spiny norman
Member
But only because the media has set out to make us believe that it is some terrible thing that he failed to comment on the tsunami. As mentioned earlier, the British Tories aren't getting torn apart for their lack of comment, and that's probably because their media hasn't chosen to create an uproar over it.Deus said:I honestly think that is missing the point. The fact is that people here in Australia are upset about not only his handling of the Tsunami crisis but also the fact that he wasnt planning on telling people about his medical condition. Now Latham and his advisors had failed to forsee this. And it has had the biggest impact on this future as leader.
Nevertheless I do agree with you that they need to replace Latham, as he has been completely discredited by the media. I'd like Gillard in, but seeing as she is alleged to have had a relationship with a married man I imagine she'll be torn apart by the press too (unlike Howard with Prue Gower). You said the Labor Party needs to change, but then say to have Beazley come in? I think Beazley had his opportunity and, sadly, missed it, so I say give someone else a chance.
I don't understand the "youth" thing. He wouldn't be our youngest Prime Minister ever. JFK was in his early 40s when he became American President. Personally, I would prefer a Prime Minister in his 30s/40s than an older one with his/her values being of a different time period (such as Howard's being based on the pre-Whitlam era).