editorial
16 Sep 2008
Malcolm the Inevitable
The sideshow is over. With Malcolm Turnbull as leader of the Opposition, the Rudd Government is going to have to step up its performance
So that's the end of Brendan Nelson.While the last couple of weeks have demonstrated that there are very few certainties in politics, the eventual demise of Nelson as Opposition Leader has happened exactly as everyone predicted.
It is almost surprising just how unsurprising it all is.
While it's traditional to pay respects to a fallen leader, and take a moment to recognise the contribution that leader made to the great institution of our democracy, with Brendan Nelson it's a little harder than usual.
Commentators are being circumspect in their reflections over the Nelson legacy. Really, there's not a lot to point to. In its kinder moments, history may record Nelson as the bloke who did it tough in the first 10 months after losing office, leading a Liberal Opposition that could have done a lot worse.
But there's no way anyone can say he was wasted in his role as shock trooper in an impossible situation. He was never going to get a lot further than he did.
Malcolm Turnbull seems to see his elevation as the next logical step in manifesting his prime ministerial destiny.
In seeing his leadership of the party as inevitable, as with so many other things, Turnbull seems to be in spooky agreement with the majority of Australians - another big change from Nelson.
In his acceptance speech in the Liberal Party room, Turnbull was keen to portray himself as a man who knows what financial adversity feels like, to undercut this idea shared by many that he's a jet-setting born-to-ruler with a silver spoon in each cheek.
Whatever. The fact is there's nothing about Turnbull's history, or that of the party he's leading, that suggests he has much interest in social justice issues, at least not as most people who use that term understand it to mean.
The real effect of Turnbull's assumption of the leadership will be to end the political sideshow that Neslon's stewardship had become, and bring some genuine policy debate back into focus. That's the best-case scenario here.
On issues like climate change and the republic, Turnbull has a much sharper understanding of where the public is at. This is partly because he shares these concerns.
While the republic may be a symbolic issue of little real importance to the daily lives of Australians, we do seem to care quite a bit about it, and we'll get talking about it again, given the opportunity.
Climate change is another matter entirely. Nelson never grasped that most of the country smells the suicidal self-interest behind the denialism and the foot-dragging of the business lobby and the right wing. Most Australians aren't interested in holding the go-slow lobby accountable for the fact that so little is being done, they just want to see some action. They're out there in their millions making decisions all the time with climate change in mind. The fact that Nelson chose not to respond to this was an appalling and unforgivable miscalculation.
But that's in the past now.
From Turnbull's point of view, the outlook is pretty good. He can't easily do any worse than Nelson in the polls - he's already ahead - and he's pretty safe between now and the next election. While it's always been clear that there are quite a few in his own party who profoundly dislike him, any further challenges are unthinkable.
From Kevin Rudd's point of view, it looks like things are about to get a fair bit harder. The free ride Labor enjoyed at times thanks to the fact that the public had very little respect for Nelson is over.
Against someone who actually agrees climate change is a serious issue, he can't hold himself up as our sole eco-defender. If we're lucky, Turnbull will actually engage with Rudd on this, and the debate may become more about who's doing the most in the face of the crisis, rather than who can keep the business lobby happiest.
So, welcome, Malcolm. As you said in acknowledging the contribution of your predecessor, the role of Leader of the Opposition is crucially important in the health of our democracy. We hope you'll try to do the right thing by the country.
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Newsvine
Facebook
Kwoff
Discuss this article
To participate in the discussion Sign in or Register
Go NM. Ahead of the game as usual.
That all being said about our Malcolm, it is far easier to be a leaker of embarrassing documents, a rouser of indignance and a policy reed, swaying with the electorate or Daily Telegraph, when you have no real responsibilities.
I think things might have gotten just a bit harder for Mr Turnbull as well. It is not just his elevation to leader that is inevitable. I predict his foot will be well lodged in his mouth by the end of next week.
