John Howard’s “annus horribilus”…

The year of 2006 will possibly go down as the worst yet for Australian Prime Minister John Howard, as he comes under inceasing pressure, both from within his party and from media pundits, to review and adjust many of his long-held beliefs.After Howard promised that he would keep interest rates low, (and got elected in 2004 on that basis) there have been several interest rate rises – three so far this year!

After promising to make Australia a safer place in which to live, the OECD report came out showing
Australia to be number one in crime victimisation. (reference: Sydney Morning Herald, March 29, 2006 “Australians top the world when it comes to crime”.)

After wasting more than one BILLION dollars on his failed gun control agenda, the mainstay of which was universal firearms registration, Howard was forced to stand at the side of the newly elected Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, as he announced that the Canadian firearms registration system, set up in 1995, would be disbanded, since it was found to be of no help in stopping or solving crimes! (ref: www.pm.gov.au/news/interviews/interview1944.html) (Dear Reader, would you like to ask Howard why he doesn’t also disband Australia’s firearm registration?)

 

Then, a report published in The British Journal of Criminology, proved that Howard’s gun bans, gun buy backs and gun laws, had had no influence on murder or suicide! (ref: www.bjc.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/az1084v1)

 

By the way, Condoleesa Rice, US Secretary of State, apparently gave Howard a real tongue-lashing over his ideas on Gun Control! In US terms, “Gun Control” means the laws introduced in the South to keep Blacks from having guns to defend themselves and their families from attacks by the Ku Klux Klan! Seems Condi got stuck into Howard over cocktails, explaining how her father taught her to shoot at an early age and how people should have the right to firearms for self-defence. Word has it that Condi was baffled as to why Howard would crush the guns of people who had never committed any crime.(more from Condi Rice: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20050511-1803-rice-guns.html)

 

Next, a back-flip over climate change/global warming, with Howard quick to embrace nuclear power and calling on experts to advise him on a more palatable post-Kyoto accord. Perhaps the views of Rupert Murdoch had a great influence on Howard, as always!

 

Now, the American voters have turned against Howard’s hero, George W. Bush, in the mid-term elections.The Democrats (comparable to Australia’s Labor party) have taken control the House of Reps and the Senate. (Gentle Reader, please suggest how Howard will wriggle out of this one?)

Advertisements

5 Responses to John Howard’s “annus horribilus”…

  1. Redneck says:

    Agree with this except for the suggestion that the Democrats win is a problem for Howard. Bush is there for another two years. In any case, he got on fine with Clinton (a Democrat), so what’s the difference?
    A lot of the new Democrats in Congress are also pro-gun. Maybe that will upset Howard more.

  2. Josh says:

    One of the first people and countries to adopt gun control and firearms registration was Adolf Hitler in Germany at the outset of the Second World War. Is this the type of example that the world wishes to follow?

    As for the Democrat Party in the USA, when Bill Clinton was elected in 1992, it did not take him long to introduce firearms legislation. At the following election the Democrats lost approx. 20 senators that Bill Clinton directly attributed to the firearms legislation. Those ammendments have sice been withdrawn (further details on the NRA website).

    If our country was to demand a ‘Bill of Rights’ type legislation, and then patriotically defend it as do the Americans, I believe we would have a free country. As it stands, we are living merely in a semi-democracy that punishes the many to satisfy the few.

  3. Harry says:

    You are a simple soul, eh Josh.

    Any Aust. Bill of Rights will be specifically designed to ensure firearms ownership is excluded as a “Right” forever. No more debate.

    Your Bill of Rights concept will have unelected judges (Kirby comes to mind) deciding political questions.

    You know not what you wish for matey.

  4. Redneck says:

    A Bill of Rights is not even solid protection in the USA. It is only because of the NRA, GoA and other lobby groups that the Second Amendment is respected.
    Unless the Bill of Rights categorically said that anyone can have any kind of gun they want, and the government can’t do a thing to prevent it, the right would never be protected.
    Somehow I can’t see that happening.

  5. Cowboy Joe says:

    The last thing we need is a Bill of Rights.

    Anyone reading the US Constitution would have to conclude that it would be impossible for modern politicians to compose any document 1/2 as brilliant. The Pursuit of Happiness — inalienable rights! Still blows me away.

    Why is it that the same politicians who despise and deride the Royal Family behave like elitists and aloof landed gentry. An Aussie Bill of Rights would be the last nail in the coffin for life as we know it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: