Is today’s terrorist attack on the Australian embassy in Jakarta a repeat of the ‘warning’ to electioneers in Spain to vote in the pacifist, withdraw-from-Iraq party?
Is this a message to Australian voters to vote the bring-them-home-by-Christmas line?
Do we toe the line or do we vote the John Howard aggression ticket in protest because of this minor atrocity?
For mine, it’s still a vote on domestic issues.
Fuck Indonesia and the boat they sailed in on.
Vote with conscience, not with children-overboard emotion.
Could you please fill the rest of us in a little bit? Tell us about the candidates in the Australian election and what they stand for. I gather you’re not much of a John Howard fan, eh?
Which ones?
Are you saying that the state of Indonesia set off a bomb in their own capital in order to affect the Australian elections? Isn’t that far-fetched? Are you suggesting that Indonesian immigrants who arrived by boat should go home?
Maybe you should take some of your own advice.
Do you mean Bin Laden, or some figure from your country’s political scene? Or are you talking about “little Johnny Foreigner”?
Well the attack is not quite as devestating for Australia as the Spanish attack was for Spain. I am concerned that the Australian government will spin it like this “See you must vote for us so we can prevent this sort of thing reoccurring”.
I wont try and explain Sisyphuses post except that “little Johnny” is our Prime Minister. His name is John Howard and he is little. Anyway his government probably scammed enough votes to wim the last election by putting the Aussie population in fear of nasty boat people that were trying to take over our land and plant bombs. Several hundred boat people that is. They were accused by the government of throwing children overboard - this has since been shown very likely to be a deliberate lie.
[QUOTE=aegypt]
Oh, and a few more questions while you’re here:
Could you please fill the rest of us in a little bit? Tell us about the candidates in the Australian election and what they stand for. I gather you’re not much of a John Howard fan, eh?
[QUOTE=aegypt]
John Howard aka “Little Johnny” is the candidate for the Liberal party. Despite the name the Liberal party is Australia’s right wing conservative party. Usually depicted as a midget by cartoonists, “little Johnny” is actually of average height and the name dates back to the days he served under an especially tall prime minister Malcolm Fraser where he appeared puny in comparison. His politics are total subservience to the Bush administration in foreign affairs, and the usual conservative mantra of privatisation and, dismantling of government services domestically. His government has been on the whole quite a competent albeit immoral one and he is a reasonably effective manager. He is highly intelligent and cunning, and recognised by all as a ruthless and skilled political operator. He fights dirty and for keeps, and has imported much american-style political ugliness into our politics. He was once quite respected for honesty but is now more commonly regarded as a lying weasel over a long litany of broken promises.
His opponent is Mark Latham representing the Australian Labour Party (ALP), our centre-left party. Latham is thought by many to represent generational change in Australian politics as he is many years younger then Howard. He is a brash loudmouth, and a thug noted for beating up taxi-drivers (literally). His penchant for colourful phrases has delighted some and horrified others. He famously described Howard as an “arselicker” and the Liberal party as “a conga line of suckholes” over their toadying to the US. He is an Australian nationalist who believes Australian policy should be made in Canberra not in Washington. He has pledged to withdraw Australian forces from Iraq should he be elected, although there are so many caveats to the pledge it doesnt mean much in practical terms. Latham has repeatedly outfoxed Howard tactically and his leadership has revived his party and made Howard appear vulnerable. His mouth works against him though and its pretty much 50:50 who will win our pending election. In economic and social policy he is right wing although not to the extent of Howard.
Incumbents are the Liberal Party (who are actually conservative these days) and is led by John Howard. He feels the US alliance is all important and that Australia should generally follow their lead. He’s fallen into step with the current American administration even when the likes of Blair have baulked at things like Guantanamo and non-terror related issues.
The pretenders are the Labor Party led by Mark Latham. Like Howard, further to the right than his party affiliation would suggest. Neo-liberal might be the best description. He’s no Hugo Chavez but he is a lot more wary not so much about the alliance but the Bush administration itself.
Vox pops on TV often have education and health mentioned as the big issues. Family also gets a run but I think this is more to do with welfare and benefits than family values issues like SSM or the like however, they are also relevant but to a much smaller degree.
Hmmm. No clue as to what he means there but as all the dead and seriously injured seem to be Indonesians, maybe he means fuck the Indonesian people who suffer far more than Australians ever have in these attacks. But that’s too callous to consider that he meant that absent clarification. Very fucking callous.
Sage meta-advice there I think.
Nope. He means Howard. The sad thing is that he got the nickname 20 years ago while he was contesting elections with Bob Hawke. Hawke is actually shorter but there is a view that Prime Minister Howard would be a small man no matter what his height was.