...is where the authors are coming from. Both Stephen Mayne and Christian Kerr (the two people responsible for most of the Crikey political content) are both former Liberal party staffers, now disaffected former party members, some would say with axes to grind. Some would say there is nothing more dangerous than a former party member who feels they've missed out on what was due to them (case in point Russel Gault). Then again, disclosure of political affiliations has never been a strong point for the media. While those politically active would know, ow many average punters would be aware that Kerry O'Brien - the ABC's current affairs figure head, as well as the Courier Mail's Dennis Atkins were formerly staffers for Labor figures (Gough Whitlam and Wayne Goss respectively I believe). Once you've accepted party-tainted coin, how can you then ask anyone to accept that the commentary and analysis you deliver is free of bias anymore? Once you cross that line you should never be allowed to go back.
Now as for the election. My blogging on this subject has been non-existant, mostly because I've been too busy working to be bothered writing anything. However, I will say this. I don't believe a man who deems to acceptable to not only go on holidays with your second wife while still married to your first wife and still living in her home, not to mention a man who deems it acceptable to solve a personal dispute by resorting to violence and breaking another man's arm has the suitable character to hold the highest office in this land (I don't mean the Australian cricket captaincy...).
This may be some-what incoherent - but I'm off to a polling booth and don't have time to proof-read properly. And unlike Nick, I'll try to refrain from posting this twice... ;)
Now as for the election. My blogging on this subject has been non-existant, mostly because I've been too busy working to be bothered writing anything. However, I will say this. I don't believe a man who deems to acceptable to not only go on holidays with your second wife while still married to your first wife and still living in her home, not to mention a man who deems it acceptable to solve a personal dispute by resorting to violence and breaking another man's arm has the suitable character to hold the highest office in this land (I don't mean the Australian cricket captaincy...).
This may be some-what incoherent - but I'm off to a polling booth and don't have time to proof-read properly. And unlike Nick, I'll try to refrain from posting this twice... ;)
2 comments:
Aye, I agree Mark Latham is a lousy choice for PM. We merely differ on whether or not the alternative is worse.
As for the double post - such are the joys of contending with dial-up :)
The thing is - I can't comprehend how anyone can consider a man who's idea of an education and a health policy is to attempt to reignite a supposed class war could be called a more suitable candidate.
There's alot you could complain about when it comes to Howard, but at a time when countries such as the United States and Great Britain have experienced economic slow-downs, Australia's economy has been kept bubbling along. Unemployment's half that of what it was under Labor. He has to get some credit for that.
Post a Comment