<< EARTH SCORCHING CONTINUES ~ MAIN ~ SIEGE OF HELENGRAD >>
MANIAC PM AVOIDED
Australia didn’t merely dodge a bullet last year by declining to elect Mark Latham ... we dodged a freakin’ firestorm:
Former Labor leader Mark Latham believed the US alliance should be ditched and called it “the last manifestation of the White Australia mentality”.
The Latham Diaries reveal his in-principle support for the alliance during last year’s election was completely insincere and driven by electoral politics.
The man was insane. Hit the link for further evidence; Latham believed we should have adopted New Zealand’s foreign policy. Not that he told us, of course. For all we knew, Latham supported ties to the US. Also in today’s press, sensible centrist ABC presenter and SMH columnist Richard Glover deals with the lunatic:
Latham’s just a hater, plain and simple - and that hatred can be sprayed at his own tribe as easily as at the enemy.
He was always a pissant, to use an old-fashioned Aussie word. It’s usually defined as “small but aggressive”, which just about sums him up. Long before Latham became leader, his books revealed a man with limited abilities yoked to a monstrous ego.
Presumably no one in the party bothered to read Latham’s books, or they would never have voted him leader. In successive chapters, he would stumble around the left’s intellectual storehouse, bumping up against various thinkers whose ideas he would then proclaim as his own. Occasionally, he would pause and marvel at his own brilliance, while attacking others for not spotting his true genius.
Pure pissant.
Latham could have become—in final pre-election weeks I thought he would become—Australia’s Prime Minister. Thankfully, we remain a lucky (and clever) country.
From the article- Latham’s final thoughts-
Mr Latham is convinced that “the Americans need us more than we need them”. He says Pine Gap is “vital to their international security network”. He claims that the Americans “restrict our capacity to trade and integrate with Asia” and that “one day their trouble with China will be our trouble”.
Well cripes you all narrowly missed a chance to “integrate” with China.
You sure this guy wasn’t some Aussie version of the Manchurian Candidate?
Piss ant. Isn’t this Fwanch?
Piss {drop the de l’} ant.
Posted by madawaskan on 2005 09 16 at 02:37 PM • permalinkPresumably no one in the party bothered to read Latham’s books, or they would never have voted him leader.
I disagree. Latham was put up for election by the ALP for much the same reason that John Kerry was nominated by the Democrats, in my opinion - lefty party cronies thinking it’s enough to have a candidate with some personality traits that voters tend to like (military experience in Kerry’s case, working class appeal in Latham’s), and who will hoodwink the electorate into voting for them despite all their other characteristics.
Um. You guys missed the best part of that article:
“I detest war and the meatheads who volunteer to kill other human beings. The US alliance is a funnel that draws us into unnecessary wars; first Vietnam and then Iraq.”
I do believe Latham was referring to those who volunteer to serve their country.
Posted by Steve Edwards on 2005 09 16 at 03:15 PM • permalinkThe guy makes Al Gore look like a good sport.
Posted by Jim Treacher on 2005 09 16 at 04:46 PM • permalinkIsn’t there some way we can get all these clown (Latham, Gore, Kerry, Dean, etc.) together and make them run for office in another country?
Like maybe Gaza?
They all deserve each other.
Posted by Barbara Skolaut on 2005 09 16 at 04:50 PM • permalinkNo matter how fire ant crazy Latham appears, or indeed may be, I think there’s a serious danger in joining in with those on the Left who would simply dismiss him as mad.
To anyone who thinks this guy is something out of the ordinary, he’s not.
I’ve worked up close and personal with Labor politicians and their apparatchiks and they’re all a pack of scheming, rat cunning, back stabbing, mentally unstable megalomaniacal narcissists.
In other words, they’re all like Latham but usually better sociopaths in that they can disguise their mental disorders.
Casting Latham as some kind of especial nutjob will only aid the Left in sweeping him under the carpet and persuading the population that his assertion that the entire party is sick is untrue.
But that is the one big truth in all of Latham’s vitriol.
—- Nick
Posted by The Thin Man Returns on 2005 09 16 at 05:29 PM • permalinkI agree - he is no madder than the others and is now probably speaking the truth.
The bit that’s hard to believe is that he didn’t know about how the ALP worked before he got into it. It is well documented (eg Graham Richardson’s account). Of course he knew. He is just bitter that ultimately he thought he could ride the ALP system, and didn’t anticipate that it would turn on him and chew him up.
