Bea Arthur 1922-2009

                  

One of the greats is gone. Actress Bea Arthur died today at the age of 86. Like other greats before her, she put her stamp both on the stage and the small screen in a fashion that was as unique as it was memorable.

Born a plain New York girl by the name of Bernice Frankel, she spent her younger years coping with extra inches in height and a voice so deep that made people wonder whether she was feminine at all. But she used that loud, deep, raucous voice as many others of her ilk would use it; on the stage. She had a successful stage career before venturing into television. She was convinced by Writer/Producer Norman Lear to do just one episode of  ‘All In The Family’, but after that one appearance, they wanted her to do her own show. The producers even asked, “Where has that girl been?” That girl was fifty years old!

The characters she played in Maude and in The Golden Girls were strong, no nonsense, ascerbic women who did more for feminism than the entire women’s liberation movement combined. She was unique. She caught your eye. You knew Bea Arthur was in the room. You knew Bea Arthur was on your screen. Not everyone gets the attention of television producers from the first scene they ever do on television. Well, they may get the attention, but their own show? Not a chance. When they made Bea Arthur they destroyed the mould. An old cliche I know, but you try and think of a better one.

I remember the TV show ‘All In The Family’ and I remember ‘Maude’. This masculine deep voiced woman made us all wonder whether she had been a man and…’had the chop.’ My parents were huge fans of both shows and I think that both shows were popular because of what they could get away with at the time. The lines in both those shows were iconic and without such a stellar cast, with Bea Arthur front and centre most times, those shows would not be a part of television folklore now.

I remember ‘The Golden Girls’ much more, but apart from the brilliant interplay between the four women, I remember looking at the clothes Bea Arthur wore. She was a tall woman, like my own mother, and watching her dressed so elegantly, gave me ideas to throw at my own mother, as my mother has always hated being tall. Bea Arthur showed the world that you could be tall, mature and downright elegant. I always admired her for that. ‘The Golden Girls’ was an ensemble cast that was in itself unique. Four retired women sharing a house in Florida. It was destined not to work, but it did. When Bea Arthur left the series in 1992, the remaining three women tried to carry on with another series called ‘The Golden Palace’ but it was a dismal failure. It didn’t have Bea Arthur.

So here’s to you Bea. The stage will miss you, the small screen will miss you and thousands of fans will miss you. Your uniqueness made you special.Here’s a little something I found. It’s a nice interview with Rosie O’Donnell. Talk about two loud broads together!

Enjoy your day

 

The point of war

                             

I remember an American friend saying to me a few years back that Australians could not possibly appreciate their freedom, as they have not fought for it like other countries. Fighting for one’s freedom supposedly makes one appreciate it more. According to my friend, Australia needs either a full on civil war, or needs to militarily defend its territory from an invader in order for patriotism to truly stick.

Today Australia and New Zealand commemorate ANZAC Day. On this day, brave young Australian and New Zealand men fought side by side against Turkish troops at Gallipoli in Turkey. The ANZACS  lost dismally, but the spirit of the friendship formed has only grown stronger these last 94 years.

If you were to ask any soldier what makes them emotional on this day, it is not the battles they fought. Those who have seen armed combat are the soldiers who don’t want to talk about it. Only the ones who had a nominal military role are the ones full of hot air about fighting for one’s country. The emotional moments are always about friensdhips formed, and more importantly than friendships, emotional and almost spiritual bonds that happened out of what is always an horrific example of humanity at its worst; war.

War should always be the absolute last option, and it disgusted me more than anything, to see former President George W Bush go to war on a whim. How does one answer a terrorist attack on US soil that killed 3,000 citizens? Send at least 3,000 more to their deaths so one man can settle a score his father failed to do. Will the war in Iraq make us a proud world? Did it do anything to truly advance freedom?

When we see the Taliban rearing its ugly head in Afghanistan and Pakistan, this is a time when we need the spirit of the ANZACS. This is a regime that is the worst kind of scenario for any country. I see no point in the war in Iraq, but I do see a point in the war in Afghanistan. The common theme that is spoken when discussing war, and probably what my American friend illuded too, is that war needs to occur in order for true freedom to be protected. If the Taliban get hold of Afghanistan and Pakistan, it will create a massive problem in the Middle East, much more of a threat than Saddam Hussein ever was or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad ever will be. The Taliban are a nightmare, and a dangerous nightmare. If you have ever read the book ‘The Kite Runner’, you will know that this is not just a regime that has no respect for women. This is a regime hellbent on vicious, violent control, and they will stop at nothing to get it. It is up to us to band together, like soldiers before us, and rid the world of this true threat to humanity.

