:: Saturday, 31 January 2004 ::
Chris Pearson reveals some stuff about Latham and Labor I did not know.
Apparently just about everyone in the Labor Party hates everyone else's guts.
And Latham hates most everyone and most of all.
See, Foxtel has been running 'Labor in Power' and that brings back awful memories of how the Labor government of the day, Keating's, was a hotbed of hate and sniping and backstabbing and lies and propaganda.
It was a godawful government presiding over a period of just pure whitebread Fitzroy/Balmain rubbish.
Republic, Sorry, yartz, high interest rates, environment, evil Liberals, blah blah.
But somehow that whole period seems kinda benign relative to today.
Back then, there was no war on terror to leave us all shitting ourselves that some wog freaks are gonna pour out of a mosque and try to put blankets on all the girlies' heads, kill all the poofs and start making folks work Saturday to Wednesday with no law Sharia law to govern life (what is the Sharia position on rainforests, I wonder?)
Back then there was no Mideastern illegal entry into Oz.
There was no Mideastern terrorism of the NY, Washington, Riyadh, Ankara variety.
Labor's internecine nonsense was pointless and disgusting but not harmful in a serious way.
But you can't vote for that now, can ya? Times are too serious.
You can't have a 42 year old skippy in charge of this country, who has never had a real job in his life. Straight out of schools to Spewni, to politics.
Jeebus, wept, eh? Never had a real job in his life.
Howard at least worked as a suburban solicitor. But even if he had not done so, Oz voters did not give him the gig til there was a level of comfort that he knew how things work in Canberra and internationally.
He will be led by his instinctive hatred of Bush, if Bush makes it back into the Whitehouse (not a given I will grant you).
I reckon a vote for Latham is a vote to become more like New Zealand than ever before.
I do not think Latham believes that there really is a war on terror that deserves to be fought.
I would like to be proven wrong, but he's so busy rabbitting on with his politics of envy nonsense (I know he calls it aspirational but it's crap - no one needs Latham to tell them they would like to have more in their lives. Sheesh. Nanny.) that who knows where he stands on protecting us from terrorists here and abroad.
Oz folks travel. A terrorist in Europe or Stateside or Bali is a big a threat to us as at home.
What's Latham gonna do to protect us?
:: WB 8:15 p.m. [link+] ::
Hey, Bill Maher, American humourist opinionist whiner about crushing dissent but otherwise entertaining fellow has a blog
:: Friday, 30 January 2004 ::
And he's an ignorant dick who does not know Megawati is a girl. "...his "moral outrage" in the face of "American imperialism." ", indeed.
Still, worth reading the thoughts of a bloke who, in his own words was"critical of this war, on the grounds that it was premature and in the sincere belief -- one I still hold -- that Hussein was contained."
Nice guy, huh? Contained from you, Bill. Not from the Iraqi population but.
Can't you just hear this bloke's adenoidal sneer as he calmly declares he does not give a shit about wogs.
Bill Maher. Self-satisfied Mercan liberal jackass who can be counted on not to lift a finger to support wogs or even think of supporting them. Wonder if he's read any Zeyad?
:: WB 7:43 p.m. [link+] ::
Gilligan, Dyke, Davies. Everything you need to know.
And a top post from Oliver Kamm with top comments.
What does the wog think?
Gilligan sexed up the news, deliberately inflating the material he got from Kelly to suit his (Gilligan's) own anti-Blair/Iraq bias to charge the govt with lying and exaggerating pre-war intelligence, and Gavin Davies and Greg Dyke and Richard Sambrook (when will he go?), none of them checked Gilligan because they shared his views and when challenged by Blair they still didn't check but just went on to the whiny offensive about 'independence' instead of just sorting out Gilligan's bullshit and the Kelly suicided and then the Beeb started to realise how far in the shit Gilligan had put them with his sloppiness.
Gilligan and the Beeb fucked up royally. Gilligan tried to influence the initial hearings by sending emails to the questioners. Sambrook tried to bully Susan Watts into corroborating Gilligan's rubbish and she wouldn't roll over. And Davies and Dyke persisted in their philosophy that they should not be interrogated or challenged by government even for humongous lies like that told by Gilligan.
There was no sexing up. There was an intelligence service that supported the material. Gilligan is such a cynic, as are Sambrook and Davies and Dyke and all their compatriots currently on strike (lord, help us) he cannot imagine that maybe there was good faith and reasonable reliance in intelligence material.
