The coming Oz election thread ...

Little Johnny, the born again (sort of) environmentalist! This is getting very weird & funny!

Please tell me the environmental folk won't be taken in?

Uhoh, here we go again! If all else fails, launch another scare campaign. If you have nothing new to offer, then frighten the wits out of voters! This is John Howard's forte. And a tried & true distraction from any gain Labor could be making with the voters. This campaign is going to get very dirty before it's through. <sigh>

Libs in 'dirty tricks' claim
By Phillip Hudson
Political Correspondent Canberra
September 19, 2004

The Liberal Party will today launch a campaign personally attacking the credibility of Labor leader Mark Latham and his economic management, sparking an angry response from Labor, which has called it dirty and dishonest.

..Prime Minister John Howard will step up the attack today in a mini-campaign launch in western Sydney where he will unashamedly make a bid for the so-called "Howard battlers" - ALP voters who shifted to the Liberals in 1996 - with a scare campaign that Mr Latham will put their mortgages and jobs at risk. ..

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/09/18/1095394062907.html?oneclick=true

I think it's gone beyond that, dlowan. It's about the Greens making every bit of mileage they can out of their current popularity/credibility with the voters. Bob Brown is playing politics, just like the big boys! And obviously it's working, with both Labor & the Libs becoming greener by the minute! It is going to be extremely interesting to see how Latham resolves problems this is causing in Tasmania. I have a hunch the "greater good" of the whole Labor party will over-ride Tasmanian's particular (logging/jobs) interests. If he wants the rest of those Green preferences that Brown is dangling in front of his eyes he'll either have to sort something out with the Tassie ALP, or sell them out ... all for a good cause, of course! :wink:

Ah - yes - politics is a very difficult calling.

Last Update: Sunday, September 19, 2004. 6:46am (AEST)

Forestry policies have become election platforms for the major parties. (ABC TV)

Party wrangling offers forest protection result, Greens say

The major parties are under increasing pressure to come up with popular plans to save forests without costing jobs.

..Greens Senate candidate Christine Milne is hopeful of a breakthrough.

"Finally a solution to the forest industry divide in Tasmania is at hand," she said.

"It's fascinating to watch Liberal and Labor now jostling and arguing and internally fighting about how they're going to do it."


http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200409/s1202219.htm

Yes....

But - will they stick to promises?

Bob must be pissing himself laughing.....but, it is scary stuff once you can have a real effect.

Look how the Dems cracked when it became real, instead of just prissy whinges from the sidelines....

I have time for Bob, though - he is an operator - but a committed green.

And - he is "out"! Go Bob - (as long as you don't get the damn Libs back in!)

But you have to admit that watching this unfold is kinda fascinating, Deb? I LOVE the idea of the Greens forcing these political heavies to embrace the environment! It also says a lot about the type of party the greens are becoming - tougher by far!

Oh yes - but I sorta can't watch.

Imperfect as labor is - I don't think I can bear it if we have mor eHoward - especially as Bush looks like winning.

The world is too much with me....

I don't think he's killing himself laughing. I think he's deadly earnest about this, Deb. (Actually I'm a fan of Bob's. I admire his commitment, too. ) He's trying to change the Greens from a feel good, fringe party to a real force. That might mean that the Greens are less fuzzy & lovable, but if he succeeds they'll definitely have real power in the mainstream of politics. Less pure, but more effective. And the growth forest issue is a winner with the electorate. Neither the Libs or Labor have addressed those concerns adequately till now. What an achievement.

Regarding the Democrats, I think they cracked for a number of reasons: Kernot's defection to Labor , but most importantly, Meg Lees' support of the GST. That wasn't "getting real" to many of their supporters, that was selling out. Prior to that, they were really doing very well. Lees divided the party by her actions.

Aw, Deb!
Who wants more Howard?
Actually, the Greens preferences will be HELPING Labor. And they will certainly need that help to win. And who knows, they might win. The only reason the Greens are having so much influence right now is because it's so close. Not because the Libs & Labor have suddenly grown passionate about old growth forests!
I see this as a really healthy development. Anything that makes the 2 party machines responsive to real community concerns has gotta be good. It's certainly a change, anyway! A breath of fresh air.

Oh - I meant Bob was laughing at seeing the big boys come cap in hand - not that he sin't serious.

I disagree about the Dems.

I always believed the cute, progressive stuff was reliant on their never really having to stand up and be counted.