In my last post I argued that the politics of fear that the right wing wax lyrical about, has to stop. Their aim is to destroy everyone who does not see eye to eye with their ultra conservative, evangelical Christian views. They are a danger in themselves. We may very well need another civil war in order to rid the world of them. When I refer to the Taliban, I am pointing out to the world what is a real threat, not an imagined one, that is on the move into countries beyond Afghanistan. Adolf Hitler was not a perceived threat who we thought might do something. He was on the move, and his practical efforts at poltical domination were very evident. Ahmadinejad talks a lot, but if he was ever going to be a realistic threat, he would have made his move by now. Saddam Hussein was a dictator, but apart from a half cocked attempt to control neighbouring Kuwait back in the 1990’s, he was easily ‘contained in a box’ as former President Bill Clinton once said.

If we ever have to send out soldiers into harm’s way, let it not be a repeat of what those that landed on the Gallipoli Peninsula suffered in 1915. An ill prepared battle resulted in one of the most disastrous military failures of all time, and an enormous loss of life. Iraq is America’s Gallipoli, but Afghanistan need not be. It has the backing of the world community. We see a real threat to the security of our world, not just the Middle East. Most importantly, we see what true freedom will be like for both Afghanistan and Pakistan at the end. That is something we still do not see in Iraq after all these years.

On this ANZAC Day, my thoughts are with all service men and women, regardless of nationality, and the service they give to their country. But most importantly, let us all remember those who have laid down their lives for their country in any of history’s conflicts.

“…at the going down of the sun, and in the morning, we will remember them.”

Lest We Forget.

Enjoy your day

 

Right wing fear

It has been absolutely astounding to watch and listen to the right wing media in the US  since the election of Barack Obama. It’s also been amusing to watch my own country’s conservatives, called the Liberal Party oddly enough.The right wing have failed to do anything of any substance in regard to improving the lot for their citizens when they are in power, but they are the quickest to jump to their feet with a waving finger and a ‘tut, tut, tut’ whenever their left wing opponent so much as looks a different way.

President Barack Obama, and Prime Minister Kevin Rudd of Australia are never going to be all things to their country; no leader ever is. They will both make mistakes and make a judgement calls that they shouldn’t have. To say they won’t is ignorant and downright silly. Obama can trumpet ‘Yes We Can’ all he likes, but he has to make that powerful call to arms happen. So too with Kevin Rudd. He likes to travel overseas a lot, and does a lot of talking. But he is very slow to get things really happening. One theory behind this ’slow pace’ is because he does not want to be seen by the electorate as ‘going too fast’ and changing everything at once. When he has secured a second term in office, sometime after late 2010, which is highly likely, he will then start on a more bold agenda, having gained more trust and respect from a supsicious electorate.

President Barack Obama is taking the economic downturn by the horns. Is he doing the right thing? He is taking a huge gamble, but then again, so is every government around the world. As I have said in a previous post, no one has any real clue how the world can get back on its feet and different governments are trying different things. Australia and the US are sepnding their way out of the downturn, whereas Europe sees spending as dangerous. Who is right? In the end, they all could be. It could end up that a mix of a number if ideas could be the golden solution.

But instead of being helpul, the right wing media are not just saying that President Obama’s plan is bad and will make the economy worse, they have to go a ludicrous step forward and say that Obama is putting us ‘on the road to socialism.’ The politics of fear just will not die. The right wing love it and they can’t let it go. The right wing are loud, confident and full of puff and bluster, but unfortunately they have very little substance. Some widely respected political commentators are even thinking FOX News has delved into the world of fairytale and farce. Facts are becoming hard to come by.

I don’t see it as fairytale and farce. That would mean it is harmless. I find it dangerous and reckless. President Obama is being criticised for shaking hands with Hugo Chavez of Venezuala, bowing to the Saudi King, and wanting to meet with Ahmadinejad of Iran. The most hypocritical criticism was of President Obama bowing to the Saudi King. There are two glaring issues that I wish to address here. One, President Obama is doing what all of us should do when we meet a reigning monarch, bow or curtsey. It is proper protocol and even the royal families around the world demonstrate that protocol to each other. I witnessed the Princesses of Thailand bow to the Sultan of Brunei on one ocassion. He is a king, he is superior. Whether we believe it or respect it is immaterial. That is proper protocol and President Obama was only doing what was expected of him.

Secondly, I find it rich that FOX News is questioning why President Obama is bowing to the king of a nation that harbours terrorists. Need I remind FOX News of the very cosy relationship that the Bush family, not to mention Dick Cheney, had with the Saudi Royal family?

 Clearly, the finances and fortunes of the Saudi oligarchs and the Bush family have been intertwined for many years, and oil has been the lubricant of choice, even non-existent oil.

