December 07, 2003
TERRY LANE AND PAULINE LATHAM
"Lefties are dumb, pure and simple," wrote commenter Amos last Wednesday. "A few schoolyard insults directed at Bush are all that's needed for them to throw away every ideological objection they have to Latham? Jesus, are they really that fucking dumb?"
Apparently so. Here’s pure and simple Terry Lane:
We already know that Mr Latham is at one with the Tories on border protection and mandatory detention. We know that his tax policies are redistributive only in the sense that they would distribute even more from the poor to the rich.
But, on the other hand ...
His characterisation of Bush as incompetent and dangerous and the Prime Minister as an arse licker startled the bourgeois left with its vulgarity, but it suggested a heart in the right place. And it is possible that he has looked across the Tasman and observed that a bipartisan anti-Americanism hasn't hurt our Kiwi cousins one little bit, either electorally or internationally ... Given the sorry state of the ALP, Mr Latham could take a little risk and create a genuine difference between the parties.
Lane is happy to promote a Tory who would have (by his own flawed economic analysis) poor Australians surrendering their money to the rich ... just so long as the perpetrator of this injustice is anti-American. The man is insane. Meanwhile Latham is sounding kinda Hansonish:
He described himself as a social conservative on family issues, and said he wanted more emphasis on Australian culture.
The larrikin politician said eccentrics in Parliament, such as Independent Bob Katter, were an exception these days.
"I worry that it's a sign that we're not as Australian as we used to be," he said. "Society changes quickly, but we don't want to weaken the things that have made us distinctly Australian."
Imagine the screeching if John Howard held up Katter as an example of someone "distinctly Australian".
Posted by Tim Blair at December 7, 2003 12:11 PMImagine the screeching from the looney left and the AB stinking C (is there any difference?) if a Liberal senator/member had done a drunken manhandle on a Labor/Democrat/Green, male or female!! He'd have been lynched, tarred and feathered or run out of town by now.
By the way, Kevin (good to be with you Kerry) Rudd has been a tad silent lately, thank Christ!
As for Latham, methinks he doth proclaimeth just a bit too mucheth. Too smart by halves!
Posted by: Kate at December 7, 2003 at 12:28 PMYo I got a shout out on the main. My wisdom shines like diamonds fired from a pig's ass at a carnival hoop.
Don't bother trying to decipher that, it's wisdom talk.
Posted by: Amos at December 7, 2003 at 01:08 PMLatham is fundamentally his own, very ambitious, man. It would be unwise for commentators to pin ideological labels on him, or cherry-pick ideas from his playbook to try and predict his power-plays. This kind of thinking tends to reveal more about the hopes and fears of the commentator, rather than the reality of the commnentated.
Ideas are the power-tools of politicians, rather than politicians being the slaves of ideas.
Regarding Latham's foreign policy: Latham has bagged GW Bush's reliance on neo-con foreign policy advice. There is every difference between bagging a person and opposing an institution, and there is no reason to believe that Latham's criticism of Bush implies an opposition to the US alliance.
amos is correct to say that Left-wingers are being stupid in failing to note that distinction.
Steve Sailer and Patrick Buchanan have done the same. Does that make them, or Latham, an anti-American or school-yard Lefty? Nope.
Leftwingers are dumb about lots of things relating to power, especially since the trade unionists and communists have drifted away from mainstream leftist organisations. Which is why the Left have so little power these days.
Regarding Latham's domestic policy, amos is indulging in a schhool-yard ideological crush if he thinks that Latham's occasional nods towards low-taxation and aspirationals are the sign of him being a reliable Right winger.
Latham favours increasing expenditure on health and education. This is not Right wing or Toryism. The "Naive Right" wing-nut brigade would lose their reputation for gullibility, if not ferocity, if it stopped falling for people who made the right noises at the right times eg Ken Lay, Chalabi or Latham.
To the extent that Latham has an ideology, it is Third Way social democracy. This is an ideology that makes a virtue of being anti-ideological, ie pragmatic, evidence-based and consensual. The first Hawke government is a paradigm case of this form of rule.
It is not free-market capitalism nor bureaucratic-socialism.
It is what it is, an attempt to split the difference and get the best of both worlds.
Thus overriding all the hot air blown over whether Latham is in favour of this, or that, is the fact that he is an ambitious politician who will usually say one thing and do another to get power.
Thus John Howard came to power with a reputation as a champion of small government, less regulation and pro-racist immigration policies. He has turned out to be a gun-controller, high-taxer and NESB migrant-favourer.
I think that alot of people are going to look mighty silly if they stake their intellectual reputation on attempting to ideologically pigeon-hole an ambitious man like Latham.
Posted by: Jack Strocchi at December 7, 2003 at 04:14 PM"And it is possible that he has looked across the Tasman and observed that a bipartisan anti-Americanism hasn't hurt our Kiwi cousins one little bit, either electorally or internationally "
Certainly true, but then NZ has always been utterly insignificant internationally and electorally, well the place IS full of Kiwis for gods sake...
Posted by: Harry Tuttle at December 7, 2003 at 05:55 PMTell you what, I'll try not to stake my 'intellectual reputation' too much on Latham.
