Efforts to get rid of John Howard are getting desperate...and it is not all coming from his colleagues by any means...in fact very little is coming from his colleagues. It is being done by the Opposition, the media, the unions...everyone who is still scared that there might be an outside chance of the Coalition winning the election. The efforts to destroy Howard's leadership in front of world leaders at APEC was unforgiveablely rude and lacking in diplomacy.
Rudd's appalling lack of diplomacy (which would have caused considerable embarrassment to the Chinese) by using Chinese publicly rather than privately is an example of how lacking in experience this man is in the international arena. He has an enormous amount to learn before he can even begin to believe he can run the country - however much a few regulars on this forum may hate Howard he is still by far the best thing for Australia.

On the 28/4/06 Nicholas Gruen wrote an article on OLO entitled "Bad Economics and Bad Leadership" Now he's no left wing limp wristed bleeding heart,however was this a forboding quote from his article?

"Howard's proposed IR changes illustrate my point.They are an impromptu mess."

Was no one listening to articles like these in Canberra?Personally I think Labor will be an absolute disaster for all of us.They have less talent than the the eras of Gough,Hawke or Keating.There is no inspirational rethoric or new policies,just reptilian patience waiting for their quarry to tire or get bored.

I can just hear the excuses for for Labor's destruction of our economy.Well Global warming forced us to increase taxes on energy,food,shelter and clothing.All the while their PS bloats like NSW as poor management and waste brings us all to our knees.Will we ever learn?

Born to rule, say the Liberals in imperialist colonialist metaphors.

Yet nowadays with economic rationalism and the corporate culture there is not one true liberal among them.

Work choices for the workers, they say, when any old cockie knows, who had to work with his old man's workers when he was a kid, that all work choices means when the boss holds the whip hand or the big end of the stick, that the choice belongs to the employer.

One might suggest that nowadays one never hears any commentaries on arbitration, or has Howard just used work choices to take its place, and to satisfy a public, so dumbly satisfied when Howard says how they've never had it so good, never suggesting how much we owe to China, not only for cheap personal commodities, but also China's purchasing of our pitstock resources, to which we should be building a massive memorial spiritually thanking Eternity or Mother Nature rather than Johnny Howard.

Ginx said "whilst everyone is entitled to a point of view, I think it unfortunate that the MODERATOR of this site should express a leaning to either Left OR Right on his own forum." I'm not sure I entirely agree Ginx. Graham's been honest about his political affiliations (unlike many others in public life) and therefore I am able to evaluate his contributions with an awareness of his ideological leanings. We all have a political stance and Graham should be allowed to have his own.

However, I am disturbed at the way a Liberal brawl is being fought out in the press. Albrechtson and Bolt may be using their columns to further the interests of allies within the Liberal Party. Is this appropriate? Or is it a misuse of the power they have been given? Should journalists (sorry, I mean opinion-puffers) take sides in a factional brawl? Should they recommend who we should vote for? Should political parties reward their press cheerleaders with sinecures and seats on the board?

Forgive my cynicism, but could Graham's piece be another shot in the factional battle? That I think is the real question. Your thoughts, Graham?

I am reminded of Paul Keating's fond description of John Howard:

"What we have got is a dead carcass, swinging in the breeze, but nobody will cut it down to replace him."

Replace Bonsai? Who with?