Absolute corker of a post by Tony Abbott at his Daily Telegraph blog this week. It seems that the Mad Monk and Piers Akerman are the only two sentient beings in Australia who believe the following:

Press Gallery opinion is that this has not been Malcolm Turnbull’s week but I suspect they should revise their judgment. This week, the government threw everything it could at Turnbull and he never flinched.

Of course, Tony! The almost unanimous opinion of the nation’s journalists is certainly less likely to be correct than a hopelessly biased member of the disgraced political party in question. A hopelessly biased member of the disgraced political party in question who can presumably say something like this without feeling a hint of shame:

This week, the government threw everything it could at Turnbull and he never flinched.

I watched the House of Representatives broadcast for four hours on Monday (the things you do while you’re crippled with flu) and not only did Malcolm Turnbull flinch, the entire opposition side of the chamber collectively flinched. You could see it in Malcy’s body language and hear it in his voice on that day and in the days following, during which he contradicted and embarrassed himself across the news media. The man was in shock.

Abbott then accuses Rudd of acting un-Prime Ministerly by calling for Turnbull’s resignation. His benchmark? John Howard, of course.

John Howard never lost his dignity …

If you say it often enough it must be true.

Bitter and twisted Liberal ex-Minister, Tony Abbott, compares and contrasts.

Last week, an Australian was awarded the Victoria Cross for the first time in 40 years. Trooper Mark Donaldson deliberately made himself a target to protect wounded comrades. He then ran 80m under machine-gunfire to carry to safety a wounded Afghan interpreter.

[...]

Another Australian received a medal last week. In Washington, then president George W. Bush conferred on former Australian prime minister John Howard the Presidential Medal of Freedom. It was the first time an Australian prime minister had been honoured in this way. In conferring the award, the president said that Howard had helped to produce a safer world and a stronger country.

And then Abbott passes judgement on the deeds of the two men.

Field marshal William Slim, a fighting soldier who became governor-general of Australia, once said that moral courage was a higher and rarer virtue than physical courage. Moral courage means facing issues and making decisions that every normal human instinct would rather avoid. Provided you have to answer for the decision, it takes a similar measure of courage to commit soldiers to battle as to face the bullets yourself. Howard wrestled with these decisions no less than John Curtin. It was in recognition of this, I imagine, that the chief of the Australian Army last year conferred on Howard a personal commendation.

Call me crazy, but I doubt that John Howard would ever have had the courage to go to battle himself, let alone make the extraordinary decision to voluntarily endanger his own life like Trooper Donaldson did. But Abbott reckons he had moral courage, and moral courage is betterer than physical courage, so Howard is the better man.

Brazen.

(Oh, hang on. I’ve just realised that Abbott made these remarks at the Young Liberal conference. Those über-conservative little national service-loving twirps would’ve been eating out of Tony’s hand.)

There really is nothing I can say about this. Well, I can, but it mainly consists of words like “fucking” and “cunts”. 

So, caption time. Tell me, Grods Readers, what are these two big dickwads thinking in this photo ? Or you can just caption the photo. No winners, just the freedom to go crazy.

The title of this post? It’s from the brilliant “The Mateship” from the Keating! The Musical, er, musical. You can watch it here.

Former Prime Minister John Howard is set to receive the US Medal Of Freedom from outgoing President George W. Bush. Of course, the award has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Howard was one of only a few leaders who pledged his full support for the flailing President in the face of overwhelming opposition from most of the world.

The Medal Of Freedom is awarded to people who “work to improve the lives of their citizens and… promote democracy, human rights and peace abroad.”

I could only fit one link on each “achievement”, so what are some other examples of John Howard’s commitment to improving lives, promoting democracy, defending human rights, and fighting for peace?

UPDATE: Of John Howard, MK sez: “Humble as always.” The larfs!

The best thing about APEC Summits is seeing what ridiculous get-ups world leaders have to don for a photo op. More often than not, they have to wear something so bloody awful that it induces howls of “OH MY GOD!!! I WOULD NEVER BE SEEN DEAD IN THAT!!!” among ordinary folks like you and me, who will never been seen dead in these outfits because… well, let’s face it, we’re either too poor to rig an election or just simply born lucky.

Anyway, remember last year’s APEC Summit in Sydney and the embarrassingly god awful Drizabones that the world leaders had to pretend to be extremely thrilled to be seen in?