 

… the Gulf Oil Drilling Supply, of New York, Miami, and Bahrain, was Jeb Bush’s favorite artifice for oil and gas frauds:

“The fraud was rather simple. Richard Secord arranged through then Vice President George Bush Sr.’s old friend, Ghaith Pharaon, the then retired head of Saudi intelligence, for Gulf Oil and Drilling to purchase from the Saudi government oil and gas leases in the Gulf which were effectively worthless.”

http://www.hermes-press.com/BushSaud.htm

And again:

For his part, President Bush has been consistently unabashed and unapologetic about his “good relationship” with Crown Prince Abdullah, telling Barbara Walters on “20/20” recently:

“I’ve got a very good relationship with the Crown Prince Abdullah. … I believe he is … as we say, ‘the genuine article.’ He is a good, honest man. And, and in my discussions with the crown prince, he has assured me that the Saudi government will do everything they can to disrupt finances headed toward terrorists. I explained to the crown prince that obviously there is an issue in America when, you know, 16, I guess, of the 19 hijackers were Saudis, and therefore the American people are skeptical.

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/10/17/215142.shtml

It is very clear that right wing commentators have conveniently developed a short term memory.  Right wing commentator Sean Hannity was almost disgusted seeing a picture of President Obama bowing to the Saudi King, but remained silent years ago when this picture was made public.

                    

Looks similar to this really, doesn’t it?

                    

Just like the right wing are gaining power, it is time that those of us who believe in a fair decent society, say enough is enough to these ignorant excuses for human beings. No wonder President Ortega of Nicaragua spent an hour cursing the United States at the latest Summit of The Americas. No wonder Hugo Chavez of Venezuala has done the same thing over the years. America was hated because of its treatment of others.

I don’t care if waterboarding and other interrogation techniques worked and gained information. Torture is WRONG, and we as a civilised people should not accept it under any circumstances. We criticise the arab for their brutal punishments, but we are no better. Don’t we say to our children to not lower themselves to the level of the bully or the cheat? We teach our kids to show a good example.

The next time on of our own is tortured for ‘information’ by brutal thugs in far distant lands, we should applaud them, as they are doing what they need to do to gain ‘vital information’. Does the right wing agree with that?

What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

Enjoy your day

 

Stealing the soul of Burma

Not so long ago, we were all watching the anti-government demonstrations in Burma, or Myanmar as it’s now known. We saw monks being beaten, people being taken away never to be seen again, and the harsh reality of a military junta demonstrating full force. We then cried and were deeply saddened and even angry watching that same junta sit on its hands after Cyclone Nargis, and refuse humanitarian assistance from the outside world. Through the eyes of both these events, we clutched at straws trying to work out a way of doing something about this brutal and hideous regime that has had a stranglehold over its people for over forty years. It seemed hopeless.

I regard TIME magazine as one of the finest publications that I have ever read. I have said to people that I hate it in a way, because I can never escape reading it from cover to cover in under 90 minutes! Every page has quality journalism. Every story, whether it is finace, the environment, politics or just pure witty observations, is just downright interesting. It is not a magazine one just ’skims’. I have tried to skim it. Just not possible.

The reason I wax lyrical about TIME is that one of their recent issues had a superb article about Burma which literally opened my eyes and made the recent events there, and our lack of pressure on the junta, much clearer.

While American and European foreign policy thinkers ponder how to financially strangle an army government that has ruled since 1962, Burma’s regional neighbours are embarking on a new Great Game, scrambling to outdo each other for access to this resource-rich land

 The New Great Game – Hannah Beech- TIME Vol. 173, No.12

It does not get more heartless than this. On the one hand we watch innocent peaceful monks being bashed, on the other we say “Oh well” and elbow every other country out of the way to rip the riches out of their soil, and further abuse a people that have been abused enough. These are just some of the natural resources that Burma has to offer: Gold, Jade, Hydropower, Logging, Nickel, Rubies & Sapphires, Copper, Gas, Oil. The treasure trove does not get any richer than that, and the military leaders know it. Try to find a natural resource that Burma doesn’t have. So of course they can snub the world. They need not rely on the world for anything. They have everything, and their neighbours would love a slice of that everything, especially China.

China wants Burma as a buffer state. It wants Burma to be secure – so China will be secure.

          -Col Gun Maw, spokesman for the Kachin Independence Organisation

 The New Great Game – Hannah Beech- TIME Vol. 173, No.12

As we move further into the 21st Century, I am finding that we are becoming more self absorbed, more greedy, more corrupt than we have ever been before. The corporate greed that we have discovered has been happening during the late ’90’s and throughout the first decade of this new century. Corruption is being uncovered in high office, and crimes against humanity are still being committed. Now we uncover the true reason behind why we turn a blind eye to the woes of the Burmese people.

Burmese dissident and opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi remains under house arrest for absolutely no reason, and will remain there until her death, that fact is unfortunately true. Releasing her and allowing her to take power that she democratically achieved, would have dire consequences on the mining contracts put in place by the junta. The junta is raping the land, and its people. That’s how their pockets are being lined. We think that the junta don’t wish to relinquish power because of the simple fact that they have ruled with an iron fist since 1962. Any injustices that will be found out after they are gone will land them on trial in front of the International Criminal Court. That fact is a given.

