Mark Latham’s supporters bemoan the passing of their once great leader, while others save their wrath for the media for its role in the demise of the Labor leader.
Crikey on Latham
Comrade, you and your Kerr are no better than Murdock when it’s feeding time. Small plaudits engulfed by horseshit is the typical ploy.
No words to say sorry his sickness was the major reason for leaving the scene. Have a look at Altered Statesmen on the ABC for insights in to the shortcomings of great leaders. I hope Latham returns one day, he gave old bastards like me hope for a decent future, without lying to the back teeth (guess who I’m commenting on).
If you want to keep me and hopefully others of similar thoughts paying our dues, then become the alternative opposition for a while. And destruct some of those Govt. members in like manner.
Reading your shit makes me lean more towards New Matilda.
The demise of a great man
I was utterly disgusted in how the rats within the ALP rose to do John Howard’s bidding this past week.
Let’s be blunt – Howard did NOT want to go against Mark Latham with three extra years of experience as Leader. He knew he would lose such a contest, but he needed not worry, the ALP has enough back stabbers and traitors to achieve the very result he wanted – Beasley Jnr back in the job.
Wayne Swan should have been dumped, but Mark Latham proved to be a man of compassion and gave this slug another chance, plus a promotion. Swan said “thank you” by running to the media to bag his Leader. What scum!
And I am certain that Senator Conroy (saved by a moron who claims to be of the Left) and other trash acted equally traitorously.
As to Mark’s so-called Deputy, if he goes then so must she. Her expertise is clearly not suited to leadership and she has been miserable as a Deputy over this terrible period. Yet she dares to say that she expects to remain.
She no longer has my support. So if the Deputy needs to be a woman then bring on Julia Gillard or even Carmen Lawrence. Certainly Macklin must go.
Giving it their best
Latham had a crack at it gave it his best shot. Good on ya.
Kim this really is your last shot, make it your best. Good on ya.
Why oh why?
Crikey wrote: “It is certainly hard to think of another political figure in history who has been so publicly hung, drawn and quartered for literally doing nothing,” and this is tragically most certainly true.
But why? What has he done wrong? The poor bloke was/is on leave (Parliament is not sitting if you had not noticed) and he was obviously stricken with illness…..a serious illness!!
The media vultures have certainly been circling for some time now but again I ask why? He did not respond to the Tsunami disaster. What did you want him to say…..was he ever going to add anything that would be of value anyway to anyone, so why demand that he make such a statement, making out that in not doing so he was doing something so wrong? Why?
Just take a second to think about the last time you were ill…..and we mean ill……not just a cold or flu….but ill and awaiting results. Now that you have thought about it, you must think how absolutely mad you all are in placing these demands on someone going through what he was going through. If you don’t, I can only hope that next time you are ill you are asked to do a few cartwheels and back flips?? Why….well that is exactly what I am asking.
Satisfied for now but where will the next carcass come from.
The world has gone mad dot com.
Latham’s media circus
It’s fun watching the media circling around the corpse of Latham and rewriting history according to their own political persuasions. Latham is out because the media chose to tear him apart in its own self edifying feeding frenzy, and because his own team mates couldn’t wait to kick the guts out of him when he was down. What is particularly amusing is the warm attention paid to Kim Sleaseby, who of all the Labor party members is their most destructive, having destroyed the party’s cohesion on countless occasions. His mere presence within the party creates conflict.
I have seen no real evidence of Latham’s poor leadership as proclaimed by the mass media. For starters he had limited options to work with (eg – Sleaseby). He was up against an immensely powerful government/media partnership running into the election, and apart from a few tactical errors his overall strategy was sensible.
The funniest thing of all is the claim that he lacked policy. Has the media forgotten his attempt to save Tassie from Gunns, to stop the bleeding of public funds to elitist schools, to protect Australia from the FTA, to save Medicare, to bring some sort of rationality to our part in the Iraq horror, to apologise to the Aborigines …….? What exactly were Howard’s policies again? Oh that’s right – strong economy and low interest rates, strong economy and low interest rates, strong economy and low interest rates, strong economy and low interest rates, strong economy and low interest rates.
Latham and alcohol
I refer to the article:
With friends like Joel Fitzgibbon – Part II
Brilliant, mate. Just brilliant. No one outside the government dirt unit had even bothered to publicly mention the talk that Iron Mark’s pancreatitis had flared up because of the turps until you opened your trap on PM last night.
I find the statement that nobody associated Latham’s illness with alcohol except for the Govt’s dirt unit ridiculous in the extreme. Since the first occurrence, every mention of his illness has been followed by the assertion that it is “often caused by alcohol”. The suggestion that it may have something to do with excessive alcohol consumption has well and truly been planted firmly in the minds of the electorate over the past 6 months. As a matter of fact, the Google New Search (which you are so very fond) comes up with the following result “Results 1 – 10 of about 42 for Latham pancreatitis alcohol.” I don’t know how long this search goes back to but it certainly would dispute the fact that the first time it has been suggested that it is alcohol related was 5.10 last night.
Re some friendly advice to Caucus
Come off it Christian, I know you’re a “jaded ex lib” but most of the time I can get past it because you generally have something intelligent to say…. but your column today was crap.
I fully agree that its John Howard’s policy that’s won him the lodge – his mastery of marginal electorate middle class welfare is unparalleled in Australian history.
The highest taxing governing in Australian history. Pissing money against the wall in non-means tested, often uncapped and always ill-thought out subsidies. Electorally popular? Undoubtedly. Economically responsible? Absolutely not.
Is this the lead you suggest Labor follows?
As a Labor member who strongly believes in the Keating/Hawke economic legacy for my mind this is at least as great an outrage as Howard’s social and foreign wedges/policies. Sure we’re enjoying reasonable economic success at the moment – but as PJK says Howard (or Hewson) claiming success for that is like someone climbing the Empire State building, putting a flag on the top and saying “Ours is bigger”.