Given the appallingly cautious approach of Rudd to most of the issues that matter to voters I suspect that Rudd’s will be a one-term government. Australians who grew more and more disappointed in Howard’s inaction on almost everything have been doubly disappointed in Rudd’s failure to offer anything that smacked of courage, let alone daring. He promised so much - well perhaps he didn’t promise much, but we needed a change so badly we assumed much would happen - but he’s offered so little. Yes, it’s early days, but there’s been no smell of excitement, of logs being unjammed, of plans being hatched, not even a trace of rhetoric. I reckon it will probably come down to a contest of ideas rather than a contest of left and right. And Rudd doesn’t seem to have any ideas.
"The fact is there’s nothing about Turnbull’s history, or that of the party he’s leading, that suggests he has much interest in social justice issues, at least not as most people who use that term understand it to mean."
Oh, indeed. Inner city lefties might think Turnbull is on their side, but he’s not. You might want to have a beer with him, but as George Bush showed, having a beer with someone is not enough reason to let them run the country.
That said, I think Rudd is in trouble. Turnbull is a winner if ever there was one.
Harry Malcolm in the middle might call in Whitlam’s son to help out. After all they ran a bank together. Politically versatile is Malcolm. and he did sign up new Liberal Party members at his own expense to toss out the sitting member. Not to forget him hiring a bus to take these new supporters to Canberra as a cheer squad when he made his maiden (not really virgin) speech..Nelson won’t join him on the front bench which is commendable. Nelson intends to hang around for when Turnbull gets rolled at the next election and the Libs return to Nelson as their leader.
Harry Morton Crikey says
Well that was efficient. Liberal MPs went in at 9am, and it was barely 25 minutes later that Sky — presumably alerted by a text-happy MP — was declaring Turnbull the winner. There was a wait until the result was formally declared: 45-41 to Turnbull, with Julie Bishop re-elected unopposed as Deputy Leader. Journalists milled about, swarming over any MP emerging from the party room.
"A great result for the party," declared Christopher Pyne, whose job, one suspects, hung on the result. Michael Ronaldson, numbers man for Turnbull, echoed the comment.
Going in, the tip had been that Turnbull, caught on the hop and given only a few hours to cement his support, would fall short. That was Nelson’s gameplan, and it was a reasonable one. The fact that Nelson lost shouldn’t obscure the fact that this was the smartest play available to him.
There was also talk that Nelson was planning a clean-out of his own office, particularly focussing on his chief of staff, Peter Hendy. Clearly, Nelson thought people other than himself were the problem. His party — narrowly — thought otherwise. The sympathy vote, the view that Nelson had not been given a fair crack, wasn’t strong enough against the reality that he needed to be removed for the Liberals to move forward.
At his press conference, attended by a large number of quite chipper Liberal MPs, an aggressive Turnbull indicated that there would be no immediate change in Coalition policy — including on the 5c a litre excise reduction proposal that was the basis for the first leadership flare up following the Budget. He did commit to the retention of the current – and, he claimed, Howard Government — emissions trading scheme policy. He emphasised his relatively poor background, and spoke about a "fair and free" society — they were, he claimed, inextricably linked – and one that would "empower and enable the enterprise of Australians."
Nelson himself is off to the backbench, as part "generational renewal" he said in an impressive final press conference. He pledged full support for Turnbull and declared himself — not entirely convincingly — satisfied with the loyalty he had got from Turnbull and Bishop. Nelson was his normal relaxed self. Hand it to the guy – he can take a beating and still come up smiling.
It also turns out that not everyone was taken by surprise last night. Nelson admitted that he had spoken with Peter Costello last night before announcing the spill. That might have been Costello’s last chance to grab the leadership, for the time being at least.