Renowned fashion icon John Howard made the Drizabone decision, “with counsel and good advice” from his wife Janette Howard and the APEC 2007 Taskforce. You remember Lil Johnny, right? This happy chappy:

Do you recall his haute couture sense now?

Anyway, yeah, that’s the guy who was responsible for those raincoats at APEC 07:

But really, were the Drizabones any better than the ponchos served at this year’s APEC Summit in Peru, I ask you?

The Drizabones don’t look so bad after all, do they?

John Howard has been traveling a lot since he got turfed. You can’t blame him, really. By last November – even in his own electorate – Australians were less than enthused about the fella. But over in America, wingnuts staring down the possibility of an Obama presidency just love him.

If you dare, check out the video at PajamasTV where Johnny explains how the media were all agin’ him. (I think it was taken just after he got that award that Bron was talking about)

Highlights abound. Not least among them is the premise of the thing: that Howard had a “contentious relationship with the press” which “wasn’t a whole lot better than the Republican party’s in the US”.

Now, my memory isn’t what it once was, but I could have sworn that John had a few media outlets very much on side. Just for a start I recall a national newspaper openly campaigning for him, friendly columnists in practically every major paper, a good relationship with the family who owned Channel 9 and The Bulletin for most of his tenure, and a bunch of right-wing shock jocks cheering him on. So why would JWH think the meedja were out to get him?

HOWARD: It is a reality in all of our societies that the majority of people who go into the media have a centre-left disposition, that’s just the reality. Not all of them, and there are a significant number of remarkable exceptions to that rule.

Yes, there are many significant and remarkable exceptions to this rule, Mr Former PM.

HOWARD: You need as much diversity as you can have in the media.

Stuff like cross-media ownership restrictions can help with that.

HOWARD: In talkback radio you have a different attitude, a different spirit.

Indeed. Then, with a cheeky grin:

HOWARD: On occasion I accused particular outlets of having a particular bent… From time to time when I’ve been involved in a heavy debate or a heavy campaign I’ve made some remarks about certain outlets in Australia that have identified them with the Labor Party.

Who could he be possibly have been making these mischievous allegations about?

So then there’s some painful, faux-blokey banter about the Olympics and vegemite and Jamaica, after which as quickly as he appeared, the Man of Steel is gone. That leaves the Internet TV guys to talk about how awesum he is in absentia.

PJTV GUY: His single quality is his moral courage, his ability to see right from wrong, and say it plainly.

Hmmmmmm. Are you sure?

OTHER PJTV GUY: My daughter is now in Australia… and she says he’s actually thought of very kindly by the people of Australia who still think of him being a towering leadership figure.

I dunno. I can think of some people who don’t remember him that fondly.

Nothing.

Except that the American Freedom Alliance last week awarded the recently and gloriously deposed Australian Prime Minister, John W. Howard, with the so-called “prestigious annual Winston S. Churchill Medal of Freedom Award” in Los Angeles.

I read this and I wondered, what’s a right-wing/conservative American “think-tank” organisation doing giving out awards using the name of a long-dead two-time British Prime Minister?

And who the hell are the American Freedom Alliance? Instinct told me that they’ll no doubt be a bunch of neo-cons, pro-war, individual liberty loving, “freedom” loving hawks.

I was on the right path. (John Howard being in attendance to accept an award for “being ‘a strong ally of the United States’” was a big clue.)

The American Freedom Alliance’s mission is to promote the free exchange of ideas, freedom of inquiry and freedom of conscience among the practitioners of the world’s religions.  It seeks to build alliances between such communities and people of faith in order to protect and defend common values, principles and ideals.   Its programs, publications and websites explore the means by which peoples of faith around the world can protect their ethical principles and moral values against the scourge of  anti-Semitism, anti-Zionism, coercion, penalties for blasphemy and fascist ideologies.

