A champagne socialist reflects on Western culture and the Universe... and whilst gazing at his navel, he comes up with a lot of useless lint. It is the fruits of this navel-gazing that form the substance of this blog.
Published on October 10, 2004 By Champas Socialist In Politics
The ALP ran an excellent campaign...once voting was closed. There was McMullan and Beazley and everyone pointing out that this line about interest rates was a big LIE. But where were these statements over the past 6 weeks? It should have been plastered across our ad breaks. We should have seen the clips of all our leading economists pointing out that Howard was talking out his arse on this. It was an excellent opportunity to point out that the lying rodent was at it again.

When the Libs ran that ad about interest rates always rising under Labor, why did Labor not loudly point out that when Howard was Treasurer they went up, that when Whitlam was PM they reached lower rates than the current rates, that interest rates were falling under Keating. Last night McMullan kept pointing out that it was Hawke and Keating’s management of the economy that had set up this position we are in now and that therefore the ALP can manage the economy. But why did they not do this for 6 weeks running? Too little too late ALP! And many Australians will suffer as a result of your ineffective campaign.

Latham has done an excellent job at restraining himself and showing himself to be mature and responsible. But at times this went too far. One of the weaknesses to be exploited about Howard has been that he has turned the Libs into an autocracy, as former President John Valder points out. So when Latham was asked about his inexperience, Latham’s response should not have simply been ‘Well no I don’t have experience at lying to the Australian people’. That played into Howard’s game of making this a US Presidential-style battle. What Latham should have pointed out is that the ALP are not exactly a new party!!! eg.

‘Well yes I am less experienced in Federal Politics, but Labor is a team with a great balance of experience and enthusiasm. People like Kim Beazley and Bob McMullan have a lot of experience in Government and I value their contributions to the Labor team’.

Latham is undoubtedly their best choice as leader. But they must emphasise their team. Labor has several talented frontbenchers. Use them! Where has Jenny Macklin been? After her excellent performance as Health Minister, she has become a shrinking violet, happy to stand next to Latham and smile as Education Minister. Why is the unpopular Crean in such a crucial portfolio? Finance spokesperson Bob McMullan is a much stronger performer, and even I have more faith in him.

Kevin Rudd, who is undoubtedly one of the strongest performers in the ALP, must be used. Rudd needs to be out there all the time to point out that Downer is a klutz at foreign relations, that Howard has completely ruined our relations with Asia and that only Labor can ensure national security in the region. Downer has made Asian leaders nervous and unwilling to help us. Only Labor has the negotiation skills to maintain relations with Asia. Labor should be at pains to point this out.

They have used their asset of Beazley, but not enough. He is undoubtedly in the best position for him as Defence Minister. But Beazley’s relationship with the US is excellent and shows how you don’t need to be all the way with LBJ to maintain ANZUS. Beazley is a strong figure who can make Australia safer because he can negotiate with Asia as well as the US and UK.

As for campaign mistakes, when they released that forests policy, they needed to really emphasise that they were forking money into retraining, to help the loggers who would lose their jobs. They needed to emphasise that the forests would create more long-term job opportunities as a tourist venue than as a logging resource. Maybe they should have even put money into new growth forests to support the industry.

Even many members of the Liberal Party have come out against this extremist refugee policy of Vanstone’s. Why did Labor not sell their moderate position? The racists aren’t going to vote for Labor anyway.

Beyond bulk billing and Medicare Old, why did Labor not have policies on health that were publicised? There was no mention of the fact that the Libs have forced everyone onto private health and that private premiums have risen under Tony Abbott.

This election is gone. But within hours, some members of the ALP have identified the things they need to start saying. They need to sell their team and get out there and be strong. They need to be critical of the Liberal Party. Latham is achieving good stuff as leader. They must begin work towards hacking away at the Liberals’ support now!!!!

The Not Happy John campaign in Bennelong shows what Labor can achieve if they put in more work. Imagine if they’d put the same effort in in Moreton and other marginals! I predicted that Bennelong would be a bit of a waste of resources for NHJ. But the same campaign in other important electorates could well have swept Australians up in a popular movement against Howard, away from this hardline Right position.

