John Howard lied consistently throughout his career. Where were the Doc Martens then, eh?

What's motivating the pack this time?

Spikey:"ohn Howard lied consistently throughout his career. Where were the Doc Martens then, eh?

What's motivating the pack this time?"

So your defence of Einfeld is based two wrongs making a right?

P' the B', since you are far more informed than I, let me ask, would it be possible for a citizen, or group, or whatever, to start an action to remedy the situation as you describe it? It would appear the Court is failing in it's duty of care, or responsibility, or something, I don't have the legalese to cover what I'm trying to ask.
As for Einfeld, he is a clear demonstration of the superiority complex that has become all too common among the elite here. Take a look at how many Pollies are the relatives of pollies, Downer being the worst example, he's not even mediocre, but having been a successful lap-dog, is granted a sinecure, and doubled his already generous, obscenely so, pension in the process. I really fear we are evolving into a new Feudal system, as the computer age wipes out the middle-class, leaving only the Elite and a service class.

Antiseptic: "So your defence of Einfeld is based two wrongs making a right?"

Not at all. That's the problem when you come to a thread with a closed mind. I said plainly on Wednesday that: "The man has been tried, convicted and sentenced - as appropriate."

I can't be clearer than that, Antiseptic. He broke the law and has been tried and convicted.

I want to know why such a concerted vicious personal assault is being laid after the event. If it's lies from a man in high office that concerns the pack, then where were the braying hounds when John Howard did serious damage to the lives of thousands of innocent people with his repeated lies?

Pericles stands as spokesman: "My overreaction is principally driven by the sight of someone in a position of great moral responsibility, trashing the entire concept of ethics, and of behaving ethically."

Prime Ministers apparently are exempt.

I can't stand the stench of hypocrisy. Enough already

The baying hounds were baying mightily, but with the support Howard was getting from the media, it was hard to get them heard. There were many many people angry and saying so, but who was listening?
On top of that, as a member of parliament, virtually all his words were immune to legal action, by act of the same parliament.
I don't honestly think the two cases are comparable, the people concerned moved, and lied, in different area's of power. People now are very cynical about pollies lies, we almost expect them to, but look quite differently upon the Legal System, it's whole base is supposed to be about "The Truth", isn't it? Einfeld made a mockery of the whole of his life and deeds, Howard merely lived down to expectations, and we all made a mockery of HIM!

This thread is not about John Howard, Spikey.

>>Pericles stands as spokesman: "My overreaction is principally driven by the sight of someone in a position of great moral responsibility, trashing the entire concept of ethics, and of behaving ethically." Prime Ministers apparently are exempt.<<

Why should you assume that simply because I make my views known on Marcus Einfeld, I automatically exonerate John Howard from the same charges?

What kind of logic is that?

If you would like to canvass opinion on the ethics of Howard and his government, start another thread.

Incidentally, given the fairly even balance of views here (including the golden-hearted Foxy) don't you think that your description of it as "a concerted vicious personal assault" is a little over the top?

It would be a sad day if we were prevented from having opinions that diverge from yours, Spikey, simply because they make you uncomfortable.

And I'd be prepared to say what I have said to the man directly.