He cannot imagine it.
Alistair Campbell (who did resign ages ago on the government side) said something like, if folks knew about the workings of government they'd be pleasantly surprised and if they knew about the workings of the media they'd be appalled.
He's got that right.
Plus he looks like a really good lay.
:: WB 7:10 p.m. [link+] ::
Since when is reading to your kids a Federal Matter?
:: Friday, 16 January 2004 ::
I am watching Latham speaking at the Labor conference thing and announcing a policy.
Get this: at the first maternal nurse meeting thing after a kid has been born, the gumment is going to pay for ma to get a kit with a story book in it and cards with the numbers and addresses of libraries. He is calling it a "Read Aloud Australia" policy, and it is an education issue.
Which means it is a State issue.
What part of section 52 of the Constitution does reading aloud to kids between 0-4 years of age come under?
Here he goes, this is a new idea, we mustn't look backwards (wha'?) we must look forwards, children are the future, we must invest in them. Oh, and too much about how his own son has been read to.
Pardon me, I have to puke.
Does the man not even hear himself when he says "Read Aloud Australia". Jeebus wept, it's like those ads from years ago when some fat cartoon bloke was exhorted to go for a walk in the sunshine, or some such activity.
It is not a government matter. Less tax to gumment means more money in my pocket means I can buy books to read to my kids.
Horrible nanny state nonsense.
Zif folks don't Read Aloud to their kids already.
My ma and pa read to me. Pa liked Poe and Somerset Maugham and Virgil and Tesio and Wizard of Id cartoons. Ma liked Joan Aiken and Agatha Christie and Lampedusa. I liked Moomins and Thelwell. They took me to the opera. They took me to the races. They parented me. As was their duty as parents. And a good job they done too.
Thye did it. With no gumment help.
"Read my books Aloud Australia" is probably what Latham wants, too. Or his choice of books.
How can Howard react to this without sounding like a jackass who hates kids? Cos that what he faces - a stupid Labor nonsense feelgood policy that does nothing so it's hard to complain about.
Just go with tax. Just say:
reading aloud is great. I was a beneficiary of it and I did it for my kids too. But is it really a government matter that you read or what you read? I don't think so, because the richness of life comes from choice and reading different materials. And people can choose to do that now. They don't need the government to tell them to read. They just need to pay a little ess tax, a little lower interest rate, so they have some extra to choose and buy the books they want. Or join the libraries they want.
That is all.
Now a policy that sets up, say, mobile libraries - that's a good policy. And that's a State matter, and the States are currently doing it. So if folks want more books in their life, they should feel they can get them now, And if they don't feel that, they should feel they can press their State governments to arrange it for them. The States are getting all the GST of course, as well as stamp duty which they still have not abolished. And they are all labor states.
You get the picture.
Latham is a nannystater.
:: WB 5:38 p.m. [link+] ::
He got a mini-facelift. So what? You sayin' you never once thought about getting some work done? Yeah, right.
:: WB 4:56 p.m. [link+] ::
Ha ha ha
The insufferable French (journalist's) way of addressing foreign leaders as if they were nothing but their own readers (or as if they were indeed readers of what they write) reaches, in his article, a kind of paroxysm that makes them, as they’re written in English, something absolutely pathetic and self-deluded. One can easily imagine him, after having finished his article, going to his favorite coffee-shop and commenting with his local friends: “Now that I told them what they didn’t want to hear I very much doubt whether Blair and Bush will ever be able to sleep calmly at night again, ha, ha, ha.”
:: WB 4:41 p.m. [link+] ::
How is it possible to be so stupid and still be alive?
I am watching the Vice Secretary or something of Amnesty International, Irene Khan, declare on the BBC that ~economic globalisation has failed to deliver on increasing security for people around the world. On human rights progress.~
Do you see how lousily lie-laden that is?
No? well, sit up and pay attention then:
Number one, economic globalisation as a philosophy does not promise to deliver on anything. It theorises delivery.
Number two, the philosophy of economic globalisation is practiced by governments around the world and those governments have not promised to deliver on anything except economic growth for the citizens they represent.
So, to use a phrase like 'failed to deliver on security' is simply miscasts what economic globalisation is for and sets it up to fail.