This is not to say I had no respect for many of them. Janine was a great woman - real commitment, wild at parties(!!!! - I like that in a polly) - Don Chipp had real gravitas - etc......(don't ask me about Kernot - I have always disliked her - especially after meeting her) - I just think that when such folk come up against the harsh realities of politics - which is a messy, complex, ambigous, emotional witches brew of ideals, possibilities, compromise, power, ego, lofty commitments and dirty self-aggrandisement, knowledge, killing hard work, fear, terror, excitement, clear thought - well, you know - anyhoo - a party based on the sort of naive idealism that most Dems have was, I believe, bound to founder on the ricks of reality.

Just my opinion - lol!

Yeah, I respected Janine Haines (& Janet Powell (sp?) too, for that matter, though there were problems ..) And Don Chipp, too.
I guess I can only speak for myself, but when Lees endorsed the GST, the Dems lost all credibilty for me. Actually, I'd voted for them in the Senate, prior to that. It just felt that they'd joined the bastards, when their motto was keeping the bastards honest. There was absolutely no reason why they had to do that! And they've been in strife about their aims/identity ever since.

I see the Dems as having lost direction and become too much of a party that was willing to swing in whatever direction the political wind of the day happened to be blowing. The Greens have certainly taken over the middle ground.

Heehee - Clarke and dawes on Howard's credibility:

(audio version: http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/7.30_clarkedawe.htm

Clarke, Dawe and 'Mastermind'
Reporter:


KERRY O'BRIEN: And now, John Clarke and Bryan Dawe with their own version of 'Mastermind'.

(JOHN CLARKE AS JOHN HOWARD, BRYAN DAWE AS INTERVIEWER) INTERVIEWER: Your special subject is John Howard.

Your time starts now.

What will John Howard never bring in ever?

JOHN HOWARD: A GST.

INTERVIEWER: Correct.

When did John Howard bring in a GST?

JOHN HOWARD: 1st July, 2000.

INTERVIEWER: Correct.

What are weapons of mass destruction?

JOHN HOWARD: Hang on, is that George calling?

INTERVIEWER: Correct.

If you know people want a republic, how do you get them to vote against it?

JOHN HOWARD: You ask them to vote for a republic where they don't get to vote for the president.

INTERVIEWER: Correct.

What is the Kyoto agreement?

JOHN HOWARD: Something to do with coal pricing.

INTERVIEWER: Correct.

What is the environment?

JOHN HOWARD: Pass.

INTERVIEWER: Correct.

What were being thrown overboard into the sea just before the last election?

JOHN HOWARD: Nothing.

INTERVIEWER: I beg your pardon, I'm sorry, I misread that question.

What did John Howard say were being thrown overboard into the sea just before the election?

JOHN HOWARD: The children of asylum seekers.

INTERVIEWER: Correct.

And what did he do to prove it?

JOHN HOWARD: Showed film of it not happening.

INTERVIEWER: Correct.

And who told him the children were being thrown into the sea?

JOHN HOWARD: The Defence Minister said he had been told that by the Navy.

INTERVIEWER: Correct.

And what did the Minister for Defence do when the Navy denied that?

JOHN HOWARD: He resigned and got a job selling defence contracts to the Australian Government.

INTERVIEWER: And was there a conflict of interest involved?

JOHN HOWARD: No, it was Peter Reith.

INTERVIEWER: Correct.

What about some of the other people in the Howard ministry when they retired?

Where have they retired to?

JOHN HOWARD: They've got jobs with companies dealing in the area where they used to be the minister.

INTERVIEWER: Correct.

And would this have been worked out beforehand?

JOHN HOWARD: Shut your face.

INTERVIEWER: Correct.

What does the expression 'integrity' mean?

JOHN HOWARD: I'm sorry, can you repeat the question?

INTERVIEWER: Correct.

If you made a promise and don't keep it, what is it?

JOHN HOWARD: A non-core promise.

INTERVIEWER: Correct.

Who can get married in Australia?

JOHN HOWARD: Marriage is between men and women.

INTERVIEWER: What if they don't like each other?

JOHN HOWARD: It doesn't matter if they hate each other's guts, as long as one of them is a man and one of them is a woman.

INTERVIEWER: Correct.

Why don't we have to listen to senior members of the Defence community criticise the Government on defence?

JOHN HOWARD: Because they're too old.

INTERVIEWER: Correct.

Why don't we have to listen to ex-public servants criticising the Government's use of research information?

JOHN HOWARD: Well, they're the scum of the earth, aren't they, public servants?

INTERVIEWER: Can you be more specific?

JOHN HOWARD: Get stuffed.

INTERVIEWER: Correct.