Nelson said he thought the spill was the right thing to do, noting that there was going to be no focus on policy issues until the leadership was resolved, and the financial crisis made it more imperative than ever that that happen. He’s right. For now, at least, the Opposition has a good story to tell, unclouded by the incessant speculation that has constituted much of political coverage for the last two months. In ALP Caucus, Julia Gillard, filling in for an absent PM, declared that it didn’t matter who led the Liberal Party. Ah, but it will, Deputy Prime Minister, it will
It was only Turnbull by 45 to 41. I predict he will get rolled by Costello and Nelson well before the next election.
Hi Dr Dog, I left a message for you at Sorry Pakistan, We Need to Bomb you too. It was just to say hello. I don’t know that Turnbull will be that stupid (I hope!) It’s just that as a Labor voter through and through. But fail to see how any government can do without a strong opposition, Hopefully Turnbull will provide it. I agree with Rowena that the dreaded Peter Costello will continue to hang around like a smell on the back benches.I dare say his chances to land a top job-if the opening ever existed- for the world’s greatest treasurer (choke, choke). A heap of major financial houses in the US have turned turtle since Costello’s job hunting began. Oops Peter. If the Yanks are so clever at finance, how is it they are so crooked into the bargain? Don’t take my word for this, the lovely John (the senile arsehole) McCain said it tonight on the tube.
Sorry about the typos in my comment. I’m tired and I’m off to bed.
Cheers Venise
We now have a millionaire laboral PM versus a multimillionaire
liberal PM. Does anyone doubt where future tax breaks will be focussed?
Forget about the median wage, the average wage will keep increasing, and these goons will be proud of it.
Pensioners are doing it tough, and the PM’s response?
"Ooh, I knooow. We’ll have to look at it, one day. In the fullness of time."
What happened to representatives actually being representative?
Oh, I remember. We had to give our pollies a huge number of pay rises, because "that is the only way we will attract quality applicants".
So what does that say about all the current pollies, who took on the job before the pay rises?
Representative government is now officially dead, in Australia.
Grim.
www.thecomensalist.com
Grim indeed!
I’ve been thinking about this overnight and I can’t see how it can be a bad thing that the opposition has a more competent, and certainly smarter, leader. If Big Mal Turnbull can pressure Rudd to get active then I can only applaud the move.
Also in terms of positives it looks like a republic must be back on the agenda, at some point. This long overdue change is probably more important than whether we have a Liberal or Labour government over the next ten years.
Apart from that yes Malcolm is a scary beast. As an original Inner City leftie I am under no illusions.
This guy was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and knows nothing about working families. Labor should ram that home.
I almost wept at Malcolm’s rag to riches sob story until I remembered the ruthless way he ousted the sitting member of Wentworth, his shonky deals in Tasmanian loggin and many other little foibles. He shows the ruthless drive for individual success that has brought down the global stock market. He is a bully but a successful one so the press drool over him. Rudd was so poor at one time that he got rheumatic fever , a third world disease now only found in impoverished indigenous Australians. Much of the Rudd wealth seems to be his wife’s , but neither were shonky wheeler dealers. Rudd is trying to introduce bills but with the one man band in the Senate, Fielding and the LIbs playing populist spoilers it is hard to achieve much. Howard controlled both houses for a couple of years and could do what he liked. Let us hope Malcolm can at least pass legislation like the Dental Bill and not oppose out of sheer politicing. Malcolm wants pension rises but voted against them a year ago. What does the man stand for except himself.
sorry not Tasmania the Solomon Islands.
I like the wit of Annabel Crabb’s in today’s SMH: "Fortunately for Turnbull, he was abandoned at the age of nine by his mother, who probably had no idea all those decades ago just what a handy future political service she was rendering her son."
That’s about it really, hardship-wise for Turnbull. And following his parents’ divorce, Turnbull went on to board at Sydney Grammar, arguably Sydney’s most elite (and expensive) academic private school, where he no doubt made many of the connections that have stood him in good stead ever since. Sure his Dad may have scrimped and saved for the privilege, but how many ordinary solo parents could manage that, no matter how keen they were or how hard they tried?