But with all the other countries being ‘accessories’ to the raping of Burma, the tangled web may end up with the leaders of quite a few other countries in the hot seat as well. Burma is an easy country to exploit. The fat cat military just let anyone walk in who is willing to pay a good price. With an endless rich cocktail of minerals and energy laying deep within Burmese soil, the door is open, the world is their oyster, and ethics, humanitarian issues, environmental issues or even legal issues for that matter are of no concern. It’s a greedy corrupt person’s paradise.

I’d like to say that there is a silver lining to this, but what I read in this article further confirms to me that unless Burma’s business associates, especially China and Burma’s regional neighbours, develop some sort of conscience, the people of Burma are doomed for many years to come, if not forever.

The best thing we can do is find out who deals with Burma and boycott their goods as well. That all depends how many countries are involved. After reading this artcle, the list could be endless and no one is going to be part of a campaign of boycotting 40-50% of the world’s nations.

Saving our planet from environmental disaster? If we can’t save one country, how can we possibly save the world?

Enjoy your day

 

History in ruins

                     

Over the last eighteen months, we have seen a number of devastating natural disasters. In Burma, we saw Cyclone Nargis, in Australia, ferocious bushfires and floods, and in China, as is the case in Italy a few days ago, thundering earthquakes that show no mercy and land a brutal blow.

The historic town of L’Aquila is a part of the world where an earthquake will cause more damage than we can imagine. Apart from the immense human cost involved in any natural disaster, this is a town that has buildings, or had buildings, that dated back 200, 300, up to 500 years, possibly even more. Whole slabs of history are now rubble, and for those who are left behind, L’Aquila will never be the same quaint village it once was. Those historic buildings were L’Aquila, and no new building is ever going to be the same.

What has come out of this, as usually does when these things happen, is the buildings that were all those hundreds of years old, were the ones that faced the earthquake and came off better than their younger constructions. The hospital was built ten years ago, and has been damaged so badly that it is unsafe to use. This is the epicentre during these sorts of tragedies, and because of shoddy workmanship, it was useless at a time it needed to be most useful.

Why is it that structures 500, 1,000, or 10,000 years old fare better than the ones we literally made last week? Look at the pyramids. Men with ropes, and brute strength built those constructions. Nothing else, because there wasn’t anything else. They still stand today, maybe a little worn from erosion, but their damage is minor, and these were built in a time so far back we cannot even mentally calculate that far!

Bribes, kickbacks and corner cutting are not things of the past, but very much in the present day. The buildings in L’Aquila that are not historic were built in recent times. Knowing what I have seen in parts of Asia, poor building standards exist, if there are any standards at all. Health and Safety regulations are non existent for the workers, let alone incorporated into the plans or the construction.

Questioned about the issue, Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi said there could be “no magic wand with which we transform our old buildings into earthquake-proof ones.”

To which Thomas Braun, a seismologist at Italy’s National Institute of Geophysics and Vulcanology replied:

“The Italian engineers and architects I think are some of the best engineers in the world because already in medieval times they constructed churches and buildings much better than anyone,” he said. “So it’s not the technological know-how that is missing, it’s a political problem.”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7987772.stm

Countries such as Italy, Japan, and parts of the United States, just to name a few, all know what they should do. But when the boss wants the job completed early, or wants to cut costs, all that a lowly builder can do is to obey orders. Then you get a Prime Minister who says he doesn’t have the foggiest idea what can be done. Maybe he needs to sit down and have an open air breakfast with the survivors. I am sure they can give him some ideas.

Pope Benedict XVI said he would stop by the region…after Easter Sunday. No real sense of urgency is there? One must put all the opulent religious mumbo jumbo first before one visits his people. Jesus said to St. Peter, “You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church. Jesus saw Peter as a tough strong dependable character. The Pope follows the line of St. Peter. I don’t see the Pope being a rock to anyone at the moment. If he was, he would have been visiting L’Aquila today and made himself available to counsel people and just to be with them. He holds a shepherds crook when he is officiating at a Mass. That crook is meant to symbolise that he is the shepherd and the people are his flock. The L’Aquila flock are scared, Your Holiness, and where are you to watch out for them? But they will forgive you. They are Italian. To them, ‘Il Papa’ is almost at the level of a deity.

My heart goes out to the people of L’Aquila and if any of my readers have relatives and friends in the region, I offer my condolences for those who have died and my thoughts to those who are recovering.

As I always do during these natural disaters, please donate to the red cross in your country.

http://www.redcross.int/en/default.asp

Enjoy your day

 

 

Newsprint loses its aroma

As we wander through the swamp that is the ‘economic downturn’, we see life around us change. But one aspect of our lives is changing forever. Print media, especially newspapers, are taking a big hit, and some smaller newspapers in the United States have had to shut down. People are getting their news online for cheaper and without the need to waste paper. The smell of the newsprint is no longer as enticing as it once was.

