There’s two types of rusted-on now, as regards Labor. There’s the “first-order” rusted-on, the original true believer who sees the first duty of a Labor type as party loyalty. Criticise from within, organise factionally if necessary, but keep the faith with the party wherever it goes, and whether the compromises of its leadership are judicious and necessary or cowardly and ill-judged.
Such rusted-ons are having a hard time at the moment, to put it mildly. The Albanese government leadership are clearly a bunch of people who had, in 2019, their Straussian moment. Having lost to Scott Morrison in 2019, and facing a potential generation-defining loss in 2022, the leadership clearly decided it would have to adopt a veiled, trickster approach.
The approach was to create a program for government which conceded all major positions to capital and power, and would be willing to do whatever they asked, without hesitation, without cavilling. But this conversion would have to be kept from the core voter base, and above all from that remaining part of the membership who were genuine members (i.e. actually aware that they were members, and had paid the fees themselves).
The political stakes for Labor were high in the lead-up to 2022. But the existential stakes for the leadership were higher still. Loss in 2022 would have made their lives not merely failures, but a bit of a cosmic joke. That’s the crossover moment, the 3am waking thought that the laughter would never cease, that looking behind there would be nothing to show, and looking ahead just a few places on super boards, long lunches in Richo’s Chinese restaurant, the long abalone banquet of the soul, and brave-face statements about how you held the line against those terrible stage three tax cuts.
No, no, no. Better to wage a sustained double-level campaign against your own membership. Convince them that you’re faking a total rightward shift to appease prosperous outer ‘burban voters and News Corpse, when you are actually making a total rightward shift, and your members are the useful idiots.
So it has transpired, and rusted-ons of the first order now face a choice that is barely a choice. They must either, with a metallic rending sound, tear themselves away from the party, and launch criticisms against it from a broader social democratic position that the party was meant to stand for. Or they must become the opposite; use their community credibility and local standing to sell Labor to increasingly sceptical members and supporters, who are watching as the country is handed to the US and the board of the Reserve Bank to have its fate decided.
At that point, a rusted-on becomes a Rubashov, the hero of Koestler’s Darkness at Noon, who decides that his final service to the victorious revolutionary party that now wants to execute him is to commit to the ludicrous trumped-up charges they want to justify such an act with. What else is there to do that makes any sense? And so the rusted-on liquidates their last shred of principle, resistance, dignity, etc, to defend a leadership that long ago separated from them politically and psychologically.
But there is also a second-order rusted-on, outside the party, and who may well be in a worse position. This is the rusted-on who is rusted-on to criticising rusted-ons, and who maintains that keeping up an endless stream of specific criticisms of Labor policies will constitute a pole of opposition that might assist left forces within Labor to rally and resist.
To which the question must be asked: haha, which left forces internal to Labor? What’s left? This notion that an eternal petitioning of Labor as each new atrocity is waved through, and the party leadership recommits ever more resolutely to absolute and total incorporation into global capital and global US rule, will be of use, is bunkum.
Will the new budget have enough in it to retain the first- and second-order rusted-ons? Quite possibly, but unless there is a commitment to taxes aimed at corporate profits and capital, any measures will be mitigation of a total commitment to capital. Consenting to the stage three tax cuts was necessary. But for any genuine progressive or social democratic government, that should be done in the wider context of shifting the tax burden to corporations and property.
Barring some incredible surprise, rusted-ons of both orders will have to make a post-budget decision. Are they going to continue as either loyalists, or loyal opposition, or admit that Labor must now be opposed, from the left, on the ground? That demands the harder task of either building the Greens — if it doesn’t become a party that normies find impossible to support — or other, smaller left parties, or starting to build networks on the Indi model in Labor seats.
That latter process wouldn’t be as hard as it sounds, in certain seats anyway. The reason is the distinct single-member, exhaustive preference system, which acts like a sort of political semi-conductor. Usually it ensures that energy stays with the dominant major party in the seat. But if you can get support above a certain level, then the energy flows away from that party and towards you. You simply have to hit the switch level.
That could be done from the left in Labor state and federal seats, if one can find genuine community candidates with a left political-economic program and centrist and mildly suburban-conservative social and cultural values. Such values are progressive to a certain extent — yes to same-sex marriage, trans acceptance, the Voice — but otherwise stand with the mainstream, in their beliefs about the centrality of the family, embodied reality, and the legitimacy of a mild patriotism.