(source)

OK, fair enough. But if they really want to promote these commendable values, what about the scourge of anti-Muslim sentiment (or against anyone with a Middle Eastern complexion, for that matter) that is so prevalent these days? I needn’t remind you of Howard’s shameless and xenophobic Muslim-baiting over the years during his draconian reign. Something tells me that they promote freedom of religion — as long as it’s not Islam. Well, if you look at the profile of their “Fellows“, particularly that of Robert Spencer. He is a director of Jihad Watch.  He has written “six books, eight monographs, and well over two hundgred articles about jihad and Islamic terrorism”. Check out the titles of his books:

• The Truth About Muhammad
  
• The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades)
• Islam Unveiled: Disturbing Questions About the World’s Fastest Growing Faith
  
• Onward Muslim Soldiers: How Jihad Still Threatens America and the West
• Inside Islam: A Guide for Catholics (coauthored with Daniel Ali)
• The Myth of Islamic Tolerance: How Islamic Law Treats Non-Muslims (essay collection)

Oh, and the Winston S. Churchill Medal of Freedom?

… is awarded annually to a current or past leader of a Western democracy who has demonstrated resolve in confronting threats to democracy, freedom and the survival of the West. It is named after the British statesman and author Sir Winston Churchill who, in the 1930s, stood almost alone in Britain in recognizing the threat of a resurgent Germany under Adolf Hitler and who forcefully opposed his own government’s policy of appeasement.

(source)

John Howard demonstrated resolve in confronting threats to democracy, freedom and the survival of the West? Get fucked.

The gutless little wonder just did whatever Dubya told him to do.

The American Australian Association’s website, in talking about this award night, described John Howard as thus:

While in office, Mr. Howard forcefully articulated his government’s position that appeasement of both rogue regimes and ideologies that threaten democratic life would not be tolerated. For those stands he won wide admiration throughout the Western world.

Throughout the Western world? OK. The Bush White House would have enjoyed having a little and very willing lap dog, but is that admiration? Dunno, go ask ‘em. The British? Who the hell knows what’s in Blair and Brown’s heads these days? Um… I guess the “Western world” would consist of the laughable “Coalition of the Willing” (or the “The Coalition of the Coerced, Bribed, and Intimidated” as Michael Moore called them), because I sure as hell don’t recall, say, France or Germany commending Howard for standing up for the values of the Western world.

There was this one time in grade five that I desperately wanted some help in an English comprehension test, so I looked around me to find out whose test papers I could see. Unfortunately, only the writing of the dumbest kid in class was visible, leaving me with no choice but to plagiarise this John kid’s work.

Turns out Canadian Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, has had the same problem as me.

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper once gave a speech that was copied heavily from an address by John Howard.

Mr Harper has become embroiled in a plagiarism row after his former speechwriter admitted copying a speech in support of the US-led Iraq war by Mr Howard.

[...]

In a statement, the staffer apologised for being “overzealous in copying segments of another world leader’s speech” and said his bosses at the time were unaware he had done so.

Speaking in parliament on March 20, 2003, Mr Harper, then in opposition, delivered an almost “verbatim copy” of a speech by then Australian prime minister Mr Howard two days earlier, the Liberals said.

As my grade five teacher said to me after I handed in a copy of John’s work: “You’ll never fly like an eagle if you’re surrounded by turkeys.”

Well, thanks for making it hard to pick a winner, people. No one bribed me and I have been forced to select winners for third, second and first place with no help whatsoever. This is not how we on teh Left operate!!!!11!!

Here was the picture:

Here are the winners:

In third place is Ray Dixon with this apt interpretation of Costello’s expression:

“Why me?” Peter Costello takes umbridge at being forced to sit next to the corpse at the State funeral.

Ray would have made it into second place if only he had spelled “umbrage” correctly. Never mind, better luck next time, Ray.

In second place is Ross with this spot-on observation about Peter Costello’s balls:

Former Prime Minister and Member for Bennelong John Howard cops a quick, discrete feel and is happily reassured that former Treasurer Peter Costello is still missing both testicles.

Similar to Ray, Ross would have made it into first place if only he had used the correct “discreet” instead of “discrete”. Never mind, better luck next time, Ross.

Finally, in first place is Bridgit Gread, for getting all teh speeling n grammer rite:

Leads for Australian re-make of Rain Man announced.

Unfortunately, I haven’t come up with a prize or anything, Bridgit, so never mind, better luck next time.

Honourable mentions go to: Wah, Idlaviv, Ron, Magic Bellybutton, Bruce, Tim, keri from her phone, Prophet, John Surname, Dam Buster of Preston, Andy B and Mikey. Who are all, of course, everyone else who contributed a caption.