There are a number of issues that we could discuss here. The pros and cons of newspapers disappearing, how journalism will be forever changed if everything goes ‘online’, as well as simple quality issues of the material presented. I was listening to a forum today on radio about this and a number of issues came up, but there were two particular ones that had me thinking.

I am a blogger, living alongside millions of other bloggers. In some circles there is a dislike toward the blogger, as we supposedly see ourselves as ‘pseudo journalists’. This was one of the issues raised in this forum. The newspaper is no longer the only source of news anymore. People can access news from a variety of different sources depending on what type of content they are looking for. The downside for us going to a ‘non-journalist’ for editorial comment? Journalistic integrity and a code of ethics do not exist. As we bloggers are not journalists, we do not feel we need to abide by the same rules. To us, this is just ranting and banter. To a true journalist, every word needs to be researched, and every accusation needs to be backed up with evidence, otherwise you are liable to be sued. The other criticism of bloggers is that their content is rumour and gossip, or at best unsubstantiated statements, which may well be true, but have no basis in fact. Sources they quote from are unreliable, or just downright rubbish. That hit home to me, as I regularly use Wikipedia as a source. Reading one of my comments highlighted this to me, as one of my readers stated that you cannot use Wikipedia as a reliable source as it can be edited by any man and his dog. Very true. Hence I try not to use it anymore, or if I have to, I use it sparingly.

But being a blogger, I need regular newspapers as my source of evidence to back up what I am saying, or who said it. Am I a lazy man’s journalist? In a way I am, but I am not here to break a new story. I am here to have an opinion and the quality journalists who fill our world’s newspapers help me with that opinion. Which leads me to another observation about the future of newspapers; online delivery.

If I ever use a quote in my blog post, it is usually from an online news source. I try and go for quality newspapers or news services, and not trash, although I am still not sure where CNN stand in this debate. The forum I was listening to today discussed how newspapers are moving to online delivery, and how that can have its problems. The delivery online is not the problem, it’s just that what is delivered online is not what the reader comes to expect of that newspaper. In essence, the newspaper has ‘dumbed down’ for its online audience, or is ‘not true to its masthead’. It has even been described as ‘news porn’.

So where does that leave print media and what responsibility do journalists have to make sure their newspapers survive in paper form or online? Is there a greater pressure on me, as a blogger, to take on more of the journalistic ethics and responsibility, especially when backing up my claims?

I still love reading the newspaper. I still love connecting with the print. I subscribe to a magazine and love laying back on my bed and devouring its contents, even if it takes hours. If newspapers all die out and we are left with cheapened online versions of what were great papers and great journalism, then we all suffer, and I as an opinion based blogger dependant on the news of the day will suffer, which means all my blogs and blogs similar to mine will end up being are simply rants and babble. Blogger and Journalist Katie Allison Granju says it best:

I still believe in real journalism. The business model that built the newspapers shutting down today will no longer support that kind of journalism, and the new model isn’t completely clear yet. But despite the scary times in this industry, I remain a true believer. The great journalists of tomorrow will work online, not in newsprint, and they won’t operate out of abundantly staffed newsrooms, but they will be here, and they will matter just as much to our democracy as the great print bylines of yesterday mattered.

But I will always miss the smell of newsprint.

http://blogs.knoxnews.com/knx/granju/2009/02/ill-miss-the-smell-of-newsprin.html

Enjoy your day

 

America’s light shines proud again

As an Australian, I was on the one hand brought up on a staple diet of American television, but on the other hand, we all disliked the ‘yanks’ as we called them, because they were loud, showy and obnoxious. And over the last eight years, we have seen the American community become even more isolated because some of them were stupid enough to vote in an idiot to the Presidency not once, but twice. That is why it is now so refreshing to see the ‘rebirth’ of America and most of all, America’s standing in the world community.

President Barack Obama has been called a celebrity by his critics because he seems to be idolised by the press and everyone he meets. He is a good looking, charismatic man. People do tend to be a little overawed when they meet someone like that. But he is also a man of substance who they can see is hard at work trying to deliver what he said he would deliver. He is also articulate and educated when he talks, something that has been sorely lacking these last eight years. And we can’t get by the fact that when people meet him, they are meeting the first African American President of the United States. That is a thrill in itself. However, if he was an idiot, like his predecessor and had absolutely no charm, he wouldn’t be getting the time of day.

President Obama is using his first international trip to mend bridges and to reassure the world, and especially Europe, that America is on the path to normalising relations with all those it has offended. He has impressed President Sarkozy of France, Chancellor Merkel of Germany, and has today been warmly welcomed by President Gull of Turkey.

