October 14, 2004
SO THAT WAS THEIR EVIL PLAN
Those brilliant Labor strategists have tricked us all:
Mr Tanner said the Howard government's landslide win may play into Labor's hands.
Oddly, despite the success of their crafty landslide ploy, Labor identities seem angry and combative:
Senior federal Labor frontbencher Simon Crean is demanding his colleagues "shut up" in a bid to keep a lid on post-election infighting.
A number of Labor MPs have come out swinging over the Party's disastrous performance.
Frontbencher Lindsay Tanner is worried the party does not know what it stands for.
Backbencher Graeme Edwards wants those he says are "hacks" out of the shadow ministry.
Whoa! Get rid of the hacks, and Labor's shadow ministry could hold meetings in a glovebox. Hey, Mighty Leader has commenced a Hillary-style listening tour:
After his initial shock, Latham has roused himself and is phoning colleagues for their views about what went wrong. Those close to him say he wants a thorough appraisal and is intent on listening and learning.
If Latham wants to learn, why is he phoning his colleagues? Those idiots caused all the problems in the first place. Call Miranda Devine instead:
To the folks in Gnashville, John Howard's fourth and most decisive election victory is not only devastating, it is inexplicable. "I cannot understand how the Coalition was returned to power," a "stunned" Petrina Frost of Woollahra wrote to The Daily Telegraph. "I only know one person who voted Liberal. I attended the polling booth with three people. We all voted Labor. I discussed the results with my workmates this morning - they all voted Labor. Everyone I talk to voted Labor. So, tell me, how is it that Labor did not win?"
Poor Petrina should get out more. The same goes for the big wheels of the Labor Party, not to mention a good portion of the media who, as the joke goes in Liberal circles, suffered a "major failure of intelligence" in not predicting the election result and misjudging Mark Latham's appeal.
"Mark Latham's appeal". There’s a phrase we won’t be seeing too often from now on.
(Via reader Guy H. and contributor J.F. Beck)
UPDATE. One of the reasons Mark Latham's ease the squeeze line didn’t work is because -- besides sounding like a taxi driver’s desperate plea to be released before his arm is broken -- Australians didn't perceive that there was a squeeze to be eased. The same is true in the US of John Edwards' attempts to paint the place as a hardscrabble dustbowl nation, with pitiful dirt-streaked Steinbeckian moppets lining up everywhere for a bowl of union soup and a plate of sawdust. Mark Steyn:
I don't care about Edwards' dad and his heartwarming, sepia-hued vignettes any more than I cared about the mythical "coatless girl" he used to cite in his primary speeches: a wee shivering thing whose coatlessness was supposedly a result of Bush-Cheney reducing her parents to poverty. I offered to buy a coat for any authentically coatless girl the campaign managed to produce. Not the most generous offer on my part -- girls' winter coats are $9.99 at Wal-Mart -- but the Edwards camp never took me up on it. Do you recognize this Dickensian image of America? It's true there are some folks who are having a tough time finding work in certain Rust Belt states. In 2003, the U.S. unemployment rate was 6 percent, which is considered high. In Canada it was 7.8 percent; France 9.7 percent; Germany 10.5 percent -- and in the last two cases these levels are permanent features of the landscape, as they would be in America if the Democrats ever get the opportunity to impose the Franco-German high-cost social welfare/government health care system John Kerry admires so much. America's "bright light" isn't "flickering." It's Europe where the lights are about to go out, permanently.
Doug Payton has more on Little Mary Sunshine:
Praise the Lord, and pass the crystal ball. John Edwards said in a speech, "When John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve are going to walk. Get up out of that wheelchair and walk again."
Now compare this to the brouhaha over Cheney's comments that a Kerry presidency would make us more susceptible to terrorism. Democrats were livid over this, even though Cheney couched his comment in an examination of Kerry's record and what can be gleaned from his stump speeches about when he plans to do regarding terrorism. Based on that, and what Bush & Cheney have done and plan to do, Mr. Cheney was well within his rights to render his opinion on the subject.
However, he was accused by Democrats of trying to scare people into voting for him. But while his opinion was buttressed by Kerry's record, this pronouncement by Edwards is pure fantasy and is, in my mind, worse than anything Cheney has said. Edwards is both trying to add an irrational euphoria to his own campaign, based on nothing but his say-so, while scaring folks that, by implication, Bush wants to keep disabled people in their wheelchairs.
But he does! And even worse, according to Tim Dunlop: "President allows Christopher Reeve to die".
Posted by Tim Blair at October 14, 2004 05:14 AMpeople in wheelchairs are so much easier for us to grind under our black jackboots, tim. geesh, don't you know nuttin'?
Posted by: Mr. Bingley at October 14, 2004 at 05:41 AMHere's the illuminated version, to inspire piety:
(With apologies to Rembrandt)
Posted by: Sean Gleeson at October 14, 2004 at 05:47 AMThey are both partly right.
The majority of americans support stem cell research and it would probably help quite a few people (although not Christopher Reeves obviously).
AND the US would likely be more vulnerable to a terrorist attack under Kerry (at least after the first time he refused to bend over for them).