Commendations for making observations and other comments go to: Jeremy, Bridgit Gread, joe2 and The Editor.

Thank you, all. Now piss off (unless you have a belated bribe).

UPDATE: Since the third place winner, Ray Dixon, is being an ungrateful wrench, I have decided to use my powers to knock him off the perch and place the runner up into third place instead.

Wah, take your spot on the third place perch (and don’t fuckin’ complain), for your caption entry:

Peter Costello remains tight lipped as John Howard denies all knowledge of appalling fart in church.

See what happens when no one offers bribes?

If former dynamic duo John Howard and Peter Costello have buried the hatchet since their famous post-election spat, they were still doing their best to hide it yesterday.

The occasion was the state funeral for former Victorian premier Lindsay Thompson at St Paul’s Cathedral in Melbourne.

[source]

Still?

Get over it, boys. Feel free to rip each other’s eyes out.

OK, folks, caption it.

Best caption and runner-ups announced sometime Monday evening 28 July 2008. (Bribes happily accepted)

“Hold all my calls, Bernard.

“Oh, and hand me my apologetics hat — it’s going to be a long day.”

The Labor government has announced its intention to ram 22 pieces of legislation through the House of Representatives this week, necessitating 10pm sittings of Parliament. The opposition, through Joe Hockey, has claimed that the rushed timetable will not allow sufficient debate of legislation enabling things such as FuelWatch and equal benefits for gaymosexual couples. The government, through Anthony Albanese, has hit back accusing the opposition of hypocrisy due to its habit under John Howard of doing the exact same thing with legislation covering areas such as industrial relations and asylum seekers.

I was highly critical of John Howard’s government when it dodged scrutiny and debate of its legislation by using its numbers to force it through Parliament as quickly as possible; it was anti-democracy and bad for Australia. But Labor using the primary school argument of “they did it first so we’re going to do it as well” makes a total mockery of Kevin Rudd’s pre-election rhetoric that his party would restore back to government the respectability that had been eroded during the Howard years.

Kevin Rudd and Labor should allow proper debate of their legislation in Parliament or else they risk lowering themselves to the democracy-hating levels that John Howard used to enjoy flirting with.

The lame-duck Bush bandwagon is still in denial about its abuse and misuse of intelligence when deciding to invade Iraq in 2003:

“We acted on the intelligence that we had, and that the entire world had,” spokeswoman Dana Perino told reporters after Mr Rudd’s alleged “abuse of intelligence information” led to regime change in Baghdad.

“No-one else in the world, no other government, had different information and so we acted based on what was the threat that was presented to us.”

It’s a strange kind of zero-sum game when you invade foreign nations on the basis of dubious or thinly-extrapolated evidence of WMD, then argue ‘Well nobody had any evidence that there weren’t WMD…’ Apparently in this ludicrous new world order, you are likely to be invaded for possessing something unless someone else can prove that you don’t have it. And of course, no WMD were ever found, despite some flimsy and often deceitful attempts to suggest that stockpiles once existed and were somehow destroyed or spirited out of the country.

Hindsight and history will paint the Iraq War as a foreign policy folly of significant proportions. It has brought the deaths of 4,000 US soldiers, more than 1,000 civilian contractors and an inestimable number of Iraqi soldiers, police and civilians. It has cost the US in the region of $3 trillion at a time of economic decline and domestic need, such as Hurricane Katrina. The stabilisation of Iraq is now inextricably hinged to an American military presence that, once withdrawn, will see Iraq descend into a sectarian quagmire. There will be gross regional instability that will almost certainly draw in Iran, Syria, the northern Kurds and Turkey, not to mention remnant al Qaeda elements.

None of that belies the contribution of many elements of the multinational force, including the 14,000 Australians who have served in Iraq. It’s worth celebrating their thoughtful contribution in the wake of a thoughtless invasion. But it should also be acknowledged that Iraq is a patchwork of local, tribal and sectarian divisions – some more febrile and unstable than others – and that our zone in the south was considerably more manageable than Baghdad or those in north and central Iraq. We should be thankful because this has allowed us to withdraw without a single military death – but we should also recognise that it wasn’t only the professionalism of our soldiers that permitted this.

We are better off out of it and well clear of our fawning support for US action there, one of John Howard’s repugnant legacies. As for Iraq itself, Andrew Bolt might think the war is over, but I suspect it’s the ‘end of the beginning’ rather than the other way round.