When President Obama was running for the Presidency, he famously said “..we are not the red states, we are not the blue states, we are the United States of America.” Today, in Turkey, he spoke similar words:

“…one of the great strengths of the United States is that it does not consider itself  a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values. I think modern Turkey was founded with a similar set of principles.”

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/06/obama.turkey/index.html?iref=hpmostpop

Don’t tell the mad right wing evangelical Christians that America is not a Christian country, they’ll hit the roof! Of course, they are probably still clinging to that roof since November, when they realised that a black man was President.

Karl Rove, former advisor to George W Bush, has been quoted recently as saying that Obama needs to “get off the campaign trail and start being President.” I don’t think Karl is watching because that is exactly what he has been doing. You see, Karl isn’t too keen on seeing a President talk too much, and talk eloquently. He made sure Bush said only the minimum and confused everybody. President Obama sounds like he knows what he is talking about, and that’s not what Karl wants to see. The more Obama gains acceptance from all parts of the world, the more his boy George looks like the waste of space he was.

Even the reception Barack and Michelle Obama got from the Queen was extraordinary. Very few sitting US Presidents have had a private audience with the Queen outside of a State visit, and very few First Ladies, or any lady for that matter, could get away with not curtseying to the Queen. Then we see footage of the Queen putting her arm around Michelle Obama, ignoring protocol and getting uncharacteristically ‘touchy feely’. Scenes like these that we are unlikely to see again.

Karl Rove also alerted to President Obama claiming that America was arrogant, and that he needs to mend the damage that has been caused by that arrogance. Rove was insulted and saw it as Obama ‘putting America down.’ The plain fact is George W Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Karl Rove spent the last eight years putting every other country down and making them yield to the power of the United States. They showed no respect for any nation that did not do what they were told. Bush even stated “…you are either with us or against us.” This is the arrogance that President Obama is talking about. This is the wound we need to heal. I feel sorry for the right wing. The party is over, everyone’s gone to the other guy’s house, and they are having a better time there than they had at the other party. But it’s ok, the Republican train wreck may be able to regroup by 2016, if they’re lucky.

Obama’s attempts to reach out will work. But when something has been frozen for eight years, it takes a little longer to thaw.

Enjoy your day

 

Meddling Mahathir

                     

The grumpy old man from Malaysia is at it again. Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, former Prime Minister, is yet again demonstrating that he just cannot sit back and do what he should have done six years ago; retire with dignity and leave the governing to those who are elected.

This week saw Mahathir’s hand-picked successor, Abdullah Badawi, resign. According to my friends in Malaysia, most of whom are ethnic Chinese, it isn’t a great loss. He was fairly useless in the job and had his fair share of minor scandals. Dr. Mahathir, who ruled with as close to an iron fist as you can without technically being a dictator, decided he didn’t like Badawi anymore, after Badawi pulled the plug on projects that were favourites of Mahathir. Badawi bit the hand that fed him. So Mahatir has spent the last six years pulling Badawi and his government apart and being the continual thorn in the side.

So now Badawi is out of the picture, bowing to pressure from his party after their poor showing in elections last year. Will we now hear the end to the incessant whining and complaining from the grand old man of Malaysian politics? Not on your life. Mahathir has hardly allowed the new Prime Minister, Najib Razak, time to get comfortable in the chair. The 85 year old former PM is letting Mr. Razak know that he is watching very carefully, and that any action not worthy of the Mahathir stamp of approval, will incur his wrath.

What has happened is that Abdullah has got no power to administer this country. His tendency is to bow to the opposition. He doesn’t want to be all this ‘free’ and all that, but he feels he doesn’t have enough support to be strong,” he said.

Mahathir also had sharp words for Najib, who was once his protege but disappointed the grand old man of Malaysian politics when he refused to oppose Abdullah’s policies or campaign openly for him to quit.

“Unfortunately as a second man (deputy) he hasn’t performed very well. His tendency is just to follow blindly his leader,” he said.

“It doesn’t speak well of a leader who allows himself to be so overawed by his superior.”

http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/world/03/30/09/mahathir-expects-firm-leadership-under-new-malaysia-pm

While some are calling Razak a hardliner along the lines of Mahathir, Mahathir himself is obviously seeing Razak as weak, even before he has been sworn in. But what Dr. Mahathir is failing to see is his own hypocrisy. Mahathir was the final say in Malaysian politics for 22 years. He is criticising Razak for being overawed by his superiors, but during his time in power, Mahathir’s direct subordinates were forced to be ‘overawed’ by him. He had the final say and didn’t give a damn what anyone else thought. You disagreed with Mahathir at your peril.

What’s happening in Malaysia could very well happen in the City-State of Singapore. Lee Kuan Yew, former Prime Minister, is like Dr. Mahathir, an elder statesman of asian politics and someone who has officially let go of power, but still pulls strings when needed. When Lee stepped down as PM, he became ‘Senior Minister’ and when Goh Chok Tong became Senior Minister (Lee’s hand-picked successor), and Lee’s son became PM, Lee created the position of ‘Mentor Minister’ so he could still call the shots. Lee may not be as ruthless as Mahathir, but both these men, while doing great things for their countries, are unable to let go. Mahathir openly criticises, Lee doesn’t, mainly because the Prime Ministership is held by his son. He need not publicly criticise, simply admonish him over the family dinner table.