I just can’t wait for Alan Ramsey and the rest of Latham’s pompous cheersquad to account for themselves in their cocksure endorsement of Latham. He is apparently ‘on leave’. I hope he has plenty of spare underpants and some immodium.
Ramsey is now a lame duck columnist whose opinions aren’t worth fish wrapper. He’s got to go.
Posted by Flying Giraffe on 2005 09 16 at 05:43 PM • permalinkLatham is no madder or badder now than 20 years ago, he is the same man that was annointed by the Great God Gough as Emperor-in-waiting and the same man that was elected by the ALP as their leader and propsective Prime Minister. He is their monster.
And a lot of people voted for him last election, although not enough to get him over the line. How do they feel now?
Mark Latham: 4/2004
“We support the troops,” Mr Latham told reporters in country Victoria today.
“Our argument is with the Howard government and that’s the way in which our comments have been cast.
“There are valuable jobs being performed in the tasks that have been allocated (to Australian troops in Iraq) and that’s important to recognise.
“Our mention of symbolism is political symbolism. It’s a critique of the Howard government’s policy on the political matters. We have nothing but support for the troops.”
Mark Latham: 9/2005
“I detest war and the meatheads who volunteer to kill other human beings.”
......And people wonder why so many troops don’t feel particularly supported by certain politicians and their parties.
LOL
LABOR’s treasury spokesman Wayne Swan has acknowledged the Australian people were right not to vote for Mark Latham in last year’s federal election.
Posted by Quentin George on 2005 09 16 at 06:19 PM • permalinkI felt this about Latham all along (call it a disturbance in the force), but his comments about meatheads who volunteer to kill others makes me sick. The people of this country would not be able to sleep safe at night without the willingness of those meatheads to kill the baddies on their behalf. So when you are enjoying your café culture first thank a meathead!
On another note, where does that leave the federal opposition? Her Majesty’s opposition is in disarray. Whilst I lose no sleep about Labor implosions there needs to be some effective opposition for the health of Westminster democracy. Or are we going to see our democracy develop in a different way, that will in fact be more healthy?
That’s really the $64000 question, Wolfbane. Regardless of how the ALP and their hangers-on try to sweep him under the carpet, the fact remains that they nurtured the viper at their breast.
When we look at the implosion of the Democraps, and the expansion of the Greens to fill the vacuum, it’s looking a bit bleak. And now we have the Best Party of Allah wanting to inflict sharia law upon us all. (thanks to Nick and Nora for the heads up on that one).
Looks like the Man of Steel will be in the big seat for a loooong time to come if this keeps up.
Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2005 09 16 at 07:30 PM • permalinkThe ALP may say Latham is an aberration but there is a deep current of anti-Americanism in the party that has been there for decades – and is still there. All sweetness and light on the surface but scratch most any ALP man and you’ll find a rabid America hater.
In my memory this goes back to at least the late 60s/early 70s when a member of the Victorian Parliament was convinced the CIA was deeply involved in a plot to undermine the ALP and put the Liberal Party in power. She wrote a book about it. Her thesis was widely believed. (Darn, what was her name? This is pre-internet and I can’t find it).
“Pine Gap and North West Cape make us a nuclear target. We’re all doomed. Let’s give the Yanks their marching orders” - and on it went.
Posted by walterplinge on 2005 09 16 at 08:08 PM • permalinkMark this lesson, children, and mark it well… true “progressives” feel not the slightest reluctance to lie to you to get your vote…
There is no such thing as a “moderate” liberal or progressive, just one who hasn’t told you the truth yet.
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 09 16 at 08:09 PM • permalink#30 - Chavez in Venezuela must be a contender. Depends on what you mean by ‘insane’. Churchill was a manic-depressive who drank a bottle of whisky a day.
Posted by walterplinge on 2005 09 16 at 08:23 PM • permalinkThere are two issues here - one a trivial distraction, the other real news that is being buried.
Latham would have made an awful PM. Big deal - we all know that, and most of us knew it then. The only people harping on about it are ALP leftists and journalistic fellow travellers looking for a distraction from their own corrupt and dishonest behaviour, and conservatives indulging in smug smarty-pants-isms.
