Talking About Howard Behind His Barack
There’s a wonderful headline in today’s edition of Melbourne’s leading daily paper, the Herald Sun, published by the media company I work for. The headline ``Howard cops Barack-lash’’, on page two of the paper, runs with a report about how Australian Prime Minister John Howard is facing a backlash both at home and abroad over his attack on US presidential contender Barack Obama and his Democratic Party.
Howard had suggested that terrorists would rejoice if Senator Obama was voted into the White House in 2008. He told Channel Nine: ``If I were running al-Qaida in Iraq, I would put a circle around March 2008 and be praying as many times as possible for a victory, not only for Obama but also for the Democrats.''
He also poured scorn on Obama’s pledge to withdraw US forces from Iraq. As expected, the remarks were widely reported by the US media.
Obama reacted immediately, dismissing Howard's criticism as ``empty rhetoric''. He said, ``I think it's flattering that one of George Bush's allies on the other side of the world started attacking me the day after I announced.''
Interestingly, Democrats and prominent Republicans saw common ground in the fallout. Texas Republican senator John Cornyn said: ``I would prefer that Mr Howard stay out of our domestic politics and we will stay out of his domestic politics.''
In Canberra, Federal Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd said: ``To accuse the party of Roosevelt, to accuse the party of Truman, of Kennedy and Johnson, of being the terrorists' party of choice . . . I cannot understand how any responsible leader of this country can say to the nation that it is his serious view that the Democratic Party of the US is the terrorists' party of choice.''
Howard, however, reiterated his view and denied he had threatened US-Australian relations. ``(America) doesn't want a country and a friend that will leave her in the lurch,'' he said. ``I would say the greatest current threat to the quality of the alliance would be a sense in the United States that Australia had deserted her in her hour of need.''
You can read the whole report at news.com.au/heraldsun.
There’s a wonderful headline in today’s edition of Melbourne’s leading daily paper, the Herald Sun, published by the media company I work for. The headline ``Howard cops Barack-lash’’, on page two of the paper, runs with a report about how Australian Prime Minister John Howard is facing a backlash both at home and abroad over his attack on US presidential contender Barack Obama and his Democratic Party.
Howard had suggested that terrorists would rejoice if Senator Obama was voted into the White House in 2008. He told Channel Nine: ``If I were running al-Qaida in Iraq, I would put a circle around March 2008 and be praying as many times as possible for a victory, not only for Obama but also for the Democrats.''He also poured scorn on Obama’s pledge to withdraw US forces from Iraq. As expected, the remarks were widely reported by the US media.
Obama reacted immediately, dismissing Howard's criticism as ``empty rhetoric''. He said, ``I think it's flattering that one of George Bush's allies on the other side of the world started attacking me the day after I announced.''
Interestingly, Democrats and prominent Republicans saw common ground in the fallout. Texas Republican senator John Cornyn said: ``I would prefer that Mr Howard stay out of our domestic politics and we will stay out of his domestic politics.''
In Canberra, Federal Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd said: ``To accuse the party of Roosevelt, to accuse the party of Truman, of Kennedy and Johnson, of being the terrorists' party of choice . . . I cannot understand how any responsible leader of this country can say to the nation that it is his serious view that the Democratic Party of the US is the terrorists' party of choice.''Howard, however, reiterated his view and denied he had threatened US-Australian relations. ``(America) doesn't want a country and a friend that will leave her in the lurch,'' he said. ``I would say the greatest current threat to the quality of the alliance would be a sense in the United States that Australia had deserted her in her hour of need.''
You can read the whole report at news.com.au/heraldsun.
12 comments:
PM John Howard has been a Bush-suckup from the get go.
It is truly offensive for a foreigner to echo the right wing yahoos in America who paint anyone disagreeing with the Administration on foreign policy or homeland security as being unpatriotic.
Howard is a supporter of a "failed policy" (to use Sen. McCain's words - and he is the leading REPUBLICAN candidate).