The majority of americans support stem cell research
Since stem cell research is still happening, and will continue to happen, I say, "Good". Let the majority of Americans pay for it, out of their pockets. Maybe start a foundation. I have a problem with the government pay for it, however.
Just like abortion. I'm against it, but don't think it should be illegal. However, I don't want my tax dollars paying for it.
This is the situation we're in today.
TV (Harry)
Posted by: Inspector Callahan at October 14, 2004 at 06:11 AM"I cannot understand how the Coalition was returned to power," a "stunned" Petrina Frost of Woollahra wrote to The Daily Telegraph. "I only know one person who voted Liberal. I attended the polling booth with three people. We all voted Labor. I discussed the results with my workmates this morning - they all voted Labor. Everyone I talk to voted Labor. So, tell me, how is it that Labor did not win?"
Australia has their own Pauline Kael.
In 1972, The New Yorker's movie critic, Pauline Kael, won herself a place in political lore by expressing astonishment at the Republicans' 49-state landslide victory. "How could that be?" she demanded. "I don't know a single person who voted for Nixon."
Posted by: Ripclawe at October 14, 2004 at 06:18 AMHah! Woollahra is in Wentworth, a safe Liberal seat.
Does Ms Frost talk to any of her neighbours?
Posted by: Quentin George at October 14, 2004 at 07:25 AMDoes Ms Frost talk to any of her neighbours?
I suspect the problem is that none of her neighbours are willing to talk to her.
Posted by: 2dogs at October 14, 2004 at 07:40 AMAnd I can't believe Graeme Edwards. Get rid of the hacks?
The ALP just wouldn't be the same without 'em.
Posted by: Quentin George at October 14, 2004 at 08:05 AM"Mr Tanner said the Howard government's landslide win may play into Labor's hands."
If I was a huge nerd, I'd make a Monty Python and the Holy Grail reference right here.
So stem cells help you not be crippled, right? I bet Bush held a big spoonful of stem cells right in front of Christopher Reeve's lips right before he died. "C'mon, Chris! C'mon, boy! Ya gotta want it!
Posted by: Jim Treacher at October 14, 2004 at 08:10 AMAh, you see to lose big was their plan all along! Now the government will be ever more surprised next time...
I hope Kerry's plan is similar.
Posted by: Quentin George at October 14, 2004 at 08:11 AMAnd I can't believe Graeme Edwards. Get rid of the hacks?
The ALP just wouldn't "be" without 'em.
OK, then. Australian politics continues to confuse me. After reading this blog for a while I thought that "Labor" was Australian slang for "hack." Can someone please note when you're using Ozzie slang and when you're not. This is making my head hurt.
Posted by: Dr. N.O. Brain at October 14, 2004 at 08:49 AMThe ALP are beginning to remind me of that game we used to play on the old 486's in primary school - LEMMINGS.
Posted by: Will S at October 14, 2004 at 09:47 AMMark should spend one day at home, read the blogs on this site-CL, Gnu Hunter and a few others- he would then get a better idea of why they are delegated to the compost bin of life until such time they break down and evolve as somthing even Peter Cundall would be happy to spread on the veggie patch.
He could wean himself off the Prozac and weep his frustration in private.
By 2011 he might be ready to dip his tootsies in the political pool again.
"..the Howard government's landslide win may play into Labor's hands."
With that statement Mr. Tanner identified himself as the chief 'hack'. I'm sure that was the funniest swept-away-in-a-landslide statements ever uttered.
Here's your hat and coat Tanner! what's your hurry?
Posted by: Arty at October 14, 2004 at 10:04 AMhack=functioinary with no work experience in business and lots in politics/unions
Labor=full of functionaries
http://theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,11063518%255E7583,00.html
If I knew how to insert a link the above url would take you to an op-ed piece in today's Australian by Kroger on Latham's "shirt fronting" of our PM.
BUT if you watched 4-Corners last Monday you will see where Latham got his crazy stunt. In setting up the presidential debate Bush and Kerry meet to shake hands and Kerry (using his greater height) does exactly the same as we saw Latham do to the PM.
Poor bastard Latham has to even copy his sleazy stunts from the Yanks he so despises.(excepting when he wraps himself in the American Flag as did in his suck-arse bit after insulting President Bush!)
Oops! Yep I can read even when the text is in blood red telling me how to insert a link.
Just another senior moment - will try to do better.
Sheesh!
Maybe Iron Mark should ash \k you Timbo given your forecast was one of the worst made concerning the result.
By the way I don't know ANY so called 'strategist on either side who got within the bullsroar of calling this election correctly.
It seems to me that bloggers on both the left, right and the centre have a lot to be humbel abour concerning the election.
the one thing in common is getting the election result WRONG.
Posted by: Homer Paxton at October 14, 2004 at 12:21 PM"Mark Latham's appeal".
Well, he has plenty of appeal (most probably of a kind I do not wish to describe) to Phatty and Antony Lowenstein. Since they're all pretty piss poor judges of the Australian people and equally inept in their professional vocations, maybe they should go into business together. Maybe a circus. Yes.....a three ring circus!