The real news is that the ALP would have made, would now make, and in its current state always will make, an appalling cynical unprincipled Government; that Australians are being lied to by their media; and that a vast chunk of the parasite class are in on the rip-off. In other words, all the talking points of the RWDB agenda are on the table, and all we can do is chortle about what a lunatic Latham is?
For all his innumerable inadequacies (and who among us can say they have the character and intelligence to be PM), Latham has stepped up to the crease (maybe for the wrong reasons but who cares), and is blowing the whistle on the whole Left Wing Machine (the ALP, the unions, media, the works).
So get over the I-told-you-so-itis. It’s hardly big news to have come to the same view as the majority of the electorate.
No one is asking you to vote for him, just to stand up for him as a whistleblower.
Whilst I lose no sleep about Labor implosions there needs to be some effective opposition for the health of Westminster democracy.
Well, my dream for America is the destruction of the Democratic party, followed by a schism in the Republican party between the libertarian and conservative wings. That would be a real debate, and a real choice.
#33 so right - the latham stuff is great entertainment, but the bigger story is what it has always been - the ALP is rotten to the core & not just in NSW. here in braxtopia the factions are eating each other’s entrails while steve swans around having his picture taken & the state slides gently back into the 1980s. tasmania under labor is a basket case, & SA pretty close. with the ALP in power in all states, nannyist policies, committeefication of all policy & the growth of new departments dedicated to “communities” (ie pork-barrelling) are sucking the life out of the economy, infrastructure & volunteerism
if latham helps expose them for the scum they are, good on him, psycho or not
Of course Latham is a self serving incompetent scoundrel. But that is the charge that corrupt organisations always level at an informer. As always, it’s true but it’s irrelevant.
An honest man will never be initiated into the rotten inner sanctum, and a brilliant man will not be ejected in disgrace. Every whistle blower is the same - he’s a typical case.
Don’t be a bunch of suckers letting them get away with a cover-up.
Ross, walterplinge,
Now, now, let’s not forget two true and longstanding nutcases on the international stage: Muammar Gaddafy with his fembot bodyguards and the maniacal dwarf with a pompadour, Kim Jong Il.
Posted by Spiny Norman on 2005 09 16 at 11:49 PM • permalinkI’d be interested to find out more about Louise Adler’s decision to publish the Latham book for Melbourne University Press. I was working on a transcript yesterday, with Kathryn McKenzie interviewing Adler. Adler defended the book and Latham, saying the press had taken it “out of context”, that it was a “chronicle of events” in the “tradition of Pepys”. She said that Latham had been known for a long time as the “intellectual” of the Labor party, and appeared to think that this was the highest praise you could give to a person.
But Adler herself is from a media-savvy family; she’s worked for the ABC herself, and she MUST have known the storm that would erupt following the publication of Latham’s diaries - after all, she would have been the one to decide what portions of the journal to release to the media.She’s also decided recently to publish Loewenstein’s anti-Israel book, and subsequently, Loewenstein has publicised his book by crying hysterically about Danby’s attempts to “censor” him.
It seems to me that Adler herself is acting less than honestly, and that she may be letting her own biases get in the way of good publishing decisions.
Kip
I cannot help but get the feeling that you’re falling for the ol’ “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”.
Latham may be blowing a whistle on ALP corruption and idiocy but that does not exclude him from the same vices - particularly the latter. The fact that Latham wanted to dicth the US alliance is more than enough information thankyou very much.
The right needs to be careful with Latham in order to get him to spill his…erm..guts, but we should avoid legitimising him at all costs.
Dave S, parties split along a Libertarian/Conservative divide would be an interesting change; it may be a more consistent ideological divide.
Amen to Nannyism being THE Labor blight in State governments. If you think things are bleak in Braxtopia, consider for a while Beattieopia. A crazy mix of smoke, mirrors, and green platitudes. Maybe they are in such a fix because of the greens they smoke.
Sorry, Murph, you’re just wrong.
There’s nothing to be scared of. His wacky policy views are irrelevant now. He doesn’t threaten us.
He’s being treated like too many whistleblowers “yes, he could give us the evidence to put bring down some criminal masterminds, but the problem is, he’s such a shabby fellow himself.” How many scum walk the earth because of that prissy attitude?