What Dr. Mahathir does not realise is that the more he says, the less the people of Malaysia will respect him as a great leader who did many great things for the country. A kind retired elder statesman is always more respected when they know their place. Former US President Jimmy Carter was travelling nicely until he went to the Middle East to fix the world’s problems all by himself, ignoring official channels. Interference can destroy all good work that is currently being done. He was President once, he isn’t anymore.

Same with Dr. Mahathir and to a lesser extent, Lee Kuan Yew. It’s time for ‘Daddy’ to let go and allow their nations to move forward. Of course mistakes will be made and the decisions will not be what they themselves would have made. But it isn’t them anymore and they have to learn to deal with that. These countries have strong foundations. Those foundations will still be there after the likes of Mahathir and Lee are long dead.

No matter what we thought of them during their lives, they will both be seen as ‘founding fathers’ of their nations and respected for the passion, the energy and the hard work that they gave for over two decades.

Enjoy your day

 

Stop talking and start doing

We have APEC, OPEC, ASEAN, the G7 and of course, the G20. These meetings were all started for various reasons, but most times they are passed over as ‘talkfests’. A memorandum or ‘communique’ is read at the end of each of these conferences, to prove to the waiting public that all these leaders have actually been doing something over the time they have been locked behind closed doors.

Let’s just think about the G20 that is unfolding in London as I write. Twenty leaders from the world’s largest economies are in London. They will formally start ‘meeting’ today at 9.50am GMT and will finish at 3.30pm GMT. In that time they will hopefully solve the world’s problems. Or will they?

Of course they won’t, but  I feel for the very first time that the global public wants more than just talk. In previous years, most of us would not even know what the G20 actually was, let alone take anymore interest in it. Now with the economy in the toilet, we are taking one hell of a lot of notice of this meeting. Why? Because now it affects us. Our hip pockets are hurting and these twenty men and women are the ones who can stop the pain.

Watching CNN earlier today, reporters Sasha Herriman and Charles Hodgson were making small talk about the leaders and the summit, as we watched footage of leaders arriving at the summit and having the obligatory handshake and fake smile session with host, Gordon Brown. Herriman stated that after all the hoo hah over the last day, with dinners and audiences with the Queen, they can ‘relax’ and get on with what they came to London to do. Hodgson disagreed saying that they will feel very much under pressure to come through with the goods over the next few hours, otherwise the global public will have their guts for garters.

The buzz word throughout all of this economic misery has been regulation. Nicolas Sarkozy of France and Angela Merkel of Germany have threatened to walk out of the conference if their demands of regulation of financial institutions are not in black and white in the communique. Pretty dramatic stuff, which is either French and German grandstanding or evidence that at least some of these world leaders want the talk to stop this time and action to be what drives them forward.

We as a global public have failed to regulate our leaders over many years. If we kept them accountable, they would not have been allowed to walk in and out of these ’summits’ without delivering. We ignored them at our peril. Now that it hurts us, we are scrutinizing every move they make. We have joked for time in memorial about the uselessness of politicians and how they never get anything done and that these meetings are a waste of time. These meetings cost the host country millions of dollars, and disrupt everyday citizens enormously. For me, I want accountability. As a teacher, I get paid miserably lower than any of these world leaders and none of it is tax payer funds. But I am very much accountable to the parents of the children in my care. If their children can’t read, or if their children’s work is not marked, they let me know about it.

So it should be with world leaders. These are the men and women that have received our votes and gained power off our backs. But we let them go to these meetings, let them chat on about nothing in particular, have a lovely photo oppoortunity, get on a plane and return home. Watching footage of the latest ASEAN meeting in Thailand, I noticed exactly where one leader’s priorities lay. With ASEAN, their group photo consists of each of them locking arms and hands, their left into the other’s right. The leaders all stood there and were about to have a standard picture. But this leader looked all forlorn at seeing what might be happening and desperately made the effort to do the locking hands thing. He looked like a sad kid at the party who didn’t receive a party bag at the end. This is unfortunately what some of the leaders of these countries see as the highlight of the trip; the warm fuzzy moment.

People want action and people want it today. Forget the photo. Forget the display of fake friendship. Get down to the nuts and bolts of why you are there. We are in this mess now not because of one country that we all now admonish severely. We are in this mess because we, as ordinary citizens, failed to make our leaders accountable, and failed to make them work for their extraordinary salaries. They in turn, came to these meetings in the past with one eye on the clock and the other on the latest sports results from their respective countries.