The prospect is that such candidates could get the “full flow”. They would break the Labor primary vote in half, and then draw the preferences of further left and other independent voters, the Greens and a fair tranche of Liberal voters (if they get the language right, and the social and cultural settings are sufficiently attractive). The preferential system means you grow such a movement over two to three elections, gradually building support and credibility. And, really, what else are you going to do? Watch more Netflix?
The risk, of course, is that one will create Frankenstein candidates, who escape and stalk their way across to the Coalition, for reasons of cultural politics, bad preselection, duplicity and connivance, or simple corruption. Such a risk has always stayed the hand of many a Labor-left person, nursing their frustration.
But if not now, what is going to make you take the risk? How long can many second-order rusted-ons avoid the truth: that endless criticism, without a parallel and accompanying commitment to organisation and contestation, becomes complicit in the maintenance of that power?
I mean, if AUKUS wasn’t the starting pistol, then surely the RBA is. If Labor gives up government power of RBA override on setting rates, then what even is it anymore? The historical drift is with networks and post-party forms; we live in a “centrifugal” society in which all capacity for centrality is being thrown off, by the furious action of its centre, which is capital, technology, and the yet deeper forces which drive them. Why not start now?
Surely rusted-ons, one and two, you can hear the rivets popping? I mean, you are the rivets popping. You’re going to fly off eventually. That is in the very nature of rust, which is, after all, a measure of decay, and decay of both whole and part.
One word sums up this government for me – AUKUS – what on earth for? Zero scrutiny, massive military debt at the expense of social welfare, education, cyber security, health care and foreign aid. Never in my lifetime did I think Labor would commit to such insanity. Keating called it out but Labor deems him no longer relevant. Albanese attending the wedding of a right-wing, misogynist is just the icing on the cake. Disappointing doesn’t come close to describing the direction we are going … it’s tragic.
Ahhh Brownshoes I could have written the article is a few words. After 45yrs I am totally pssed off with the traitors and luckely I will never confront them. If so I dream of screaming out AUKUS and punch their lights out in deference to the Pacifist that I am.
Glad we don’t live in the US otherwise some may be tempted with evil thoughts.
Fairly strong evidence suggest that the “Pacifists” tend to be rather bellicose, if not especially pugilistic.
Unlike pacifists.
Yes, one does get frustrated at times and only have to read Crickey to develop some finesse on the topic. The French certainly have a way with words. Thank you Crickey – “I’ve never been this dilated,”
I was asked once how someone so “not passive” could call themselves a pacifist. I replied being against war and violence has nothing to do with being passive.
Depending on which year you compare it with, on an annual basis AUKUS is about a 5% increase in defence spending. That cost will likely be offset by reductions in defence spending elsewhere (already happening). The chance of the full 30-year debt ever becoming a real debt is almost zero – 30 years is 10 elections away for goodness sake. We’ve been through 3 different sub deals in just the last 10 years.
In case you haven’t twigged, Australia runs up a ‘massive military debt’ every year. So, the real objection to AUKUS is not the money but who it locks us in with i.e. the USA. That’s quite repugnant, but as John Mearsheimer say, that’s the price Australia pays to protect itself from the USA.
Labor loses nothing by just going along with AUKUS for the moment. On the other hand it risks losing the lot if it ditches it. Remember, even in its most dire form the Coalition still has voters convinced it’s better than Labor on defence and the economy.
Brownie
Don’t worry about AUKUS it was a Morrison brain-fart that Labor were left to sort out.
We will acquire three, maybe five, Virginia class submarines in about twelve years time, long before AUKUS class are being built.
Experts in the filed are saying that underwater hi-tech drones using developed AI will make conventional subs obsolete before an AUKUS ever gets delivered.
In twenty years time we will look back with bemusement on the notion that we thought it was a good idea to put two hundred men and women on a submarine for extended undersea surveillance operations – technology will rule out the need for massive expenditure on these dinosaurs of the seas.
A huge aspect of this problem is how unfashionable it’s become to consider, let alone confer primacy on, the matter of wealth distribution in one’s politics.
Nobody is watching the main game anymore; they’re all busy with various sideshows. So as long as people are talking about the Voice and whatever other petty distractions, a large number of folks will imagine Labor is still Labor, rather than the corporate sock-puppet it’s become.
This hasn’t just happened since 2019, either: I’d argue that in my lifetime, the federal Labor party has only properly stood for its alleged values under Whitlam. It’s been selling us out to neoliberal scum ever since. It HAS been neoliberal scum ever since, with a sprinkling of camouflage.
