Was Bob Hawke the one that was on TV once crying saying he’d had an affair and blithering about wanting his wife to forgive him or she had forgiven him?

Who on earth is McGurk? That’d be the only name a chicken could pronounce?

Wobbles hon, you are so right, this matters not...nor does the other thing.[smile]

Dear Piper,

Personal ethics in a politician?

All we can hope for is that they do the job we
elected them to do - if they don't we can replace
them at the next election.

As for their personal ethics - how on earth will
we ever really know what they are - in a politician?

As Dennis Pryor cleverly points out in his booklet,
"Political Pryorities: How to get on top
of Australian Politics," :

They seem to vary - depending on the situation,
and there's always an explanation available.
They're all guilty of 'polspeak.' Pryor tell us that
this is, "The verbose,
hypocritical, mendacious and ambiguous language
that politicians and their hangers-on use.
It's fundamental method is to express everything so vaguely
and densely that polspeakers can extricate themselves from
difficulties by claiming not to have said what they did
in fact say. Look at election promises - they're what's
called "self-destructing statements." Following the election
the promises self-destruct because either the promise
becomes inoperative 'due to changed circumstances,' or
the promise is found to have been so cunningly worded that
it did not mean what it said and careless voters
misunderstood the terms of the original promise."

Pryor tells us that:

"For example the hidden agenda of a simple statement like -
'we shall abolish poverty,' reads as follows:

"We shall abolish poverty some time in the future, subject
to the state of the economy, if the Senate lets us, if
we haven't got more important things to do, if it suits
the international bankers and if there is no more important
measure necessary to win the next election."

Dennis Pryor writes with his tongue firmly lodged in his
cheek - but it does expose all the vanity and hypocrisy
of our leaders, bureaucrats, journos, and party hacks.
It rings true - just as the TV series, "Yes Minister,"
did. As someone summed up - "this is the voters'
revenge on the people who spend their taxes..."

Pied
Michael McGurk was a property developer who was assassinated in his own driveway in front of his young son.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/09/05/2677427.htm

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/my-lunch-with-a-dead-man-20090904-fbhm.html

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26026551-601,00.html

Foxy:”As for their personal ethics - how on earth will
we ever really know what they are - in a politician?”

Umm… we just did? Knowing what I know I wouldn’t vote for him. Ha! I can’t even vote.[smile]

“As Dennis Pryor cleverly points out in his booklet,
"Political Pryorities: How to get on top
of Australian Politics,"

Yeah he makes sense... this is how caseworkers talk to me. Do they get special training in this language before becoming a government employee?

Thanks Pelican… didn’t realise he was recently dead so feel a bit bad about the chicken comment now.

Ladies
Just a small quibble. We don't actually directly choose PM's or Ministers of the crown. Electorates choose representatives hence key seat focusing. The parties do the hierarchies more on internal allegiances and internal power groups than real management skills.

Unelected party (image making) trolls (IMT) manipulate people to think in terms of choosing the "more acceptable" leader, it's easier to sell than fully flesh out policies. Consequentially we are tending towards the presidential style election campaigns.

To do this the IMT create undue attention on the manufactured virtues of the PM and Ministers.

To change portfolio direction if one can't sell the party's "right" to power change the salesman ...new minister.

Ask your self has Liberal base ideological changed from that bottom dredging John to Mister Millions? Many of the leading sparklers are still in “executive” roles ( multiple self immolating bushes perhaps?). In fact the Libs went in search for a scapegoat and strategic failure rather than an ideological re-evaluation (same dodgy structure,new paint job and salesman/sales strategy). Is this democracy?
Just in case someone is thinking political bias....The other lot is the same.

On point... all of this image selling means that any individual's human fault is magnified and used by opposing FORCES to undermine the opposing party.

The interesting question is WHY, otherwise ordinary people, are able to score sex partners that were it not for their position of power or money wouldn't have a fart in a hurricane chance with.

As foxy alluded to... with power come responsibility ...in DB's case me thinks it has gone to his ego, over ruling his brain. To me the argument is akin to the lack of responsibility of the Footy boys. Their 'crime' is that they are more accessible and less prepared for the power of fame/notoriety.

Kate abandoned her common sense in favour of some immature dream and then probably simply lashed out.

IMO Neither party covered themselves with judgement/responsibility glory.

Foxy,
Eek don't you want me to have ANY Sleep? Another book for my reading list. another series of all nighters... reading. Ta..... I think.

Dear Examinator,

As always - insightful.

However - Dennis Pryor's satirical booklet of Australian
politics won't keep you up all night. It's more of a
dictionary - (delightfully witty and is designed to
be equally offensive to all parties). I keep referring
to it from time to time - because it's so spot on.
You may have trouble getting hold of it though - because
it's no longer in print.