What the leaders are now feeling is a collective global cattle prod aimed right where their mothers never kissed them and they don’t like how it feels.

But, as former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser used to say, “Life wasn’t meant to be easy”. It’s time world leaders lives were made a little less easy.

Enjoy your day

 

One should know better

When someone gives us a small gift, it’s nice. When someone gives us a moderately expensive gift, we feel quite flattered and we don’t quite know what to say. But when someone gives us an extremely expensive gift, we feel a bit embarrassed and not too willing to accept it. When a gift is that expensive, we feel that the other person may want something in return.

Australian Defence Minister, Joel Fitzgibbon, is being pressured to resign over associations he has had for many years with Chinese-Australian businesswoman Helen Liu. There is absolutely nothing illegal about his associations with this woman, nor is Mrs.Liu under any police interest or investigation in Australia. It is simply the matter of what gifts he has accepted and how that could be seen as affecting his decision making in the future.

Firstly, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd seems to be making strong advances towards China. The Chinese have for decades been watched very carefully, for fear that they may be plotting something. And since China is one of the world’s last communist strongholds, a snuggling up to China may be seen by the more conservative elements of society as a sign that Rudd intends to take us down a communist, or at the very least, socialist path.

So when we hear that Helen Liu paid for two of Mr. Fitzgibbon’s trips to China, while at the same time making handsome financial contributions to the Australian Labor Party in Sydney, no one can be blamed for thinking that the China link is becoming all too familiar. Mrs. Liu is said to be devastated over allegations of impropriety, and former New South Wales Premier, Bob Carr, has described the accusations levelled at Mrs. Liu as ’shameful’.

My concerns have nothing to do with any ‘communist/socialist’ hidden agenda. That is silly, mid 1950’s witch hunt talk and I won’t entertain it. What I will entertain is this. Helen Liu paid for a politician to go to China, twice. Yes, Mr. Fitzgibbon was in Opposition at that stage, but he was still in the inner sanctum of a party on the verge of governing the country. She should not have offered to pay and he should not have accepted. He is now Defence Minister. He claims that the Liu family have been close friends for over 15 years. It’s not the friendship that is of concern, it is how Mr. Fitzgibbon is benefitting from that friendship. And when we hear that Mrs. Liu is donating to the New South Wales Labor Party on a regular basis, it is seriously not in her interests, or the interests of Mr. Fitzgibbon, to have this form of association.

It compromises her position as well as his. Criminal elements within the Chinese community could see Mrs. Liu as someone who can get to the Minister of Defence, which in turn could cause problems for her personal safety and that of her family. I believe Helen Liu is as clean as a whistle, as is Joel Fitzgibbon, that isn’t the issue. It is the perceived impropriety that will hurt them both. Neither of them saw that generous gifts could be seen as ‘pay offs’ or ‘ bribes’ in exchange for favourable decisions and someone with an ear to the Prime Minister.

It’s a case of not thinking, but it’s also a case of gross naivete. With the push for a stronger link to China being a big part of Australian foreign policy, Mr. Fitzgibbon’s innocence in all this will be hard to prove. The ‘hidden agenda’ I spoke of before will be seen to have been proven beyond doubt.

But what this issue is also bringing up is the promise Kevin Rudd made in the lead up to the 2007 election. If his ministers did not perform, they would be sacked, simple as that. Some say Rudd is not doing what he said he would do. But this is lack of judgement based on a personal issue, not Mr. Fitzgibbon’s performance as a Defence Minister. Is he a good Defence Minister? His department don’t think so, but they are being accused of trying to slander his name to get rid of him, purely because he wishes to enact sweeping reforms into the department. How do you stop your job being axed, or at the very least downsized? You slander the boss, to take the heat off your own incompetence.

The trips came under scrutiny after allegations surfaced that the Defence Department had conducted a secret investigation into their relationship over concerns she may be a security risk.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/30/2529398.htm

If he is performing well as a minister in the portfolio that he has been given, then he should stay and continue his work. Rudd has done the right thing. He has admonished Fitzgibbon for failure to be more prudent, more alert to the consequences of his actions. If impropriety happens again, then yes, Fitzgibbon should go.

But those in the Department of Defence should also be put in their place, if they have been deliberately targetting the minister and breaching his privacy in order to create a scandal and see him removed. Such an action is even more malicious than anything Mrs. Liu and Mr. Fitzgibbon have done.

Within the Defence Department, the investigation is continuing into the report that sparked it all.

The department’s secretary, Nick Warner, is reported to have sent an email to all personnel asking them to come forward if they know of anyone in Defence accessing the Minister’s computer accounts or in any other way collecting information about him.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/31/2530631.htm

Whichever way you approach it, it is a warning to all of us just what perceptions ’associations’ can present, and just how careful we need to be.

‘Two men look out a window. One sees mud, the other sees the stars.’ – Oscar Wilde

Enjoy your day