Although the 2019 policy platform actually was proper left… Man, do I despise voters who want franking credits because the filth who do their thinking for them told them to.
Your post pretty well summarizes my views on the “Labor” Party, too, Kimmo.
Although now with all those years to think about it, even Whitlam was not perfect, (giving a ‘nod and a wink’ to the Indonesians to invade East Timor was not his proudest moment and also allowing state aid to continue to flow to church schools in an attempt to curry favor with religious voters did not go down well with me either). However, having said all that, Whitlam was light years ahead of what Billy “Big-Ears” McMahon and his motley crew had to offer. I was able to undertake my first university degree for free, thanks to him and that is something that I shall be forever grateful for.
Robert I have to disagree with your belief that Whitlam caved in over Timor.Pres. Ford had had discussions with Suharto and was keen to cement relations including selling more weapons to the regime. Ford sent Kissinger to visit Suharto and give him the OK to take Timor. Whitlam was cornered and could not in all reality have the US approval overturned. Remember the Yanks hated Whitlam with a passion and were scared he might terminate the leases over Pine Gap and North -West Cape that were up for renewal. They even sent their top CIA man to Canberra [from Pine Gap] to oversee the US’s role in the overthrow of Whitlam’s government, including their involvement in Kemlani’s visit. Ironically, the man from the CIA actually rented one of Doug Anthony’s houses in Canberra…
Gough Whitlam, still has policies that served us well being used. Though they have been somewhat mangled by governments since. In my 50 + years of voting no Prime Minister has done as well in my opinion. Mr Albanese could lose the young vote if he does not pay more attention to their needs. Labor have in their favour a very ordinary Coalition opposition.
“So as long as people are talking about the Voice and whatever other petty distractions, a large number of folks will imagine Labor is still Labor, rather than the corporate sock-puppet it’s become.”
Reminds me of the ABC’s The Drum and Q&A.
The Voice is not ‘a petty distraction’ for me nor for others I hope.
Agree about the Drum and ABC generally constantly platforming Murdoch media creeps. Why this ‘balance’ model is perpetuated is beyond me – it is dangerous and mean. Rather Duttonesque.
Would they platform any LOTO who said any stupid or outrageous thing without condemning it? Apparently yes.
Just a question, do you live in the NT where many Aboriginals don’t understand the Voice or do you live in inner city Sydney, Melbourne etc? Perspectives due to experience is everything otherwise it’s political propaganda. I just can’t trust any politician from either side so not voting as I live in the NT & witness the rot.
Indeed Kimmo. Albanese used to proclaim his love of fighting Tories, evidently these days it’s quite comfortable being one. Class Traitor.
Rex Connor tried and got Khemlanied by the Yanks and Brits who have had 50 yrs of treating our resources like an honour box at a fruit stand.. we don’t even know what they take..
Exactly the voice is a distraction whilst politicians get wealthier: there are already between 230-280 Aboriginal groups only within the NT who have a voice, I’m just not voting because the world is woke mad.
Oh dear, how to answer this as a despised ‘rusted on’.
Perhaps Guy might look at the history of elections over the past 50 years, going back to Gough, who was a great leader who achieved much and was gone after 3 years. We then had Hawke, who was a great leader who had learned from the 1972-75 era and proceeded carefully. He achieved much and much of that would be seen to be somewhat fiscally Right Wing. He and Keating lasted 13 years.
We then had a succession of leaders who espoused good Labor policies and remained in Opposition. Fast forward to Bill Shorten, another potentially great leader, who espoused a raft of great Labor policies – and remained in Opposition.
I think the current Labor Party has just taken note of history and has not yet reached just one year in Government. They’ve certainly laid down the basis of solid, reliable government and currently lead by 60/40 against a rabble. This is not by accident. Along the way, they’ve achieved much and reversed even more.
If in 12 months time, there has been no change, I’ll join Guy in his over-the-top criticism, but until then I’ll remain a ‘know-nothing’, despicable ‘rusted-on’.
The clue to what lies behind is the total lack of any attempt to lead us in the right direction. Keating used to bang on about a lot of stuff like multiculturalism and so on, and he brought a lot of people with him.
Where’s Albo, with the housing commission folks waiting for someone to go into bat for them? Playing golf.
And also attending the $1M+ wedding of Kyle the Vile?
For a man who loves peddling his housing estate credentials, how did he have a blindside to the optics of attending this spectacle?