But he knows what it is like to rent a flat. A flat I tell you! Plus he knows what it is like to have very little money. He didn’t exactly define what he calls very little money.
For some it might be insufficient funds for nappies and baby formula, for Malcolm it could be that he couldn’t afford a voting share in a major financial institution. What counts is that he knows what it feels like.
I heard that he is even comfortable having a beer with regular people like you and me. Regular people! He is like a rich Ben Chifley.
I can’t wait until he gets access to Kirribilli so that he can invite me around for a BBQ, but he is so humble I am sure he would rather stay in a fibro holiday shack down Coogee way. What a guy.
danielsydney: I hate to point out the bleeding obvious to you. Kevin Rudd
has got just as much money as Malcolm Turnbull. It is possible, according to some journos that Rudd, thanks to his wife’s activities, has a lot more money overseas, than does Turnbull. Not because he’s anti working-man but because international finance needs working capital like that.And don’t rabbit on about the evils of the American banking and insurance companies. The bloody Yanks are so greedy they become crooked in their business dealings, international or not, making them the root cause of this threatened recession we are all about to be plunged into.
I am a devout Labor voter, because I’ve always thought Labor tries to give the impression that they actually care about societies whose members can be losers. It’s
the sort of compassion that is alien to the Coalition. However, after 9 months of poor matey Brendan Nelson, and the same 9 months of seeing the most limp-wristed opposition in Australia’s living memory: Can’t anyone see that without a strong opposition, at all stages of the process, popular perception especially, all governments fail.(If the Barking Cane-toad JWHoward had had a strong Labor leader to front up to him, Howard would never have lasted as long as he did. All Howard had in the way of opposition, was the screamingly ineffectual Peter Costello A man who had all the guts of a mushroom, and lived on the same heap of shit. The moral of the Kim Beazley saga should prove this point over, and over. WTF does it matter about Turnbull’s money? If he is that rich perhaps he wont be tempted to have his hands in the till. Sure, his attitude is a little hard to take (the divine right to rule, and all that jazz) but neither Turnbull or Rudd are silly people. And Malcolm T. was having Nelson for breakfast, before BNelson quit the field. If, by locking horns with someone as smart, intelligent and ruthless as each other, it could mean both Rudd and Turnbull will be lifting their games, to the benefit of both mens’ energies?
Or Dazz, are you one of these people who only want to see men whose abilities are to be seen, running and kicking balls.(preferably their own) on the footy field? Soccer field; any place that is frivolous, beer ridden, and with it’s appeal rooted in the knuckle- dragging, cleft-palate, multiple-tattooed triceps, of the beany wearing hoons.
It is not exactly Malcolm’s personal wealth per se that is a potential problem in politics, but his network of powerful connections in the corporate world. There is a perception that he may be more influenced by them and by big business culture (where directors and CEOs make 100s of times more than 95% of people including senior politicians) than by the world the rest of us inhabit. It is a qualitatively different world that owns, manages and makes decisions that determine the fate of much of the country and the economy. His elite advantage is not just the silver spoon of birth or breeding though that may come into it. The fact is that democratic government, having lost so much of its former clout to global corporatisation, is all we have left to represent the interests of ordinary people. On the other hand, Rudd’s career has been mainly in the public sector, and his wife’s business, although successful, is not perceived as belonging to the big corporate league. So although privately wealthy and well-connected in some senses, Rudd does not appear to be accustomed to living his life and operating within these modern equivalents of the royal courts, so is less likely to identify with or be co-opted by them.
"The fact is there’s nothing about Turnbull’s history, or that of the party he’s leading, that suggests he has much interest in social justice issues, at least not as most people who use that term understand it to mean."
That, Brendan, is a bit rich. The previous government, for all its failings, did have more than a glimmer of understanding of social justice issues, including the importance of investing in the early years, but it just didn’t go far enough. Establishing a network of Communities for Children that didn’t engage effectively with State Government services resulted in adding not very much that was effective or sustainable in the long-term, despite some of the short-term community development and capacity building that occurred.
