Amadd wrote on Oct 30
th, 2010 at 5:10am:
Quote:One of the most important contributions Howard has made to national life is to make people like you apoplectic.
That gives him a free pass for an awaful lot of sins.
Really? That's an interesting way of looking at things.
So if you help a little old lady across the road, you then have a credit to snatch the handbag of the next little old lady you see?
Not quite. Help a little old lady across the road - bollock the unions for free.
Quote:I assure you that Howard is hopelessly into the red for getting us involved in the Iraq war (lickie lickie).
And I'd assume that a lot of Iraqis would feel an understandable amount of rage towards Australians for our part in conjuring such a naive, or sinister (take your pick), PM.
We really do need to take responsibility for that dasdardly evil man. He was the fault of a starry eyed generation of twits, who hopefully now know better. ..but the next generation won't of course.
I don't care nearly as much about Howard's union (democracy) breaking agenda here in Australia compared to what he was/is party to in Iraq.
If Howard wants to prove his legacy, he should launch his book in Iraq. You don't just walk away from something like that and launch a book far away from the crime in order to make a few more selfish bux.
An awful lot of outraged Iraqis are desperate to get to this despicable country. Surely shome mishtate.
It is one of Howard's enduring positives that he acted on the very, very honourable political principle of 'You can't be an 80% friend". Being part of the broad western alliance against Saddam and the Taliban was absolutely the right thing to do. Under Labor we would have acted as shamefully as the Spanish.
Quote:No doubt, this was also the opinion of the shoe thrower who did his best to show some solidarity with the Iraqis during the Howard interview with Tony Jones.
Howard (the coward) must have balls the size a nit's nat's nut.
To think that a dreadlocked bozo who throws like a girl has ANYTHING to recommend him (let alone be regarded as a voice for others) is a step too far - unless he speak for other dreadlocked girlie bozos in which case, what' new (exept you, of course, who is neither dreadliocked, I hope, nor a bozo.) I am not necessarily trying to be personal here, Amadd, just trying to make the broad point that applauding every d!ickhead who is playing to the gallery is not a policy I recommend in the long run.
Quote:Back to the unions:
If you think it's such an honourable exploit to help secure magnanimous profits to greedy banks and the like, then I'll go with your one disallusioned democratic vote.
But it's one vote and one vote only. The majority cast their vote for very different causes.
Debating the unions is important. I fully accept that they are necessary, have a very important role, very important, and that historically they have been a force for good.
I also maintaing that very often, because of their organisational ability and the masses of low IQ armies at their beck and call, they have been utter, utter bastards. That they are not democratic but feudal goes without saying.
Forum
Pages: 