The only problem with “in 12 months time” is that there will only be one more budget prior to the next election. Can you imagine Albanese being bold then, given that pre-election budgets are usually used to soften us up for the coming poll?
Sorry, my comment was meant as a reply to SR.
Hardly matters, it’s still a perfect aperçu.
God, Swing, and I thought that I was slow to wake up to the Labor scam!! I woke up to it in the very early 1980’s when Hawke and Keating, two of the most clever and fast-talking charlatans to have ever been in the Labor Party, took it over. My resignation went into ALP head-office in about 1983, some 40 years ago. And I thought that I was a ‘late developer’!
Hawke and Keating headed the best conservative government that Australia has ever had.
And throw in Bill Kelty as an enabler.
Well said.
Definitely not a late developer. Mine resignation went in about 30 years ago. I got a withering ‘so glad your gone’ letter from John Lenders. These purges of anyone deemed to have any vestige of a Socialist leaning have gone on in ‘Labour’ parties all over the world. What you finish up with is blokes with names like Keir!
Reading your post Annika prompts me to think that perhaps even after 40 years, I should write myself a “so glad that I left” letter.
Oh yes, Bob Hawke, the US intelligence asset
Well said, Griselda!! I just posted a link to an academic journal article that confirms your claim. This aspect of Hawke’s life is not well known.
He replaced Kerr as their best (sic!), or at least most trustworthy, source until as PM the role was passed (again with the sic! as in kidney stone) to perfect examples of such an excretion, Arbib & Tripodi.
Not sure what happened to that pair and can’t be bothered googling.
our very own Kim Philby..
Unlike Hawke et al, Philby had principles to which he adhered in the belief that Britain would eventually see sense.
It didn’t and he did what an honourable person would, even at great cost to himself.
Again, entirely unlike the Hawke cabal which cost this country dearly and we are still paying for their self serving actions.
Everyone seems to have forgotten that Shorten’s policies were far from the main reason they lost. They were mostly liked, but on the whole a poor campaign and a reviled leader (rightly or wrongly) was largely what did them in.
Especially the half-witted duplicity of promising different things to different groups inn different regions, forgetting about the new magic of the telegraphical wires.
The only problem with “in 12 months time” is that there will only be one more budget prior to the next election. Can you imagine Albanese being bold then, given that pre-election budgets are usually used to soften us up for the coming poll?
There’s a commenter in the Guardian (and here with a very similar pseudonym) who puts about the fantasy that Albanese will go to the next election promising to remove the already in place Stage 3 tax cuts, which he went to such lengths to superglue onto the ALP while Leader of the “Opposition”.
Well said. You achieve nothing in Opposition and history has shown the way to Labor in how to remain in opposition.
This country is in debt the likes of which we have never previously seen in our lifetimes and if Albo and his cohorts were to attempt to remedy in one fell swoop,as Whitlam did,the wrongs inherited from the Tories there is little doubt that he and Labor would experience the same fate and that is certainly not in the interest of anyone except “rusted on “Tories
Give the man some slack ,be patient ,and let the team serve out its term,
That then will be the time to pass judgment and to decide who benefits from destroying the working man’s party from within.
The CHOICE of Albanese and Co to fund the AUKUS deal and the Hobart football stadium, while stating that the nation can’t afford an increase in Jobseeker, Medicare funding, Public Housing, or Education is evidence that ALL federal government spending decisions are political rather than economic decisions.
The federal government is the issuer of the Australian currency, it NEVER needs to borrow Australian $’s, and can always afford to purchase anything for sale in Australian $’s.
So far, the big ticket things the current Labor gummint have done are:
– Climate policy (Abbott’s brain f*rt)
– USUKA (Morrison’s brain f*rt)
– Defence policy (all the way with LBJ, selling us out completely to the USA).
Not a single social democratic whisper in any of them. Keating is 100% correct when he says modern Labor are political wimps.
I should have added:
– Stage 3 tax cuts (a Morrison wedge)
Agree, we are now in the 21stC, Labor are up against a decade of traps set by the LNP, right wing media cartel catering to the dominant above median age vote, of which Howard et al. managed to pare off many old Labor conservatives on sociocultural issues including identity, immigration and home ownership; backgrounded by fewer traditional ‘blue collar workers’ for more educated, diverse, liberal &/or left white collar voters (inc. many tradies etc.).
This is opposed to falling into the Tantonesque nativism on immigration & population with Kochonomics or libertarian economics; both preserve status quo of 19-20thC; eugenics.
