to cut down?
You know nothing about my info base. Don’t assume anything. I wasn’t involved at all, but I had a direct line to the inside of those negotiations as they happened, with almost daily updates. I am well aware of just how tough and fractious they were. I also know that Galbraith’s opponents, including the Oz government and big oil, didn’t exactly play fair and above board either, not by a long shot.
For the record, I am no fan of Galbraiths. But his behaviour doesn’t justify the shafting ET got from the Oz government.
You think the ET don’t live in the real world, after 25 years of brutal occupation by the Indonesians, and ongoing grinding poverty and disease? Get real yourself, mate.
I make it 9.54 ,six minutes before the Pm s night at the helm passes to automatic snooze.Long day I would say, today..if tomorrow brings any resolution for The Liberals, who would pick an opinion here as a influence!?And there is always a desk calendar and what happened on such and such a day.Pity a poster was defending the ABC here…It will be operating through-out the night with people ready to opine in a theme like manner,that to me now competes with Howard in who is more boring.
An extraordinary day culminates fittingly, with Andrew Bolt admitting “I was wrong”. Bolt also has a pic of Howard lecturing a hangdog Turnbull in parliament today.
Heh! Costello ain’t got the guts, or the numbers, or the punters, or nuttin’. Patiently sitting around to be tapped on the shoulder to lead them to defeat. What a crock. These people are so seriously fu**ed it doesn’t bear thinking about.
Oh, and I hear that Rudd is going to force all the kiddies to speak Mandarin! How Un-Australian is that???!!!
I am entitled to comment on your statement:
If you do have any information about the negotiations you know that is untrue.
If you had ever been involved in serious negotiations that would not surprise you, given Galbraith’s conduct. In negotiating terms he legitimised what they did but was too arrogant and dumb to realise it. He gave them the cover they needed to screw East Timor and so they took it. They had nothing to lose and everything to gain once he was silly enough to go down the path he chose. If they had, out of the goodness of their hearts, conceded every claim he made he would not have, for such was the man, have hesitated to gloat over and rub their noses into their “capitulation”. He adopted a “take no prisoners” strategy, the most foolish strategy you can ever adopt in negotiations. He having done so, they owed him, and the people who had hired him, nothing. He absolved them of any of the foreign policy constraints that would have otherwise limited their negotiating position.
That is, despite your charming but naive view of it, the way the real world operates. It’s not your mum who allows you excuses because you are a petulant adolescent and don’t know any better.
Whether you like it or not that is the real world.
“Bolt also has a pic of Howard lecturing a hangdog Turnbull in parliament today.”
It is a great piccie, gandhi. I reckon he was later taken to the back room and given ‘six of the best’ by Father Tony.
A measure of Howards’ desperation is that tonight he started talking about that long dead creature “full employment”.
Maybe next he’ll talk about the need to unionise the workplace.
Strange goings on in 5 pm Ch. 10 news, not corroborated by ABC News that Howard will have a very brief Party Room meeting tomorrow or resort to the desperate tactic of not having a party room meeting at all. The last Party leader who did this was Billy Hughes in WW2, when he was Deputy leader of the Opposition and leader of the UAP. Knowing the majority of his party wanted to dump him he lit on the brilliant expedient of not calling a party room meeting for two years.
Has Howard been reading up on the Little Digger, or is 10 News just being idiosyncratic? Tomorrrow will tell.
Ahh, yes, the superficial rhetorical ‘I’m a hard man who lives in the real world, and naive idiot you clearly don’t’ debating tactic.
I am not interested in this sort of pissing contest.
Suffice it to say, if only you knew what I did with my working week, you just might feel a little foolish at your statement.
Night
If the Minister for Merchant Banking threw his hat into the ring and gained the fake Prime Ministership, it would be interesting indeed if he then lost his seat, given the unpopular method by which he obtained it.
Perhaps his electorate may be flattered by having a potential National Leader in their midst, but then again, hope springs eternal that they may not.
This is the election that the coalition can afford to lose.
They have done the dirty work of changing the nation into what it has become.
It is now time for another mob of facile, glib media tarts to do the re-adjustment. Let them placate us with the “issues” for the next period.
Whatever wars or security scares will now be someone else’s problem.
Higher education, arts, research and development, regional security problems, environment, drought, farmers, aboriginal health justice and welfare, the whole health system debacle, human rights, immigration, cultural co-operation, marine borders, abandoned 3 mines policy, US ownership of all our rights…the list goes on.
These things and more will no longer be Ratty’s problems.
Just our’s.
Looks lie the Minister for Merchant Banking is copping the blame.
And Kelly’s piece is up. Tomorrow should be fun.
Turnbull’s not looking hang-dog. He’s looking: “Shit, now I’m gonna have to stand here in front of all these people and pretend I’m listening to the silly old bugger.”
There’ve been a few new developments, and this thread is getting quite long, so I’m taking the liberty of closing it and redirecting comment here:
http://larvatusprodeo.net/2007/09/12/who-remembers-ian-mcphee/