Webdiary - Independent, Ethical, Accountable and Transparent
header_02 home about login header_06
header_07
search_bar_left
date_box_left
date_box_right.jpg
search_bar_right
sidebar-top content-top

Time to say Goodbye

Thank You Mr. Howard. I think it’s time to go - video by PF Journey

left
right
spacer

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

YouTube address

The address for PF's fantastic video essay is http://www.youtube.com/v/CBdCO5S0_kI

I agree PF

It was a great ALP speech and the best part was that the tossers finally owned Keating and Hawke and Whitlam instead of trying hard to pretend they don't exist.

We might actually have a country worth living in again. The right wingers are scowling and mewling though, because they have so underestimated Rudd that it is laughable.

Put On Your Dancing Shoes

Hi Margo, yes, I have my dancing shoes ready. Cheers - PF

Adios Muchacho

Kevin Rudd has just delivered, I mean delivered, a stunning campaign speech. I think it is really a Time To Say Goodbye.

Your dancing shoes on already, PF?

An urgent and timely matter (also very serious)

Fiona and Malcolm: Someone has thoughfully provided me with a two-sided (the less charitable would say two-faced) Liberal Party propaganda leaflet with a picture of Howard and his rival on one side under the heading LIBERALS' STRONG ECONOMIC TEAM (it's in caps in the original, so I reproduce it faithfully here) and on the other photos of Rudd and Swan with L-plates attached under the heading LABOR'S TOO INEXPERIENCED. THEY'RE STILL LEARNING. (It's in italicised caps in the original, so again reproduced faithfully.)

Note the subliminal inference of the italics, which lean to the right like the Tower of Pisa,  portending total collapse and disaster, in contrast with the Gothic stability of LIBERALS' STRONG ECONOMIC TEAM. I must confess I fell for it completely. It made me think of Durham Cathedral (dating from 1093 AD), and suggested to my mind the 1,000 year Reich that I guess Howard inclines to.

Analogous to the circular Howard departure promise identified by Robert Manne as quoted at 2:03 pm today in Fiona's post, we have in LABOR'S TOO INEXPERIENCED. THEY'RE STILL LEARNING an argument for never changing the government.  I am sure that needs no further explanation, except to say that if the electorate bought it in sufficient numbers, the only way for the ALP to provide the voters with an experienced team would be to import them. The current UK Cabinet could be transplanted here holus bolus, but the costs would probably be prohibitive, though we might get a package deal that included the Queen, or at least HRH The Princess Anne to replace Whathisname of Yarralumla. Failing that, I'm sure  that a deal could be negotiated with Helen Clark and her NZ lot on much better terms. As a last desperate resort,  don't rule out Robert Mugabe...

As persons with known legal inclination, perhaps you would both agree that the serious threat posed by inexperience of candidates would definitely warrant a referendum early in the life of the next Howard regime to amend the Constitution, to the effect that the only people who may hold Cabinet office are those with established experience in Cabinet.

I am obliged to the Liberal Party for drawing this serious matter to my attention, and have felt duty bound to pass its message/s on to others without delay.

Never forget, Ian

Never forget, Ian MacDougall, The Rise and Rise of Michael Rimmer.    Dangerous things referenda.

Robert Bosler

PF includes Robert Bosler's portrait of Howard for the 2004 election.


Painting

Margo, I think I could have done better with a paint roller. What does Robert Bosler charge for painting a kitchen?

Turgivisation

Why would anyone believe anything - and I mean anything - the Runt says about anything?   If he said it were raining I'd go and check.   He is a politician in the tradition of Disraeli.  As I have said before, read Conningsby.  It was Disraeli who put the con in Conningsby.

Why, then, believe what he says about retiring?  What if the Party asked him to stay on and he thought it in the interests of the Party to do so?

I am convinced that he wants to go down in history as Australia's longest serving PM.  To do that, he has to beat Menzies.

Believe me, if he pulls this one off, he's going to make Keating look like Cocky Caldwell and they'll never want to get rid of him.

Add to that the need to remain in Kirribilli House so that Angus can have somewhere nearby to visit Granny Jeanette after school at Shore and he has every incentive to stay.

Suspension

Dr Duncan, I haven't believed anything JWH has said since March 1996, and I was stupid to do so then.

What if the party told him to go and he told them to get stuffed? Robert Manne in the current issue of The Monthly (available online if only I could remember my password) wrote:

At the next meeting of the parliamentary party [after APEC], which endorsed his leadership, Howard was reported to have said something very interesting. He had never offered simply to quit the prime ministership when asked to do so by his party. What he had actually meant by his standard formula was that he would leave office when his party asked him, and when he decided that it was in the interest of the party that he should follow its advice . ... It was suddenly clear that the promise had been formulated in so cunning a manner that its second half effectively negated its first.

As for wanting to surpass Menzies, I'm sure he wants more than another twelve years. My betting is on his wanting to go the double whammy and beating Menzies' record as PM and Billy Hughes record as longest-serving MP - 51 years and 7 months - but with Howard retaining the Rt Hon, all the while, of course. What makes the possibility even more delicious is Ross McMullin's words in the Age this morning:

Since Federation, in fact, only Billy Hughes — who was prime minister from 1915 to 1923 — could be ranked with Howard for public untruthfulness (short-lived prime minister Billy McMahon was regarded as a notorious liar, but it seems this was more evident in private than in public).

Let's see, now, elected July 1974 ... Good heavens, only another 18 years and 3 months. That should see Angus through Shore...

The horror of the future

Yes Dr Reynolds, but what if Tim starts having sons?   After all, they're not going to start sending daughters to Loretto.

Another, better, way?

I know, Hyacinth, let's start a dynasty.

After all, the Howards (of Norfolk) - distant connexions, perchance? - were longtime movers and shakers in and of the Monarchy.

What better way of stopping all those demned republicans in their tracks by giving Australia its very own, home-grown, Royal Family?

Eat your heart out, TOM.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
© 2005-2011, Webdiary Pty Ltd
Disclaimer: This site is home to many debates, and the views expressed on this site are not necessarily those of the site editors.
Contributors submit comments on their own responsibility: if you believe that a comment is incorrect or offensive in any way,
please submit a comment to that effect and we will make corrections or deletions as necessary.
Margo Kingston Photo © Elaine Campaner

Recent Comments

David Roffey: {whimper} in Not with a bang ... 12 weeks 6 days ago
Jenny Hume: So long mate in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 11 hours ago
Fiona Reynolds: Reds (under beds?) in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 2 days ago
Justin Obodie: Why not, with a bang? in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 2 days ago
Fiona Reynolds: Dear Albatross in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 2 days ago
Michael Talbot-Wilson: Good luck in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 2 days ago
Fiona Reynolds: Goodnight and good luck in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 3 days ago
Margo Kingston: bye, babe in Not with a bang ... 14 weeks 11 hours ago