Labor should be taking account an older above median vote due to baby boomer bubble retiring, but their influence will wane as population pyramid normalises, i.e. less top heavy.
Labor is a centre-right neoliberal party, pursuing supply-side, neoliberal policies.
That is why it is cutting taxes high income earners, further increasing immigration to maintain an oversupply of easily exploited, low-skill, low-wage workers, and creating a FIRE feed trough under the guise of a “housing fund”.
Agreed Drsmithy
Nobody said ‘know nothing’ or despicable. Thats a bit whiny. I said that the Albanese leadership has shown that it will side wholly with capital, and maybe they had to, maybe not. But it’s surely clear that the shut out of any leftish tendancy or representation of the particular interests demands some action
Fair point.
But I’m happy to say “despicable”.
Start with job seeker.
If “had to ” implies “corporate” pressure with very little wriggle room then this also implies that our successive governments although democratic have effectively been puppets to overseas corporate influence since the mid 70s. This seems to be the norm around the world apart from a few exceptions. Can a country such as ours loosen that grip is the question I take that you’re asking.
Maybe not the 1970’s. I agree that the Hawke and Keating years left much to desired from the perspective of a decade or two. IMHO the real damage is rooted in John Howard’s actions as PM, the duplicitious lying and unearned handouts and more. That fellow is still pulling strings, though possibly his time is near.
My primary disappointment in the current PM is his timidity when approaching corruption, failing public service, failing wage outcomes and corporate greed. He seems to be stranded in the approaching headlights of a truckload of social unrest, too afraid to take action on obvious pressing issues that are eating the hearts of the “rusted on” socially alert party members.
My guess is that now the changes that are essential will be too hard. Failed public servants will continue to be shifted, like Pell’s crook priests, to new positions and poor decisions will continue as many and as large as those of the past 11 months.
If so, the 2025 election will, as for Scott Morrison a year ago, become primarily an opportunity to get rid of a dud.
The electoral lessons for Labor have been brutal. We should also not forget the tragic legislative history of Rudd/Gillard governments around two of their major proposed reforms: Rudd’s mining tax (which had to be abandoned in the face of the massively funded campaign against it) and Gillard’s carbon price (which was battered to death along with her prime ministership by Abbott, but principally by capital interests and monopoly Murdoch media). I don’t think we should ever underestimate the destructive power of such forces in Australia.
It’s clear the landscape is changing though – especially the fact that the Murdoch influence ain’t quite what it used to be (though ex-Fairfax is as right wing as its ever been), and we now have a citizenry finally beginning to recognise that Australian capital (especially extractive industries) may not be quite working for jobs and the national interest.
But the timidity in the face of these forces – and the program thus far is undeniably timid – is perhaps understandable. Heaven knows it took so much – in the face of an utterly discredited LNP government – to just get up at the election. So, I’ll own up to being a thoroughly corroded rusted on. Could it be though, that Albo and co are playing some sort of long game? That is to keep themselves thoroughly respectable for the next few years, while watching the contortions of Dutton’s ridiculous outfit (that’s another part of the changing landscape perhaps not anticipated), and to sweep to a major victory and mandate on a genuine Labor platform in 2025 founded principally on wealth redistribution (bigger than the 2019 one?). We shall see – without this, I’m sure we old rusted-ons will not pop, but simply disappear and die.
But yes, AUKUS is a disaster
The electoral lessons for Labor have been brutal. We should also not forget the tragic legislative history of Rudd/Gillard governments around two of their major proposed reforms: Rudd’s mining tax (which had to be abandoned in the face of the massively funded campaign against it) and Gillard’s carbon price (which was battered to death along with her prime ministership by Abbott, but principally by capital interests and monopoly Moloch media). I don’t think we should ever underestimate the destructive power of such forces in Australia.
It’s clear the landscape is changing though – especially the fact that the Moloch influence ain’t quite what it used to be (though ex-Fairfax is as right wing as its ever been), and we now have a citizenry finally beginning to recognise that Australian capital (especially extractive industries) may not be quite working for jobs and the national interest.
But the timidity in the face of these forces – and the program thus far is undeniably timid – is perhaps understandable. Heaven knows it took so much – in the face of an utterly discredited LNP government – to just get up at the election. So, I’ll own up to being a thoroughly corroded rusted on. Could it be though, that Albo and co are playing some sort of long game? That is to keep themselves thoroughly respectable for the next few years, while watching the contortions of Dutton’s ridiculous outfit (that’s another part of the changing landscape perhaps not anticipated), and to sweep to a major victory and mandate on a genuine Labor platform in 2025 founded principally on wealth redistribution (bigger than the 2019 one?). We shall see – without this, I’m sure we old rusted-ons will not pop, but simply disappear and die.