Posted by: Lofty at October 14, 2004 at 12:26 PM"I cannot understand how the Coalition was returned to power," a "stunned" Petrina Frost of Woollahra wrote to The Daily Telegraph. "I only know one person who voted Liberal. I attended the polling booth with three people. We all voted Labor. I discussed the results with my workmates this morning - they all voted Labor. Everyone I talk to voted Labor. So, tell me, how is it that Labor did not win?"
Can it be that some of those people who claimed to be voting the "right way" were lying? Perhaps, because they realized what they were in for if they voted the "right way"?
It is sad that a person like howard was re-elected. The "man?" is a liar,he is divisive spends most of allocated monies -federation fund - in lib seats, helps his friends- the ethanol bloke, his family - stanley, and Mel something his daughter,those who give the lib party donations, costs us $2mill a year to go to canberra from sydney. Stopped the oldies getting dental work done. That is just from the top of my head . The only reason I can think for his re-election of is that most Australians are the same as him.Greedy, dishonest,divisive, and a world class liars B. Patterson
Posted by: Robert Patterson at October 14, 2004 at 12:34 PMIt's funny how the people throwing around the "he's divisive" epithet are usually the ones with the most noxious, insulting and, yes, one could say divisive rhetoric. Eh, Bob Patterson?
(And they're almost all on the left, but we won't make any inferences from that. After all, they're the peace/love/harmony people; the insulting rhetoric must be a mere coincidence and not a feature.)
Posted by: PW at October 14, 2004 at 01:05 PMThanks, Rob, for that rambling, incoherent list of ways the government has failed to provide for you and your family. Fuck off and get a job, you parasite.
Posted by: Amos at October 14, 2004 at 01:07 PMIn fairness, PW, I'm on the right and I constantly call lefties 'worthless shit-for-brains leeches', 'deluded utopianist imbeciles' and 'criminals to lazy to do their own thieving'.
So I dunno if all the insults are coming from the left, but then I don't consider 'divisive' to be an insult. I don't mind being divided from the scum of our society at all.
Posted by: Amos at October 14, 2004 at 01:11 PMOh, sure Amos. I didn't say that only lefties throw insults. Just that they always claim the other side is oh-so-mean and divisive, when they provide their fair share of nasty comments. But then, Bob is probably the type for whom nasty comments originate from right-wingers only by definition.
BTW, looks like Labor's plan to lose in a real landslide keeps on working - Richmond (currently 50.64% Labor), Swan (50.19%), Kingston (50.14%), and Hindmarsh (50.07%) have all been trending back towards the Coalition since counting of postal and absentee votes has started (Richmond particularly strongly), so that might be yet four more seats Labor won't have.
Posted by: PW at October 14, 2004 at 01:19 PMStopped the oldies getting dental work done?
There's Latham's slogan for the next election: Stop the Rot.
Or Right the Bite.
Posted by: ilibcc at October 14, 2004 at 01:38 PM"Greedy, dishonest,divisive, and a world class liars"
Well your words indicate clearly that you don't know the average Australian at all or is it only Labor supporters that don't fit the above?
As for me, I don't give a toss about anyone's political leaning as long as they're decent, rational people and don't have those characteristics that, in your opinion, I must have.
Due to your disparaging all and sundry on this site with your words you get no respect from me. No doubt you smell like it, obviously look like it and definitely are it! Make sure no-one sees you sitting on the throne or they'll be out with the toilet brush.
Take a stand and do something worthwhile with your life Bob (is that short for Bobbit), like acting as a human shield in the Sudan.
Posted by: Lofty at October 14, 2004 at 02:10 PM
It gets worse Robert, the ultimate aim is that youse pay for youse own life and youse rethink the bit where I'm responsible for your choices and outcomes.
Don't be a stranger Amos, I thought "shit encrusted cat fucker" was fair and accurate.
..."Mr Tanner said the Howard government's landslide win may play into Labor's hands..."
Channeling Mr. Burns. "Excellent, I see the worm has turned. Now give the fools their tar..tar..suace.
Thanks for Howard Australia, with love, from St. Paul, Minnesota, U.S.A.
Posted by: Thomas at October 14, 2004 at 05:03 PMConsidering conservative parties together received 50%+ of the vote, I'd have to say the "divisive" parties in the election were on the left.
Posted by: Quentin George at October 14, 2004 at 05:15 PMThe difference between the conservatives and lefties is in the way they respond to adversity- conservatives seem to be able to laugh not only at the opposition but themselves as well, but the LLL are just so full of rancor and hatred that thinking people of Australia - the silent majority- very loudly reponded when give right of reply at the ballot box. LABOR-LOOK-LISTEN & LEARN
Bob McMullen on radio this morning- bitter twisted and uneducatable and thinks they can be back in 2007
so his fate sealed or seared
Re: Frontbencher Lindsay Tanner is worried the party does not know what it stands for.
OTOH, maybe the problem is that the electorate DOES know what the party stands for, hmmmm?
Posted by: AlanC at October 15, 2004 at 02:20 AMTim Dunlop believes GWB is God. Tim must live in a theocracy.
Posted by: Helen at October 16, 2004 at 04:29 AM