The other day I was having a conversation about one of those moral panic issues — you know, things like binge drinking, drugs, emos etc. Anyway, I listened to the other person panicking for a while, nodding patiently, before I said (very tongue in cheek) “I blame the internet.” Only problem is that the other person didn’t think it was a joke and agreed entirely. You see, for many people civilisation as we know it began to crumble the moment pr0n started being transfered digitally over phone lines instead of on glossy paper in newsagents.

When my students are doing research assignments and I ask for their sources at least half of them write down “Google” or “the internet”, causing me to go off on yet another angry rant about how Google and the tubes are tools to locate resources rather than resources in their own right. But I guess when supposedly intelligent adults can’t differentiate between tools, the content that tools communicate, or the intent and behaviour of the tools’ users, then why should I expect kids to tell the difference?

A classic example today from the allegedly intelligent adults responsible for running our country.

THE Rudd Government has admitted its high-speed broadband network could lead to an increase in cyber-bullying and other online crimes against children.

This shit moves me to tears of frustration. As Craig said to me in an SMS about this article this morning, “Maybe we should leave the tubes exactly the way they are? That will protect Teh Children.” On the one hand I know that the government wants to be seen to be tough on cyber-bullying and that necessitates a certain level of Today Tonight-style reactionary populism, but on the other hand it makes me despair when our government stoops to such anti-intellectual and anti-sense statements such as that one.

But then again, what choice does the government have when the media just adore whipping up the public into fits of moral panic about the internet and its emo-inducing ways? Every time there’s a case of bullying in schools that’s taken place (wholly or in part) on an internet website the popular media launches into its “the internet/ MySpace/ YouTube/ MSN/ mobile phones are evil” argument. But bullying has always been in schools, it will always (unfortunately) be in schools, and whether it takes place behind the bike sheds or on an internet chat room it’s the bullying that’s the problem and not the medium through which it occurs.

However, it’s important to note that the media, politicians and other organisations with influence don’t always run the tubes=evil line. Sometimes it’s just a total lack of understanding about what the internet is and what it does, resulting in a smack-your-head-it’s-so-stupid kind of reaction.

A couple of months ago when I was preparing to hold a school-based Australia 2020 summit to feed into the main summit I received a primer booklet from the government to help prepare kids for the topics being discussed. At the bottom of each section there was a list of resources to assist in lesson planning. Listed in each section were some books and government department websites, along with the words “blogs” and “wikis”. Not a list of specific blogs and wikis that had information relevent to the topic; just those two words because some clueless dipshit in the education ministry had some vague notion of Web2.0 and had heard that tha kidz like to use blogs.

In the lead up to last year’s election both major parties “embraced” so-called new media in an effort to connect with younger voters. As John Howard viciously discovered, simply using new media tools such as YouTube will not change consumers’ minds about the quality of your content. And setting up a Facebook profile as a tool for connecting with voters is useless unless you know how to use it and what to communicate through it.

Even religion — smarting from the way that younger generations are beginning to turn away in droves — is embarrassing itself by attempting to use technological tools to reconnect with tha kidz. The Catholic Church has well and truly entered the 1990s by discovering the power of mobile phone SMS. They have been sending text messages to worshippers in the false hope that using semi-literacy for Bible passages will bring them instant cred.

But I suppose the internet and the internet ignorant have one thing in common: they’re both tools.

Will you please just give up the keys to the Lodge and fuck off?

Just like people who aren’t satisfied with one birthday a year and have to have 13 of them, the unceremoniously dumped former Prime Minister of Australia, John Howard, can’t accept that it’s over. His grand farewell tour of the world rolled on into its sixth month with another farewell gig in Sydney last night.

In his speech, to party faithful in Sydney last night, Mr Howard also said that despite the “propaganda” of the Labor Party, his government had been kinder to the poor, the underprivileged and low-income earners than the Hawke and Keating governments before it.

[...]

Mr Howard was speaking at a tribute dinner organised in his honour to raise funds for the NSW Liberal Party.

I’m not even going to comment on that.

But here’s a bit of unintentional hilarity from Annabel Stafford at The Age.

The 1200-strong crowd, which included Liberal heavyweights (sic) such as Dr [Brendan] Nelson…

LOL!