Hopefully, both our leaders coming from challenging backgrounds, will reflect on what it was that enabled them to survive and thrive, when many others with those sorts of experiences crash and burn through a lifetime of despair. Why have they been resilient? What social policies does that suggest might be important in improving the lot of disadvantaged Australian children?
One thing’s for sure - fragmentary, single issue responses that grab an easy headline in suggesting another magic bullet will do the trick are not going to work. The world is more complex than that. We need to see the problems that afflict so many young children in Australia of all cultural groups as intertwined. If you need persuading, google the US Adverse Childhood Experiences study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control. Child abuse is related to risks of poor literacy later on; problems of drug and alcohol addiction and poor mental health are related to abuse and school failure; poor childhood experiences increase risks of poor workforce attachment, crime, poor parenting and a repetition of the cycle of abuse. Yet, with investment in decent social policies that intervene early to encourage secure attachment (and paid parental leave for 12 months following birth is one of these), responsive but not intrusive parenting, parental attachment and engagement in neighbourhoods, high quality child care and access to 15-20 hours of free preschool a week for the two years before school entry, the pay-off across a lifetime - according to evidence reviewed by Nobel Economics laureate Jim Heckman - at a 17% per annum return on investment is much better than trying to turn things around later. Much better than the stock market actually.
Bit like our response to climate change really - Invest Now or Pay Later.
Yes, Rowena you’ve nailed it!
It’s Turnball’s perceived social leanings, the circles he moves in and his toffy accent that defies his protestations about having been disadvantaged and just like everyone else.
Rudd speaks like an ordinary Australian and although Turnball brushed off his bipartisan Republican approach, he was only miffed because it wasn’t his idea!
I can just see him through the cartoonists eyes, sitting up there on his Royal throne (the antithesis of what he preachs) saying " I humbly accept this annointment as King of the Capitalists and promise to uphold all of the Rights and Privileges that I have been bestowed with."
Rowena: You certainly make some very good points. Points which I find it very difficult to argue with: I still hope, despite evidence to the contrary, that Turnbull will rattle Rudd out of his namby-pamby religious stance, and get him to make a few bold decisions. Getting rid of Peter Garrett would be a good start.
DENISE: not me! I am V E N I S E. Unlike you, my track record of voting Labor, is because they have usually given a passing thought to a more equitable society. Your ‘Us’ and ‘Them’ style of politics-despite Lindsay Tanner’s attack on Turnbull in Parliament, two days ago-was a product of the 1930s-1950’s. It’s totally irrelevant in 2008 As for you trying to tell us Rudd is an ordinary man who speaks to the ordinary Aussie, is batshit. To begin with he, along with the majority of well educated Queenslanders, has far better grammar, is more articulate, and doesn’t have the flattened vowels which are the trademark of the Catholic schools’ legacy to the southern states. (I bet he even pronounces ‘H’ properly ) ‘H’ should be pronounced exactly the way it is spelled
" A I T C H", whereas in the south, and thanks to the preponderance of Catholic and State schools, the common way of pronouncing it is H A I T C H. In no other English speaking country does this nasty habit occour.
So we’ve established that Rudd is so far from being like the ordinary Ocker
as to make your head spin. Added to that he has had the energy to learn Mandarin. No easy task. Most Ockers can scarcely be bothered moving their lips when they talk (apparently Strine is almost impossible for lip-readers to learn, meaning the deaf). Being too tired to to speak properly they would have Buckley’s chance at another language. Believe me Denise, Kevin Rudd is as far apart from the average Ocker as moonshine to single malt. And he knows it. Good for him.
Seig Heil!
Thank you so much for that lesson (instruction, admonition, command) on the King’s English Denise with a V, forgive my if I cease to be amazed. Please supply a wave file of the correct pronunciation of the word ‘he’.