What conservatives should be most afraid of is being seen to collude with the Left to prevent light being shed on both sides of politics. It’s their problem, but by staying silent we run the risk of looking guilty ourselves. There is nothing to fear. Our side are not choir boys, but the public is smart enough to see the difference between ambitious people with everyday flaws and criminally corrupt thugs and gangsters.
We can handle both at once. Latham is a walking advertisement for the corruption of the Left. I think most people realise that Latham’s meglomaniacal streak didn’t just appear AFTER his electoral defeat and subsequent push…I mean…resignation. What we need to do is expose Latham for the idiot that he is AND asked some serious questions as to why and how we came so close to having this dipsh*t as our PM. The right needs to expose the people and the institutions that put the future and security of this country at risk by backing the fool.
“The right needs to expose the people and the institutions that put the future and security of this country at risk by backing the fool.”
The media, the universities, rogue elements of the NSW Right, most of the ALP Left, ex-politicians and diplomats.
I think, however, it will eventually be uncovered that Latham was doing Beijing’s bidding. That’s the most logical explanation for his behaviour.
Posted by Steve Edwards on 2005 09 17 at 12:59 AM • permalinkI’m finding it interesting that both sides of politcs are painting Latham as a bad, mad loner.
Howard got it right when he connected Latham with the party that put him forward as a potential Prime Minister.
Latham wasn’t created in a vacuum. He is a product of the Labor movement. More so than most.
I think he has valid insights into the workings of the ALP and probably politics in general.
He doesn’t sound bitter to me. He’s just squaring up the ledger.
I loved his description of an interview with Liz Jackson, hysterical.
The book launch has been bought forward to Monday. I tried to get an advance copy today with no luck.#42 consider for a while Beattieopia. A crazy mix of smoke, mirrors, and green platitudes.
Not to mention incompetence, bullying, corruption and Ministerial infidelity that makes the Bold And The Beautiful look pious.
If you listen to Beattie and his current crop of ministers, you’ll never hear a sorrier bunch. They’re always apologising for something.
Hmmm, perhaps a book deal isn’t out of the question…
Louise, have your people call my people.
—Nick
Posted by The Thin Man Returns on 2005 09 17 at 01:56 AM • permalinkWalterplinge, #28
- I think her name was Joan Coxsedge. Her other hobby was naming ASIO agents if I recall correctly.
I agree that the ALP has been virulently anti-American for decades. It’s just been less obvious lately, what with loonballs like Baldy Pete and Tree-hugger Bob capturing the limelight.Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2005 09 17 at 02:10 AM • permalinkspeaking of nanny committeefication, the losers who bankrupted victoria have crept back into public life
caroline hogg - on the grants commission, deciding on allocation of local government funding, despite being innumerate
rob jolly (remember him? pyramid, tricon, lost the state bank) - on ecorecycle victoria
george pappas - architect of the vedc & now recommending putting the cardigans’ pension funds into biotech venture capital
john cain, who let rob jolly fuck the economy & joan kirner fuck the schools, is lecturing on public policy & doing research on higher education, presumably with a view to fucking that too
joan kirner is everywhere - board member of the Australian Children’s Television Foundation, member of the Playbox Theatre Board and matron (what that mean - evil old cow in charge of?) of organisations as diverse as the Living Museum of the West, the Women’s Circus and Positive Women
could go on but am not feeling very well
#48, #49 - thanks, that’s the dill.
#50 - let’s not forget Moira Rayner, who was obliged to resign as Acting Commissioner of the Corruption and Crime Commission after she gave a warning to a public servant (& her boyfriend) under investigation - thereby scuttling a long standing criminal investigation.
From the Bulletin:
Rayner is a fully fledged member of Labor’s sisterhood, the biographer of former Victorian premier Joan Kirner and a co-author with her subject of The Women’s Power Handbook.
.
They all piss in each other’s pockets.
Posted by walterplinge on 2005 09 17 at 04:08 AM • permalink#45—I think, however, it will eventually be uncovered that Latham was doing Beijing’s bidding.
That’s a fascinating possibility.
Posted by Evil Pundit on 2005 09 17 at 04:41 AM • permalinkLatham’s exposure is complete - of himself, his party, and of the media.
Of these, the most dangerous is the media. Without them, the ALP’s dysfunctional, psychotic behaviour would not remain a hidden sludge beneath the attractive, crenellated crust of Hype, baked fresh daily - by them.