But yes, AUKUS is a disaster
“Could it be though, that Albo and co are playing some sort of long game? That is to keep themselves thoroughly respectable for the next few years, while watching the contortions of Dutton’s ridiculous outfit (that’s another part of the changing landscape perhaps not anticipated), and to sweep to a major victory and mandate on a genuine Labor platform in 2025 founded principally on wealth redistribution (bigger than the 2019 one?).” Definitely the fantastic thinking of a rusted on. Not gonna happen, give it up, pop those rivets while you still can.
No.
The chances of Labor winning another majority Government are slim, and getting slimmer every day.
The time for Labor to pull out a bunch of progressive policies and justify all the “keep the faith, it’s 9D chess” people was about two months after they won the last election, when they could have had the better part of three years for any initial negative impacts to shake out, and the longer term positive impacts to begin manifesting in time for the next election.
As it is, they look like a somewhat less blatantly corrupt and offensive version of the Coalition – which is also what their behaviour for the last twenty years suggests they are.
As it is, they look like a somewhat less blatantly corrupt and offensive version of the Coalition
Actually that’s ridiculous!
There is something ‘very Sydney’ about the Albanese government. After all, we have had Sydney-based PMs since 1996, the exceptions being Rudd from Brisbane and Gillard from Melbourne. And the right wing of the NSW 13 years ago, did not like that state of affairs and intervened. And Albanese knows this, and knows their strength in his state.
Shorten’s loss in 2019, with a policy platform that offered some new directions was an opportunity lost for the ALP. and the nation.
Thoughtful comments and your reference to opportunity lost captures the nub of the angst. That sense is an infuriating salt on the wound. If not now, when and so forth.
To support Labor in a capitalist liberal democracy means always to accept lots of compromise. Guy is arguing we do not have compromise we have capitulation. Since we don’t have total capitulation each person will have their own reading of the extent of the compromises and if they contains enough trade offs to be acceptable.
But part of being a left party is having a critical and transformative vision and trying to shift the society in its direction. The question now is, what is that vision and is Labor (needlessly) missing the opportunities to shift that are afforded by the times it is governing in? A comparison of the compromises and accomplishments in the history of Labor in Victoria under Cain, Bracks and Andrews could be instructive regarding what might be reasonably expected? This could be a measure of Federal Labor, even allowing for the progressive advantages conferred by Victoria being a state of higher average educational levels, a stronger Union movement and not being a mere media fife of Newscorp.
It’s been a long time since Labor has been a party of the left. That got killed on 11 November 1975.
The joke in Victoria, including Kennett government, was that the Libs were more socially ‘liberal’ than NSW Labor, while the Lib govt. policies of Vic Premier Dick Hamer in ’70s could easily be Labor’s now.
Because, starting with the influence of Howard (with Murdoch & IPA) the Libs have been hollowed out and gone far right…. to be unelectable without broad media support.
Yes, Albanese using Kirribilli rather than the Lodge, going to the wedding of a Sydney shock jock unknown in the rest of Australia, suggests he’s got the usual attitude of Sydney PMs.
He probably offered the use of Kirribilli House for the wedding or nuptials but it was turned down by His Vileness as too déclassé, unworthy of such as he.
Why is AA always the silly pup in the Tom & Jerry cartoons, yapping around whoever is the Spike du jour?
Pretty sure that PM PJK was Sydney-based (very).
In the Area, ifyousenowotahmeen.
Can’t get more rotten borough ‘Labor’ than that – a direct line to the cellars of SussexSt.
The Anthony Albanese Government has lost its way on many fronts. One is Defence and the AUKUS deal is the first. Obviously members of this Government have never studied the Chaos effect. Planning out for 30 plus years is a futile exercise, since one small thing at any time will throw out all forward planning. Even the Weather Bureau realized the futility of this, even with all their massive computing power, they only forecast 8 days ahead and then with a number of alternatives. The next is planning for massive immigration in the midst of lack of housing, materials, tradesmen and money. Where are these people going to live. The third is the ignoring of low wages and the driving of people out of housing, rental accommodation and the ability to afford food, shelter and medication. I could go on, but the fact is this government has already lost its way. I am not a Liberal voter, but a concerned Australian who worries about our people.