I’m sure we have all been (relatively) rich, and (relatively) poor.
I’m also sure we have encountered the natural phenomenon of adjusting to our circumstances ie. when we make more money, we don’t necessarily save more money.
Our politicians on the wages we pay them alone represent less than 2% of the population, making more than 4 times as much as more than 50% of the population.They cannot represent us; they cannot empathise with us, they cannot understand us.
The sleepers must awaken.
www.thecomensalist.com
I wouldn’t worry too much about politician’s salaries. Surely it is worth paying a good salary to those responsible for running the country. They can hardly be considered to be in the society big league, when the PM himself is paid far less than many corporate CEOs and big directors who have incomes HUNDREDS of times the average, not to mention their accumulated assets. Compared to them, the modern equivalent of royalty, politician’s are just small fry like us.
With the greatest respect, Rowena, they are NOT small fry like us, I repeat: they make more than 4 times the median wage.
They are supposed to be OUR representatives.
Currently, in terms of living standards, in terms of tax brackets, in terms of superannuation and retirement funds, they represent less than 2% of the Australian community.
Even if they only accepted pay rises in line with the people who pay them, how can anyone justify percentage increases?
A 3% pay rise to someone on $20,000. is $600.
To a pollie on $120,000. the increase is $3600.
How can you justify giving someone who already makes 120k an extra 3.6k when a pensioner only gets $600.?
and that’s if they only accept the same increases as the rest of us. The truth is, since Frazer’s infamous "life wasn’t meant to be easy" comment, pollies have given themselves far more rises than they have ever attempted to gain for the people who pay them.
We’ve been fed the line: "wages must only rise with increases in productivity".
I believe the only productive thing my representative could achieve would be a significant improvement in the standard of living, for me, my children and for all average Australians. Instead, we have seen real wages and real buying power steadily eroded over the past 30 years. The gap between rich and poor has increased egregiously, and by no coincidence, the gap between pollies wages, and the median wage has followed the same route.
Imagine for one second, a democratic tax council.
Out of ten councillors, if 10% of citizens make more than 250k, they get one seat. If 70% of Australians make less than 50k, they get 7 seats.
How do you think that would affect tax scales?
Personally, I’d be happy for a dollar for dollar deal. If our reps want an extra ten dollars a week, they have to find ten bucks for us.
Is that really too much to ask from the representative you are paying for?
Bloody Grim.
www.thecomensalist.com
Dr Dog,
Thank you for your illuminating posts; an inner city Leftie, like me ???? Inner city Sydney ? What, Bankstown inner city, or Surrey Hills inner city ?
Joe: rmg1859@yahoo.com.au
Hi Joe, sorry only just saw this.
Inner city Sydney, Glebe 20 years, Stanmore six months.
In my view the inner city is bounded by Ashfield in the west, Paddington on the east, St Peters south and at the harbour north.
I beleive you to be an Adelaide lad. Its been a while but from memory the inner city there is a much more manageable space. How are we chardonnay latte sipping loonie lefties going down your way Joe?
There is enough hatred in some of these comments as to start a whole new class war. And a lot of good that would do in this turbulent century.
DanielSydney: has got a very nasty dose of it (hatred for them-whoever they are) So we have Daniel hating Turnbull, because he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth. And we have Venise with a ‘D’, hating him because of his toffy accent. I wonder what either of you would have thought of Gough Whitlam? Hell, he made Turnbull seem one of the blokes. Added to which his intellect was so far above other mortals that everyone looked inferior. Or, there was Bob Hawke, a Rhodes scholar who deliberately mangled his syntax, and flattened his vowels sufficiently to make everyone believe he was one of the boys. (That he spoke somewhat differently when not in front of a camera was irrelevant.
Rowena and Cherry had it right when Rowena concentrated on Turnbull’s connections to the corporate world, and that it would become the problem, and Cherry when she asked the vital question "What does Malcolm Turnbull stand for?"
