King Hazza you could have written that last sentence in another way.
It should have said
I am struggling to see,,,full stop.
I am well into Bob Menzies speech's, he was not my cup of tea, but he very much was for voters, and he was a man of his times.
John Howard worshiped him but left his path and traveled a long way from his aimed directions.
Fraser highlights that both in his interview and the book, co written as foxy says.
Balance in all things, no party ever gets it alright.
Most do however learn from mistakes.
I understand what made Fraser and Menzies tick.
Understand Howard's reasons but never his spite directed at workers via his anti union stand.
As a younger more radical man in 1975, I was one of a few hundred who became known as S.A.C.K. society to assert the constitution over Kerr.
We even bought fine wines and liqueurs had them delivered to his home.
Yet I today can not think of him or Howard as some one I would talk to but Fraser and Menzies?
Even if Bob [Ming] did crawl to HM and want to call our dollar the royal, yep interesting conversations interest me.
My 5 cents less than $60 has not been spent yet but todays bit from the book about Mal and John Grey Gorton looks good.

Dear King Hazza,

I was merely trying to point out that
collective action on the part of voters
does get results.

However, if you're "struggling," to find
out more about Malcolm Fraser - read his
memoirs. And also the website that I've
given on this thread.

As I wrote on another thread - constructive
debating is an art - and its always a good
idea to check more than one source - be
informed on the issues and get acquainted with
alternative point of view.

Stay open to learning.

I will not be buying the Fraser book. I loathe the man. I could clearly see what damage the Whitlam government was doing to my country and I spent a lot of time, effort and money to get Fraser elected, and guess what, nothing changed. Even worse, he implemented the multiculturalism, that Grassby started, and allowed 30,000 or so of the Lebs in, which impacted so much on our culture.

He has got sillier and more senile with age.
No I wont buy, or read, his bloody book. I already know more than enough about him.

Just to forget him feels good.

I've read plenty of his own recent opinions and am not impressed with him- still holding a bigoted, elitist and rather contemptuous tone, and an appallingly superficial and indifferent attitude towards politics- especially as far as his attitudes towards the public goes (and a few occasions condemning free speech if its 'offensive' (which is supposed to be the point of it)).

Maybe I'm listening to too many articles by Ted Mack- who aside from having an actually admirable history in politics and better attitude towards the Australian public, also analyzes the nitty gritty and motivations of corruption in politics and has since fed my distaste for the more self-serving and elitist figures Australians normally give their admiration for a few vague, dreamy words.

As I have said before no politician/party gets it right all the time.
They do not get it wrong all the time as well.
Once I despised the man, in part that was my blindness.
He is no longer that man, his way of talking is a product of his up bringing and education, from another time.
He has evolved during his life, and that can not be over looked.
Maybe his crime for some is being the force that put the ALP on track to be the real force it remains in politics today.
Foxy a determination to remain uninformed is a hard thing to penetrate, I wish you luck but tend to agree with your posts here and else ware on King Hazza.

"Maybe his crime for some is being the force that put the ALP on track to be the real force it remains in politics today."
Ok now I really wish this website allowed smileys- I would have put the 'rolling on floor laughing' one right here.

DO tell what makes the ALP a 'real force' in politics. The only substantial thing about it is that it spends much more money on publicity and thus dominates most airwaves, and gets lots of corporate and lobbyist 'donations' (including from cults like the Brethren) and backroom deals with various companies (and don't forget Family First).
Just like the Liberals in a nutshell.
Beyond that, both parties put as little effort into running the country as they can instead of ride the gravy train, and both seem to stumble over themselves to sell off whatever assets Australia owns (or owned) to certain private companies (which they mysteriously get jobs in after retirement).
If THIS is 'real force' then I merely have another thing to despise about Fraser for increasing the amount of political corruption in Australian politics- if he, indeed, actually made an imprint at all.

Also DO enlighten me what is so nice about Malcolm Fraser:
Merely bleating that people need to be nicer to the people HE is specifically concerned about, and donating a (VERY) small portion of his taxpayer's pension (the HIGHEST of any retired pollie- including even Howard and Keating) to charity- which aside from not really being his money, also begs the question of his substantially gluttonous personal spending with the REST of it- is NOT 'nice'- it's cheap.

So far you are only touching the mere facade both Fraser and the Labor party (and I'd wager, the Liberals) are each putting on.