The way we were

"Will he dance?" was the great question. And indeed he did, and then grabbed the microphone to 'thank' everyone.
ABC2 screened Keating the Musical last night. The great man was in the audience.
Aaaah! The alpha male! Always has to be in control. While in one sense it is about him, he also doesn't get that it is not about him. It is about Australia.

About our curious laughing at arrogance and authority. But then the arrogant do not see beyond themselves. I should know!! (some will say)

I have blogged elsewhere about how perceptive Benedetto is in this creation. It is indeed very edgy, and should be compulsory viewing for all with the slightest interest in politics.

More than that it reminds us of what a great era the 90s were in terms of landmark decisions and changes in community attitude.

Contrast that with retiring Chief Justice Murray Gleeson's comments to the National Press Club yesterday, that there is too much legislation coming out of the parliament. While he was always cautious (as befits his role) he seemed to be suggesting that we have mistaken legislation for change, when it may just be nitpicking.

P is for

PAUL, perhaps the most loathed politician in recent history. Once styled (by himself?) Australia's greatest Treasurer, he was certainly a visionary PM.
His cult spawned one of the funniest theatre experiences I have enjoyed...Keating the Musical...about which I have blogged elsewhere. I think he will be more remembered , in the annals of history than he who succeeded him.

Satire: alive and well

K and I were pleased to go and see keating the musical tonight.
Fantastically well done performance. Reminding one of the power of satire, as well as of certain insights which maybe we have forgotten.
Particularly the one where Keating was defeated by the little chimp...the echo of the song being what chumps Australians are to prefer to'just go back to the way things were before'.
I was also deeply moved by the skittish Mabo song, so full of life and which reminded us of how wonderfully life-giving that was.
It is unremittingly cruel to Howard who seems more like Brezhnev than an Australian PM, and the fact that Hawke and Howard are played by the same person is telling us something about Hawke too.
It is a little but not totally unfair to both of them.
On the side we were standing in front of Bob Ling former CEO of Hill's industries who I knew from a long time ago. He must have been bemusedto see the range of new flags that Keating was allegedly promoting. One of which had a Hill's hoist on it. More importantly I spotted Lowitja from afar, she must have been cheered by the spirit with which the move forward in aboriginal issues was presented.
K struggled (being only 24) to keep upwith the history, and she wryly observed that was why the audience was mainly made up of people my age rather than hers.
I made sure to introduce her to Archdeacon C as my daughter, lest he think I was out with this gorgeous younger woman (which I suppose I was!)

Political Legacy

I suppose that one of the mercies of politics is that history tends to remember people for what they have done and not for what they have NOT DONE.
This is no doubt a huge relief to Mr Howard, though no doubt it will take him a wee while to note it.
What exactly did he do?
We know what he did not do. He did not say sorry! He did not capitalise on the opportunity the Keating Government left him to advance the cause of aboriginal people through Mabo and Wik, it was only in the death throes that he discovered aboriginal issues and 'invaded' the Northern Territory. God save us all from paternalistic politics. Very interesting analysis on ABC today (here) of the significance of Keating's Redfern speech the 10th anniversary of which falls on Monday. It reminds us that it heralded a change. No longer could aboriginal people just be ignored, but rather when they were engaged with it was discovered they were mighty powerful folk.
Don Watson, amongst others, argues that this empowering deeply threatened Tory politics. Chief amongst these was the former PM.
The very fact that aboriginal people could and should be heeded was deeply threatening to those whose view of "history" was that European settlement brought nothing to apologise for. It was as recalled by various noteworthies in the broadcast a mythical view of history not based on the facts.
Key amongst these proponents was one JW Howard, whose constant declamation of "black arm band history" was roundly dealt with as being an unsophisticated approach which fails to allow the real facts to be dealt with.
This is logical if you think about it, if all you can do is say that any criticism is "black arm band" then it sets up a scenario in which no genuine critique can be offered. Watson and others note that this is exactly what JWH and others wanted; any suggestion of anything else threatened their (mythical) view of themselves. Only the passage of the years will, I suggest, properly expose how fully pathetic little politicians were.
So what did he do...well I suppose he introduced the GST, probably good.
He tagged along behind Dubbya into Iraq. No doubt catastrophic.
He failed to sign Kyoto...well Kev will be remembered for the ratification being first thing he did.
Can't remember much else he did....ohh yes there was Workchoices...and that cost him the election.
Ohh and he wouldn't resign because people would think he was a coward...and that also cost him the election.
It's a pity I suppose....but what was his name again?

skirting the issue

AAP reports (here)

There are some policy places even Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd won't go.