But I'll give you a tip on how you could have summed up the man more succinctly: "He's a whore."
Posted by: Amos at December 7, 2003 at 06:29 PMSo we'll ignore the embarassing truth part of Latham's assertion that GWB is the 'most incompetent and dangerous' president in living memory and hammer him because it's impolitic of him to say so?
GWB is a disgrace to all people of centre-right political views everywhere, and the avoidance of this fact by his apologists speaks volumes.
Well, the Kiwis have missed out on a Free Trade Deal with the States and all the associated perks that go with it due to their "if only Gore was president..." ponderings.
And if activists fuck up enough of our sheep and we need to invade New Zealand to get new ones nobody in America's going to lift a finger to help out now are they? What with not being allies and all...
Posted by: gaz at December 7, 2003 at 07:53 PM"GWB is a disgrace to all people of centre-right political views everywhere, and the avoidance of this fact by his apologists speaks volumes"
Pity that all those people voted for him, then.
Oh, and ny the way, Adam...what you just stated wasn't a fact. It was an opinion.
Richard.
"GWB is a disgrace to all people of centre-right political views everywhere, and the avoidance of this fact by his apologists speaks volumes"
Pity that all those people voted for him, then.
Oh, and by the way, Adam...what you just stated wasn't a fact. It was an opinion.
Richard.
I know this is off topic, but why do so many Australians refer to New Zealanders as our "cousins"? They hate us and besides, if they were our cousins, wouldn't that mean we were inbred?
Posted by: gaz at December 7, 2003 at 09:12 PMWhile I agree with many of Jack's comments, with a new kid on the block, the media feeding frenzy has begun anew, particularly with a run-up to an election. The media, faced with a one horse race while Crean led Labor, had tired of attack dog tactics with he and his party and became the defacto opposition. It started to attack the Govt for being mean and tricky, because after all, to admit that it was doing a reasonably sound job and this was the reason for its popularity, would be anathema to Australians' feigned distrust/disgust with politicians.(In this respect Australian voters are like farmers who love to moan about the weather, but deep down have a comfortable feeling about their democratic lot)
With a fresh face to Labor, being touted as a new serious alternative Govt, the media fangs have been bared once more. Kerry OBrien's initial mauling of Latham was the start of this process. Latham and Labor have now been placed back on an equal footing with Howard and the Coalition. This is where it will come down to an analysis of policies for the next election. No more media leg-up for Labor. They're on their own now.
Thus begins the hard road to the Treasury benches where Labor have to ditch the rhetoric of Opposition and present a united face, coupled with fully costed alternative policies. Of course it's an easy road if a Govt appears stale, is overtaken by events or self destructs.
Posted by: Observa at December 7, 2003 at 09:44 PMObserva, I watched Kerry O'Brien's interview with Latham closely. Yes, he asked some difficult questions but the persistent follow-through was lacking and they both ended up chuckling together. In fact, Latham had quite an easy ride with Red Kezza. Understandable, really.
Latham's previous erratic behaviour and inconsistencies gave O'Brien plenty of opportunity to go for the jugular if he cared to.
Posted by: Bob Bunnett at December 7, 2003 at 10:44 PM>Oh, and by the way, Adam...what you just stated wasn't a fact. It was an opinion.
Richard, I don't think Adam's able to tell the difference between his opinions and facts.
Hi John,
Yes, unfortunately Pilger's Syndrome is more prevalent today than ever before. Poor fella.
Richard.
amos goes weak at the knees at the thought of Latham becoming leader of the Opposition
Latham, right wing, pro commerce, low-taxing [will]...make nice with Australia's #1 trading, military and cultural ally America
amos then gives the game away by letting the world know the true source of his attraction: Latham's ideological bump and grind:
you could [have]...summed up the man more succinctly: "He's a whore."
amos, I'll give you a tip on how you could avoid embarassing self-disclosures in political commentary: don't cream then tell.
OT: Looks like they got the wrong Pilger.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/South/12/07/dead.priest.ap/index.html
Posted by: Catbert at December 8, 2003 at 02:09 AMJack, your strength is arguing on ideas. Here is my tip for you - leave the petty abuse to others.
Posted by: Bob Bunnett at December 8, 2003 at 07:25 AM"GWB is a disgrace to all people of centre-right political views everywhere"
Come on Adam. Explain. No one else has a clue why you think so. I suspect there may be quite a few others who would concur with me that you're a bit of a Bozo.
Posted by: Michael Gill at December 8, 2003 at 09:06 AMOh no, I've now staked my 'intellectual reputation', gone weak at the knees, let the world know the source of my attraction then creamed and told!!!!!!
I'm still trying to figure out if Strocchi thinks I'm pro Latham or anti, it serves me right for tangling with someone so strong on arguing Ideas.
Posted by: Amos at December 8, 2003 at 09:11 AMAmos, screw those wankers -- give us some more wisdom speak. I like that trick you do with diamonds...
Posted by: Carl in N.H. at December 8, 2003 at 10:21 AMLike Kerry O'Brien,I too would like to know why Latham has this obsession with arses,bottoms, suckholes -is there something here that you want to tell us about as well, Gabrielle?
Posted by: freddyboy at December 8, 2003 at 12:44 PM