To which I would tend to answer bugger all, except to serve his own, all consuming ego.
Grim:I’m delighted you appreciated my advice on English pronunciation. I, of course, loved your homily on economics. Y arriba la concha tuyo!
Dr Dog: You wouldn’t want to sink a pint with Turnbull. He never stops talking. You’ve
seen him being interviewed. Quel Bore!
Cheers V
True Venise,
Plus, I might be tempted in these troubled economic times to hit him upside the head with the glass and take his wallet.
That’s the second time I’ve threatened someone’s wallet in posts in a week. I may have a problem.
#2
Grim: 19.09.08. I notice you refer to my lecture as ‘the King’s English’. Was this just a lazy euphemism? Or does it reveal a ‘I’m just a little old Monarchist at Heart’ syndrome?
Hi Dr Dog,
Yeah, my mum grew up in Glebe, in Christie Street. I was born at Paddington, probably before your time, but the hospital was still there (in Oxford St) in 1985. My dad was born in Redfern (and died in Port Macquarie), my mum’s father died in Redfern, and my mum’s mum died in Annandale. No, my friend, I’m a Sydney boy, Bankstown really, through and through, even if I haven’t lived there for fifty years. You can take the twerp out of Sydney, but ……
As for Adelaide, it’s a long time since I came across any lefties at all, I suppose there may be some here. But they are probably a threatened species. I guess, Dr Dog, the problem is how do you define ‘left’ ? I don’t count Labour Party types as really left, or pseudo-left supporters of Apartheid for Aboriginal people as left, or many of the Greens either. Sorry, I’m pretty choosy, but to me, the genuine Left is a sort of shrine, or altar, of those who really are dedicated to the interests of ordinary people, battlers, usually non-Anglo, people who are desperately trying to do their very best to get ahead - I work at the Sunday morning markets here selling coffee and tea, mostly from Asia, and I meet Vietnamese workers on fruit-blocks, and Turkestani kids struggling to get to uni, and Sudanese people trying to get a foothold in Australia and provide a better life for their beautiful kids, just wonderful people, and to me these are the real Australian battlers, not the Anglos with their double-bus arses slowly dawdling past saving all their energy for the next burger and smoothie, people who should be buying my diet tea but never do. I asked one lovely Vietnamese mature-age woman what she was doing up in the Hills over the winter and she said ‘pruning grape’. I asked her what time she started - 6.30, she replied. Ever tried it ? Freezing f*cking cold all f*cking day, bending, twisting, all your body heat draining out through your feet, no rest, out in the drizzle, f*ck that for a joke. But people do it without complaining (so I give them a ‘discount’). Another Vietnamese-Tibetan friend (I don’t know, either) with a degree in Art History is working at Holden’s. One Vietnamese family bring us bread every week. A Slovenian friend finishing a Ph. D. on Cecil B. de Mille and religion in film, drops off his latest articles. One old guy straggling around the market turns out to be a Kokoda veteran, a hero, who happened also to have managed the meat-works here for thirty years. These are the real Australians to me, battlers, tryers, not some poncy bunch of latte-sippers in their 4WDs who vote Labour or Green and think that they are left.
Stay in touch.
Woof, Joe
Like US Treasury Secretary Paulson, or Rubin before him, or the various heads of the IMF, the World Bank, the BIS, various European Ministers of Finance, political leaders or heads of Central Banks like the Bank of England, I would not trust ANYBODY from Goldman Sachs - period!
It is no accident that so many Goldman Sachs alumni creep their way into these positions of power.
If these crazy Christian types who believe in the anti-christ are right, let me tell you, they need look no further than Goldman Sachs.
Pure, pure poisonous evil.
I wonder whether Turnbull’s horns and pointy tail fell off naturally or whether they were surgically removed when Goldman Sachs "chose" him for this public office?