If Latham is ready, then he needs to be ready to start working towards victory in 2007 today.

Condolences and good luck ALP!

Comments
on Oct 11, 2004
What a bloody sore loser, Latham got his arse kicked; the ALP got it kicked even harder. I don’t know if you’ve noticed but that is the fourth consecutive election that the Coalition has had swing towards it. And yet you still manage to crap on about how bad JH is, give credit where credit is due, if he was a bad as you say he was then how could he increase at every election?

Now here come your conspiracies, he cheated, he lied, and he deceived. If he has, then deal with it – Newsflash – He’s a politician. And on the “lies” are you saying that he changed as soon as he made it to office? He wasn’t called Honest John for nothing. Did he become evil as soon as he made it in?

Now for the Labour campaign that everyone thought was so great… until the night of Saturday October 9th. Now everyone like yourself is lining up to say where he went wrong. Where were the people like you before the election? Sure there were a few right wing journalists pointing out he was actually botching things but other then that there was squat all. Everyone thought he had it won and in the bag. I could get quotes from every major, and probably every minor paper out there stating that he’d won the campaign. Reality check - if you win the campaign you win the election.

There was McMullan and Beazley and everyone pointing out that this line about interest rates was a big LIE.
If I believe something to be true and then pass it on to you am I lying? Howard did say during the campaign that it wasn’t an expert saying that it was his belief. Now you could get him in trouble for not checking it out first but there are two major problems.

Number 1 problem. It would make you a hypocrite. How? For starters I’ve given you facts, not myths or made up stories on why there is no stolen generation. Further to that I’ve outright challenged you to find evidence to back yourself (if you haven’t cottoned on to the challenge then here’s your chance) and yet you still proclaim it to be true.

Number 2 problem. Anyone who actually did their research before the election would see that was what he said and that analysts are actually predicting a rise no matter who made in. The problem here is that everyone I know who voted Liberal knew this stuff anyway, sure they’re may been some who didn’t but I’m betting that the vast majority of voters who didn’t know the facts voted firstly for the Greens then Labour because they made the most outrageous claims without actually having proof. And don’t try to tell me that the Greens can back their claims or I’ll shove so many facts on your plate you’ll be left to pick on what cereal I have for breakfast.

As for them not responding to the claims it probably wouldn’t have gone too well for them because anything they said would have had to of started with a “Yes, but...” because like it or not the rates did hit the levels the levels claimed. And how easy would it have been to point out that things have changed since Whitlam’s day, may not have been right but it wouldn’t have kept people thinking Liberal was better.

Latham has done an excellent job at restraining himself and showing himself to be mature and responsible.
The fact he has to restrain himself is kinda scary. Could he keep it up for 3 years? Doubt it.

That played into Howard’s game of making this a US Presidential-style battle.
Howard’s game? Who you kidding? Latham tried everything possible to win the popularity contest using like shows like Rove Live and The Footy Show as well as magazines like Inside Sport to spruik his “funky” image.

As for where he went wrong, you forgot stuff like not putting policies in to be properly funded. Less then half Labour policies went in on time. This included the Medicare Gold splurge that we only heard the results of on Friday afternoon, and still only due to the Department of Finance working it’s arse off. If they put it in on time we would have heard the Treasurer saying “This policy is underfunded, undercosted, unsustainable and unbelievable. This afternoon the Finance Department has shown that to be the case…" on at least Thursday, allowing the public a better chance to find out Labour blew its budget by 700 million and that only in it’s first year.

His biggest mistake was announcing his “green” policies so late in the campaign. In the final days of the campaign all that was in the media was how the Greens wanted it to be better and what the Coalition was proposing, sweet nothing about Labour and their policies.

Latham didn’t just lose the election, Howard won it.
on Oct 12, 2004
A quickie, because there is much to be said about your wrong-ness fishhead. I can't help but notice that when I google some of these main thrusts, the same name keeps coming up. You might've heard of him, although I've never really read any of his stuff (don't read the Herald personally). A journalist by the name of Andrew Bolt - you should check him out, it's surprising how in tune your views are with his.