I don't know whether I will support Obama in the final analysis - since there is a lot of time left and we need to figure out where all the candidates stand on a host of important issues, not just Iraq. However, if Howard thinks he is going to influence any but the idiotic right wing yahoos - who think even McCain is not right wing enough, he needs to get his head out of his derrier.
cheerz...Bwana
Thanks for drawing attention to the stupidity of Mr. Howard, though it may be unintentional!
I agree with the previous writer - for John Howard to make such tacky comments demonstrates an unsophisticated approach, nevermind an officious one! (What's he doing in American politics??) He clearly is someone who does not care about the bigger picture, but has a selfish and narrow outlook - very unwise for him and his country.
But of course, he must not understand the business of diplomacy and stands on the side of busting and bludgeoning the ?enemy, whoever that is.
How embarassing for Australians, though, in America, we have become used to such rhetoric!
The fallout, however, only puts Mr. Obama on the international map, much earlier than he might have expected!
Carol
Hi Bwana,
It is one debate that Mr Howard should have stayed out of.
David
Dear Carol,
The strange thing is that Prime Minister is not known for active vocal involvement in the policies of other nations.
Really, the debate over his words has given Barack Obama even more dercibility.
As you so rightly say, Australian politicians are not normally inclined to bluster.
Cheers
David
Sorry, Carol,
My keyboard must have been upside down when I typed that. I meant ``Prime Minister Howard'' instead of ``Prime Minister''.
And of course the word I wanted was credibility, not ``dercibility''.
I'll take off the dunce cap now!
David
. . . and to think I spent so much time researching "dercibility" only to find out it was an 'up-cock' by the author . . . arghhhhh!!
Having lived in Aussie many years, (as a banana bender) I launch into the fray willingly. Of course it is always tacky to see another nation's leader running down someone with power in a foreign country. On the other hand, there are many things about the PM's remarks I agree with. And I am native born middle-western American. It's pretty far out to suggest the zealots of Islam will rejoice should Mr. Obama get the nod to run for Prez, but I keep remembering PT Barnum's words: "There's a sucker born every minute." I got snowed by "dercibility" too. Thanks for the correction. I promise not to ignore the Melbourne Cup in the future. Re "anonymous" posting. He/she is complaining about the PM's remarks about an American President's actions stating "What's he doing in American politics??)" As an American, I need to ask What's Bush doing in Iraqi politics??
Sorry, El Tel,
Didn't mean to confuse you (or anyone else) with the reference to "dercibility".
Come to think of it, we could legitimise the word now.
Take care
David
Hi Catmoves,
Very interesting comment. You're spot on about how a nation's leader only demeans him/herself by questioning the "dercibility" of those seeking power in foreign lands.
In an ideal world, no leader would meddle. But if that did happen, then there'd be no need for foreign policy - and just think of the number of unemployed diplomats we'd have to support!
I'm told the Melbourne Cup is big in middle-west America, your stamping ground! Actually I will post a great snippet of funny trivia about the Cup on my blog, especially for you. If I haven't posted it in the next two or three days, give me an unsubtle reminder.
Take care
David
Hey, I totally agree, we shouldn't be in Iraqi politics, that was my point - let's all manage ourselves!
David, since you are such a great representative, overall, why don't YOU run for office! We're all desperate! Judging from your blog supporters, you'd be 'in' in a minute, and what a wonderful ting that would be!
Carol
Dear Carol,
At this point in time, the only ofice I'll be running for is the editor's office down the corridor!
Have a great weekend.
David
Obama was quick to fire back -
Obama blasts Howard on Iraq:
(http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/obama-blasts-howard-on-iraq/2007/02/12/1171128843178.html)
"I would also note that we have close to 140,000 troops in Iraq, and my understanding is Mr Howard has deployed 1400, so if he is ... to fight the good fight in Iraq, I would suggest that he calls up another 20,000 Australians and sends them to Iraq.
Otherwise it's just a bunch of empty rhetoric."
But don't ask me why I'm poking my nose into Yankee-Ozzie politics. I'm all for peace Y.
Rene.
Post a Comment