Irene Khan should be saying ecomonic globalisation is achieving in practice just what the theory anticipated - more money for more folks. She should just say that Amnesty is focussed on human rights and money can't buy them - they come from people practising them. So Amensty focusses on people practising human rights.
End of story.
Instead her partisan George Monbiot anti-capitalism feelings colous her language and world view.
I tell ya, if she was working for me, using sloppy language like that, I'd sack her.
:: WB 4:36 p.m. [link+] ::
Two plus two is five
...Asim Bali, a spokesman for the Kurds who has admitted that they wanted to come to Australia for economic reasons, not to escape political persecution as originally reported.
...Mr Bali said. "We want our rights and we will fight for our rights because we should have been allowed to claim asylum in Australia."
See? This is serious wogness at work. Imenatrable self-serving inconsistency. If you are just coming to Oz for the economics, then you do not need asylum, Asim.
Is it any wonder so many applications are rejected at first instance?
:: WB 4:19 p.m. [link+] ::
Three top essays on war by bloggers.
:: Sunday, 11 January 2004 ::
And here you can find an idiot opinion journalist's blurts on the topic. He's read two biased anti-war books over the hols and come out the end....biased and anti-war.
Who'd a thunk it, eh?
Mike Carlton is an imbecile. He apparently thinks Ted Kennedy is good company for Mark Latham. Ted Kennedy. Killer of Mary Jo Kopechne. Drunk. Senator by Divine Right of Kennedy History. Briber of Coppers to make sure no conviction follows for sending Mary Jo Kopechne off Chappaquiddick bridge and into water to wait and rown while he stumbled off to save his skin.
Good company for Latham.
Carlton is an imbecile. Latham is a beater of a wog cabdriver, and a patronising toerag to his very own 'be a good girl' first wife. He's never had a regular job in his entire life. Not one.
But he ain't no killer.
Carlton is an imbecile. He praises Latham and damns the fat jackass at the same time, just by being on his side.
Say thankyou, Mark. Carlton's on your side.
:: WB 4:07 p.m. [link+] ::
Latino, Hispanic, etc. Wogs all. But not a hive mind.
Bin pondering the thing in the US with the Bush proposal to allow legal status to be granted to persons who are currently not authorised to be living and working Stateside but who are and have been living and working Stateside for quite some time.
Wogs mostly from Mexico but also from Guatemala, Honduras, Panama etc etc.
Wogs working and who, if they had authority to be doing what they are doing, then then they can be working and getting the benefit of labour laws and the responsibility of participationg in the tax system, and their current employers can get the irits finding it is harder to exploit their fear of the INS to achieve under minimum-wage pay.
Now, plenty of wogs of the same background are Stateside quite legally. How are they gonna feel about this deal? Are they gonna think it is a reward to folks who have acted without authority, who have acted illegally for ages? Are they gonna think it is a good thing for Hispanics in general.
See, much press has decided that the whole Bush thing is a cynical ploy to win Latino votes. Get them Hispanic votes, man.
As if Latinos are a hive mind. As if a Guatemalan wakes in the morning and says to himself, "me why I am no better than a Mexican, or a Paraguayan, we are all brothers, we Hispanics, all the same".
That would be like imagining a Slovenian wakes and thinks that way about Austrians, Italians and Croats.
I don't think so.
I reckon the whole deal is a good deal. But not for some wog based thing. Cos wogs don't need help to get along.
No. For the safety thing. Draw a line in the sand. Know who your folks are. Invite them all to participate. And then get them in the census. Like we went through in Oz recently.
Then, when we all know who we are, and when we are all sure we are invited to participate in society (we as in US but it goes for everywhere) then we can know who the enemy is. Easier.
Safety will be that much easier.
:: WB 3:42 a.m. [link+] ::
The Hebrew Hammer
:: Saturday, 3 January 2004 ::
Found cruising the Italian blogs and checking out ILoveAmerica
:: WB 3:23 a.m. [link+] ::
Here are some top links from Iraq
Pretty interesting, huh? And pretty hard not to stumble across 'em, if you bother with the blogs.
:: WB 10:07 p.m. [link+] ::
Hey, that NASA Mars thingy has landed safely and has confirmed this by sending signals. Nerds are on teevee talkin' it up.
:: WB 9:51 p.m. [link+] ::