There are many at present who seek to disguise themselves as “never a fan”, or who actually join in the ritual skewering of the staggering beast.
They would have been more admirable - and would have done genuine service to their country - if they had been whistleblowers back when it mattered.Waht really gets me is that everyone seems to be carrying on like they didn’t realise he was like this.
This is an extract from a Maxine McKew Interview for The Bulletin back when he was a shadow minister.
Latham, flying high on invective, delivered his “deformed” comment about former Liberal Party president Tony Staley [entropy: Staley
is crippledhas a disability]........
Latham wants to put the Kapow! and the Wham! back into Labor politics. Modernise the policy agenda, reform the party’s structures, sure, but at the same time, let’s have a bit of old-fashioned biffo. As he says, “If the other side is throwing punches, then your job is to whack them back as hard as you can.”
Of the Staley comment, he simply says, “Perhaps there were other words I could have used. But upsetting Tony Staley doesn’t cost me any sleep, I can assure you. In fact, I wear it as a badge of honour.”
Even if it means you end up being seen as the Sid Vicious of politics?
Latham thinks this is ludicrous. “Look, this idea that politics can be too rough and too personal is a bit rich. I can take you to any sports field any Saturday morning and show you parents getting stuck into it. Having a go at the ref, yelling abuse. It’s part of the Australian way. We’re not a namby-pamby nation that hides our feelings. I think we’re a nation that’s willing to call a spade a spade and, if need be, to pick up the spade and whack someone over the head with it.”
“Howard is an arse-licker. He went over there, kissed some bums, and got patted on the head…….
“Peter Costello is a champagne Charlie. …. the great Narcissus of Australian politics.”………
Latham seems just as viscerally determined to wreck Abbott’s legitimacy. “I think I now worry Tony more than he worries me, which is how I like it. Let’s just say that Tony’s days of lecturing us about Labor family dynasties and about us being elites might be over.”………
“I’m a hater. Part of the tribalness of politics is to really dislike the other side with intensity. And the more I see of them the more I hate them. I hate their negativity. I hate their narrowness. I hate the way, for instance, Howard tries to appeal to suburban values when I know that he hasn’t got any real answers to the problems and challenges we face. I hate the phoniness of that.”……
“It’s not about debating points, which is how the press gallery tends to see it. It’s about psychological warfare. All of us in there have a sense of who we can beat and who we’re worried about. And when you get to a point where there aren’t too many on the other side who worry you, that’s when you’ll start winning elections.”
What was different then to now?The point is the at the ALP knew exacly what they were doing. They were creating a circuit breaker, a discontinuity. It worked for a while, and only then because of the support from the media, who liked him because they saw him as someone who could take it up to Howard.
Nobody could say that he didn’t have the support of the media (I know there were excpetions - like Tim, Andrew Bolt or Janet Albrechtson). The interview above provided all the ammunition needed, and would hae been enough to permantly sink a politician that did not fit what the media wanted.
Forget Ramsay, the biggest hypocrite in all this was Matt Price in The Australian. He was a doormatt for Latham in 2004. Now he doesn’t stop bagging him and what remains of the ALP. Then again, Price is only an example of how Latham is being treated now that he can no longer suit their purpose…...
Agree with you on Matt Price, entropy. For a while there, his column had become a homo-erotic love poem addressed to Latham.
Posted by Quentin George on 2005 09 17 at 08:39 AM • permalinkNZ is the safest country in the world not because of its anti-Americanism, but because it’s not worth invading/terrorising.
Posted by Big Johnny on 2005 09 17 at 10:09 AM • permalink#59 and 60. Gotta agree with you on Matt Price – a pissant posing as journalist.
There are those media contributors who are so blatantly left as to be in a category of their own eg Phillip Adams, Alan Ramsey, Bob Ellis, Mungo Maccallum. These people don’t have anything to say that isn’t doctrinaire progressivism (a word that, to me, is just camouflage for the good old fashioned politics of hatred and envy). I can’t understand why any newspaper would give them space, let alone pay them for their drivel. Perhaps their editors believe that irritating their readership will increase circulation. Then you have those, like Price, who pretend to be the real McCoy; journalists with genuine insight, but who are in fact just barrackers, pimps and/or political weather vanes.
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
I always thought “pissant” was Texan. (Last Picture Show, 1971).