One is whether his deputy owns a skirt.This "vital" election issue was raised by Bob, a farmer and talkback caller who preceded Mr Rudd in a long interview on the John Laws program on Southern Cross radio on Thursday.

Bob, a professed Liberal voter, said Julia Gillard was a communist, claiming he read that in the rural newspaper The Land, and queried whether she actually owned a skirt.

He also said she would end up running the country while Mr Rudd was off in China jabbering in Mandarin and asked why no Australian flag featured on stage during the Labor campaign launch on Wednesday.

What ever side of politics you are on you should be a little scared to realise that there are people, perhaps a lot of them, who just completely disregard the facts when making up their mind about who to vote for. Worse than this, they don't even begin to realise when they are talking insane rubbish.
It also goes on

Bob also wondered where was the Labor frontbench in place of former Labor prime ministers Gough Whitlam, Bob Hawke and Paul Keating who were all present at the launch.

This at least made me think that there are heroes on the "left" in the way that there are not (currently) on the right. We all know that Malcolm is not a fan of little Johnny, but it is worth opining that John cannot muster the Frasers, the Peacocks, the et al (admittedly some are dead...but even the grand dames (their widows) didn't appear to be present) What this means I am not quite sure.
It is both a plus and a minus, as while Hawke , Keating and Whitlam are indeed significant figures they inspire not only admiration and dignity but also hatred and loathing. Have you ever stood next to a Liberal voter who speaks the word Keating!
To Rudd's credit his response to 'Bob' showed that he is good in choosing not to exploit this sort of meaningless rubbish, in a way that most others would not be able to resist

On the issue of the Labor frontbench, Mr Rudd said he believed it important to show proper respect to the former PMs, adding that all his frontbench were in attendance.

He said he believed it also important to be able to speak to a major trading partner.

"This is really important for Australia.

"If I can use whatever language skills I have go to boost the exports of Australian farmers to major emerging markets like China, let me tell you, I will yabber my way through any lunch speaking whatever language I can," he said.

Call me incredulous

I love the Sunday political interviews; obviously with nothing better to do (why don't you go to church you alleged Christians?) they do the rounds of interviews snippets of which are then replayed on various news bulletins short of genuine stories. {I know from my days as a Synod Media Officer that I used to love Sundays and desperately hoped no one would get eaten by a shark and so gazump us on the 6 oçlock news).
Any way this morning we see the Rudd-slurring machine was out in full force.
First doubt was cast on Kevin's version fo what happened to his family when he was a child. Did they get evicted from their farm or not. Now, anyone knows that we get curious ideas of what may or may not have happened. When a parent dies and you share stories with your siblings you often realise that you often have a different perspective. You may even, because of youth, totally misunderstand things. Now that is different for example than lying about whether or not you actually got a PhD, or stretching the truth about whether or not you avoided military service (as Mr Bush appears to have done). So let's get real fellahs and start talking about this guy is on about, not about how naive he was when he was 10.
Ah say the aptly named Abbot and Costello's of this world with their mate Alex (yes the one who likes to wear tights and high heels) but it goes to the fact of whether you can trust him.
So push me over and make me eat a banana covered in mustard if yesterday I didn't hear also Costello and Downer say two of the most bizarre things I have heard in this current round of mud-slinging.
Costello: Nobody's hurled more mud in the Parliament than Mr Rudd.
WRONG- You Mr Costello are mud thrower extraordinaire!
Downer: This is a man who will say absolutely anything to get elected
WRONG-You Mr Downer will say, and are saying, anything.

What has caused this total distortion of the truth? The truth is they have been in office too long and have begun believing their own version of reality. It is a strange (forgive me if I have told you this before) I met Downer briefly a couple of times at school functions. In one conversation when he was pontificating about the Keating government I was surprised how vitriolic he was.
The things is, he said, they are so arrogant!
It's true PaulKeating was, but so was Hawke and Fraser and Menzies and who ever. I realised then that political arrogance is not so much a personal characteristic as a part of the baggage of office. I predicted that within a few years of election we would say the same thing about a Liberal government. It is called, I suspect, hubris.

We are witnessing political game playing at its absolute worst when the mud thrower extraordinaire will accuse his opponent of his own most obvious fault. And when the mouth in fish net stockings will likewise accuse the same of saying anything to get elected.
Surely, as titillating as this is, the electorate must demand more of its politicians than this demeaning name calling which says more about the absuers than the absued.