And at the end of the round, your house is worth three times what you paid for it.

JOHN HOWARD: My house is worth three times what I paid for it!

INTERVIEWER: Congratulations!

JOHN HOWARD: Thanks.

Oh, fantastic!

INTERVIEWER: Low interests rates -- you're worth a bloody fortune.

JOHN HOWARD: Jeez, he's great, that John Howard, isn't he?

INTERVIEWER: Correct.

KERRY O'BRIEN: 'Mastermind' a la John Clarke and Bryan Dawe.

INTERVIEWER: And was there a conflict of interest involved?

JOHN HOWARD: No, it was Peter Reith.

INTERVIEWER: Correct.

Thanks for a bit of a laugh, Deb. I needed that!
I think I'm in love with John Clarke! I just have to LOOK at him & I'm laughing myself silly .

Oh god, here we go ...! If all else fails, go for the jugular. I'm so very, very tired of Howard & his win by any means mentality.


Gloves off, this is personal
Dennis Shanahan, Political editor
September 20, 2004

THE election campaign has escalated into a personal duel between the two leaders after Mark Latham lost his cool at John Howard and the media yesterday.

Mr Latham accused the Prime Minister of getting personal and being dishonest after having accused the media of "smart alec commentary" and of not understanding his family tax policy.

The Coalition also began a series of personal attacks on Mr Latham, saturating the national airwaves with claims he was inexperienced and with criticism of his management of the Liverpool City Council.

On morning television, Mr Latham claimed the Prime Minister had trouble "lying straight in bed".

Later, at a Darwin press conference, the Labor leader boiled over, suggesting "it was not coincidental" the media was asking about which school his three-year-old son, Oliver, would attend.

He later complained to the president of the press gallery and asked that action be taken about the questions being asked.

Gallery president Karen Middleton said she told Mr Latham she thought the questions, from The Australian's Samantha Maiden, were appropriate and she could not do anything about questions being asked.

Mr Latham's sharp exchange with the Nine Network's Sunday program political editor, Laurie Oakes, is the most strident public exchange since the election campaign began.

It began after Oakes suggested Labor's tax policy was a souffle that didn't rise once.

"Smart-alec commentary, Laurie, is no use to me, nor the polls," Mr Latham said.

The Opposition Leader said that it made the veteran journalist, not his family tax package, look "silly".

"Mate, if you don't get it, I can assure you 1.4 million Australian families do," he said. "If journalists don't get it, well bad luck, the Australian people do."

During the interview, Mr Latham knocked his microphone off his tie and was left without proper sound for about two minutes as he adjusted the microphone himself.

Mr Latham said the Coalition advertising on his management of Liverpool Council was "so typical that they go negative, they go personal, they're more interested in my past than the country's future".

"They're dishonest claims from a dishonest government, that's going personal," Mr Latham said.

Later, Mr Latham denied he had become "hot under the collar", saying it was just a good, "feisty exchange" and "it's the way I present myself on important issues".

In Darwin, Mr Latham became annoyed when asked if he was intending to send his son to a private school, as had been raised with him on Sydney radio last Friday.

"But what's the point here of wanting to know about my three-year-old son?" Mr Latham asked.

"For the Australian people, the big issue is about education opportunities for all,

instead of asking questions about a three-year-old boy," he said after detailing that he had listed his son for a pre-school and intended sending him to a government school later.

Mr Howard insisted the Coalition's advertising campaign over Liverpool Council was not a personal attack.

"This is a public office we are talking about," the Prime Minister said in Sydney.

"Being mayor of Liverpool is an elected public office - this is not a personal attack," he said in Sydney's western suburbs. I accept that everything we say in public life is fair game."

`

And now this! I'm becoming afraid, very afraid ... Just WHO would decide we were about to be attacked? This must be going down a treat, with the voters in Indonesia today. Say nothing JI & their suicide bombers. This man is stupid!

Howard defiant: I would launch strike
By Brendan Nicholson
National Security Correspondent
September 20, 2004

Prime Minister John Howard has restated his willingness to launch a pre-emptive military strike on a neighbouring country if terrorists there were planning to attack Australia....

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/09/19/1095532176122.html?oneclick=true

Ya gotta register to read that one, Miss Olga. So who is Howard worried about . . . Papua New Guinea? Maybe those dastardly Indonesians ! ! ! Give 'em an inch, and they'll take Port Darwin . . .

I laughed at the line where Mr Latham said of Mr Howard: "He has trouble lying straight in bed."
Good morning, yall. Thanks for your running commentary.