That aside:

The Labour budget balanced. Costello staked his economic credibility on an opinion that the labour tax package was under-funded. He was wrong. I hereby name him - Can't Count Costello. He picked the wrong one, the Gold package was underfunded by the same amount the tax package was overfunded - meaning a balanced budget. Trust me, I'm a mathematician.

I commend Champas' ability to criticise the party he supports where that criticism is due - it's a nice change from political party fan-boys who deem their political masters as sent by God himself.

If I believe something to be true and then pass it on to you am I lying?

If you had reason to suspect that you were lying, then yes. If you'd been told that the information was suspicious, or that all the experts in the field disagreed with you and you KNEW that they knew more than you did, then yes - you are lying.

Now, take a chill pill and lie down. I assume you voted for the Liberals, and they won. You can relax a bit now.
on Oct 12, 2004
>>>And yet you still manage to crap on about how bad JH is, give credit where credit is due, if he was a bad as you say he was then how could he increase at every election?>>Number 2 problem. Anyone who actually did their research before the election would see that was what he said and that analysts are actually predicting a rise no matter who made in. >>Now here come your conspiracies, he cheated, he lied, and he deceived. If he has, then deal with it – Newsflash – He’s a politician. And on the “lies” are you saying that he changed as soon as he made it to office? He wasn’t called Honest John for nothing. Did he become evil as soon as he made it in?>> I’ve given you facts, not myths or made up stories on why there is no stolen generation.>>>Everyone thought he had it won and in the bag. I could get quotes from every major, and probably every minor paper out there stating that he’d won the campaign. Reality check - if you win the campaign you win the election.<<<

Nearly everyone I know, including Champas, thought that John Howard would win. Why are you attacking an arguement Chapas never made? Who cares if some paper thought he won the campaign? Champas never said that. Oh that's right, it's called attacking straw men. Something you are very good at.

I'm bored, I could be here all day. At the end of the day you win because John Howard did. All I'm saying is he didn't deserve to win on the "merits" of his government. Hope you have fun filling out your BAS form.






on Oct 13, 2004
Nick I have no idea where you get the idea that FishHead simply regurgitates that wonderful beacon of democracy that is Andrew Bolt. No idea at all.

But FishHead as a Liberal Party lackey you have absolutely no room to start yelling "sore loser". The Libs are the ones who blocked supply because they lost to Whitlam and couldn't handle the fact that he ran the country differently (shock horror). No this is not the same as what the Democrats do. Given your complete inability to understand foreign relations that you have already demonstrated, I'm not sure if you'll follow this, but blocking supply is about as extreme as it gets. And even when Whitlam won a second term, Fraser still popped around to the Governor General to talk about I think 'well may we say' you know what. Never has there been a bigger bout of sore loserism than that displayed by your beloveds in the 70s.
However, I'm not saying Howard didn't win for god's sake. Congrats FishHead, jeez do you feel better? Or do I also have to suddenly convert to Conservatism because the Australian population has shown me the light on Saturday? This is not the first dirty campaign and it won't be the last. This was a comment on the ALP's campaign. which I thought was poor. That's all.

But don't try to convince me that that's because Australians are politically informed. I ran a lesson at Uni once where no one in the class knew anything about the differences between the functions of the Senate and the Reps, let alone understand all the issues pertinent to an election. Just look at the Chaser's "This Person Votes". There were people voting for Latham because they don't like Johnny's eyebrows and people voting Liberal because they'd seen the L plate ad the night before and swallowed and quoted it verbatim (as perhaps you have FishHead).

Are you going to tell me that just because someone wins Government they're not so bad?!?! I suggest you take a look at the history of some of Australia's first Prime Ministers and the comments they made simply for a few extreme examples that make Hanson look moderate. But then, FishHead too makes Hanson look moderate.
Oh and btw, did it ever occur to you that maybe I just found your arguments about the stolen generation unconvincing in the light of the many other things I have read and heard about it (and btw, I've never even seen Rabbit Proof Fence so get off your high horse about it).