DUCKPOND

Or rather once it is recognized that slime is his style, his comments as reported by the ABC are to be expected.

Easy to recall that he has won elections on the basis of racist insinuations that as he well knows will magnify existing prejudices, which I think in context is fair enough to describe as slime. Such it seems is the nature of the man that he could stoop to that moral level while claiming to be the leader of the country.

In my opinion, in these he should argue from the general principle, and emphasize that it applies to all. This statement is not an example:

“We want people, when they come to Australia, to adopt Australian ways.”

I think he is talking about the social norms that are common to most, if not all, at least Western societies. On that basis he is exhibiting ignorance and intolerance of other civilizations, and if not,what is he talking about? It is not as if Australian ways of behaving, unsurprisingly so very similar to other human beings, do not display diversity related to such social variables as class and ethnicity. Or is it the Australian ways of the Anglo-Celts, ignoring for example the far longer footprint on this continent of the Aboriginal peoples.

I am curious as to wonder why he is so desperate for a distraction. Surely, it could not be the AWB scandal, which we are confidently lead to believe he knew nothing and was told nothing.

It is wonderfully ironic, not to mention amusing, that the person who is lying prostate in the metaphorical, verbal gutter, sucking it all in, wants to stay in his position for as long as he can, and will do anything to stay there.

21 February 2006 – Howard’s arrogance knows no boundaries, as evidence of the report by the ABC. If I am fair, he has not quite reached the dizzying heights of personal immunity demonstrated by Richard Bruce Cheney, Vice President of the United States. Soon, if not now, the rule of law, will mean nothing.

Still you have to say about John Howard some of his arguments are cute. Courts, and I suspect, Royal Commissions work not just with the paper trail but perhaps more importantly cross-examination. I suppose it is fair to say that Howard, unlike for example Bob Hawke, has little experience in court environment, so he is outside his comfort zone.

You can might place ready money that Howard will not be held to account. As I have mentioned previously just one more example of failing to responsibility. So much for accountability and transparency as essential to liberal democracy, when spin and media management are just the thing.

Now John Howard has set the precedent those prime ministers who follow will I expect, independent of party, accept his standards. Somehow what we have to do as the electorate is to re-establish and set standards, if we want a credible democracy to survive.

Tim Dunlop has two posts, here and here, on the unfolding saga that is the Cole Inquiry. John Howard was very brave when he set up this Inquiry and when he appointed Mr Cole to lead it. I suspect political geniuses do not make these mistakes, but I suppose it is possibilly his worst political mistake in ten years, and it had nothing to do with the Oppposition?