Oh Paul, I miss you

If we, as a country, vote in a certain ''obstructionist capuchin'' then we "will get a large kick in the bum and [we] will deserve it."

That is as good as anything I've got on this wet Friday.

In other news, Princess and I are going on a road trip to Byron Bay. We are heading up the highway (and then back again) for about 11 days and it will be great. Last time we went up there was on a family holiday in about 2003 or 2004 and I loved driving up, although I was so tired once we got there it was like jetlag and I couldn't find the place we were staying. Someone from the convoy had to come back and get me and drive me in.

We are going to have talking books on the way and I am going to enjoy watching the vegetation and scenery change; that's one thing I remember, the change in the trees.

As for the rest of the family: Clokes will keep working, The Boy will be in QLD with his grandparents and the other daughter didn't want to come. So much for female bonding but actually I understand it. Being trapped in a car with me and Princess for 18 hours would be hell of the worst kind for some people. Our tangential conversations; our philosophical posturings; our exclusive displays of high humour. Yeah, I can see why. Oh also she'd be away from the Internet. Maybe that has something to do with it as well.

But not leaving yet. I'll say goodbye when we do.

Time now for coffee and a bagel I think. With some scrambled eggs. Yum. I have finished work for the term, no more teaching but things with the new business are going really well. We have 18 schools on our books and I had two more enquiries yesterday. We are ace.

Do you swing?

I don't understand people who swing vote, I just don't. I'd like to understand their psychology more, so maybe someone can explain it to me.

I guess I'm a small swinger. I have swung in the past between ALP, Democrats and Greens, and tomorrow I am voting Greens. It's a vote of principal I guess, plus I'm in a safe Labor seat, so I figure it's as good as voting Labor. I don't want Labor to lose but I do want them to move a little bit more left. But I did hear the left is well and truly dead in the ALP and anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves. I am a leftie at heart.

Last election I voted Rudd which was more a case of "we can't let that cunt get back in" rather than "Rudd's so ace, he the man."

When I was young, I remember the day Gough got his arse kicked. My parents were shocked and quite devastated, more because (I think) they couldn't believe that it had happened, and though my dad was a member of the ALP and I helped hand out the stuff (IT'S TIME) at the polling booths (I think, I remember a march as well) my memory is that it was more the principal that they were annoyed by.

I have always been a Labor girl. I had friends who when they were 18 voted for Hawkie more as a rebellion against their staunch Liberal parents (I went to a posh girls' school, lots of parents were Liberalish.)

About tomorrow's poll. I am not rigid with fear though I think it will be close. I tend to see the whole thing as a big stupid game and maybe I am lucky in that MY day-to-day life is not really affected by a Liberal government being in power (other than that my mental health suffers and I find myself being angry all the time. During most of Howard's "era" I had to stop listening to radio and reading the newspaper. It all made me too angry and I felt so impotent.)

In other news, going to see "Westside Story" tomorrow with Princess and my Ma. Looking forward to it. Yay us, 4 rows from the front, awesome.

Have a good weekend and happy voting.

ROVE

So last night I watched Rove. I don't think I have ever watched Rove before. The reason I watched was for the unmissable triumvirate of Bruno, Kevin Rudd and Matt Preston.

Just imagine.

This

meets

this

meets

this

Of course, they weren't all on stage at the same time, and while Rove found himself in a knitted body-suit complete with nipples and genitalia, he was spared the humiliation of having to interview the PM "like that."

Bruno was funny and outrageous.

Matt was funny and entertaining and smart.

Sandwiched in between them was a man who really is just a nerd. He's smart, sure. But it left me having to explain to Princess that you can have cool PMs (Hawke, Keating, even way back, Whitlam) but that really, they just have to be themselves. Unfortunately, KRudd coming on the heels of JHow means that we seem to have the same guy twice.

There were several irritations for me, about the interview between Rove and the PM. I wish Rove was a better interviewer; then he would have gotten something worth watching. As it was, the PM hijacked the interview, proceeded to repeat himself about the Ute Thing, came off looking like someone who was just a little gleeful about what is happening to the Opposition, over-justifying himself. It was, frankly, embarrassing to watch. But it was over soon enough and we could move on to Matt Preston. We are unashamed fans of Masterchef in general, and of Matt "Man of a Thousand Cravats" Preston and George "Plosive Diction" Calombaris in particular.

And on Bruno. I like that he's outrageous and does and says the unthinkable. But I think Borat is a better, funnier character. Something about the innocent abroad in the world is very appealing, whereas the Bruno character is more knowing, more cynical and bitchy. As he is meant to be. Alot of the laughs are in the fashions, and I think the movie won't be as subtle as Borat was. Did I just use the word subtle to describe Borat? Maybe I'm wrong there. Am revisiting tonight with Princess. She hasn't watched it, and maybe I'm making a mistake about letting her. She's pushed and pushed so I figure, let her. The worst part is the nude fight scene, right?

i should know better

(let's label him tool #2 for this week, shall we?)

sorry to start with a pic of him, i know that some people might be picking up a fork to stab into their eyes right now, such is his power. but i thought we'd just get it out of the way, you can scroll soon, and get rid of him.

let's do it now.

okay.

when i am trying to focus on something important, ie writing, i should know better than to read the newspaper in the morning. it would be better to leave it until later in the day, when all my words are out. it's like avoiding people with colds, not sitting near coughing and spluttering people at the doctor's surgery, or on trams. likewise, i try to avoid the viral rage that peter costello seems to make me feel by just not reading him.

i'd finished my eggs (scrambled on toast, with diced tomato, fetta cheese - danish, smooth, yum - and olives.) i'd had one coffee (steel plunger, freshly ground, milk in a little green earthenware jug with no handle.)

i read a bit about the budget, about the controversy to do with miriam margoyles and that play, about horses dying in jumps races, skipped all black sat. stuff, was doing well until i got to p17 and this. i got about half way through and then reached for the laptop. he just pisses me off so much, and here i was getting steamed, and i wasn't even up to catherine deveny yet. (i don't read her, i just don't, but sometimes the words jump out and assail my eyes and brain. she's a virus to avoid as well.)

the headline is the only good thing about this article. it's quite clever, but HE DIDN'T WRITE IT. that's usually the sub-editor's job. i may be wrong though. peter might have been working on that headline for a week before? who knows.

what really bugs me about this man is he has to make everything about himself. you know those people, sometimes they are friends, and when you are talking, everything, EVERYTHING that you talk about, they relate to themselves. peter costello is one of those people. this is what some of our conversations might go like.

pete: so, what'cha been doing?

me: oh, running around, took princess to the dentist. to get her braces.

pete: hey, i went to the dentist last week. had to get a filling. it hurt!

me: really?

*

pete: do you wanna come out for a drink?

me: no, thanks. i don't think so. i'm working on something, i gotta keep the momentum. you know how it is.

pete: yeah! i'm working on something too. it's taking alot of my time, i'm working on an ace headline. wait 'til you see it!

me: er.

*

this is what they're like. when i used to teach in japan, i would get up in front of the class and map out on the board what a conversation looks like in english. i would talk about the "answer+" and the "follow-up question." follow-up question in the above two exchanges would look like this:

me: took princess to the dentist. to get her braces.

pete: yow! how's she going? are her teeth tender? i guess you're having to mash all her food. that must be tough for her. give her a hug from me.

*

me: i gotta keep the momentum. you know how it is.

pete: hey, watcha working on? sounds interesting, tell me about it.

*

answer+ doesn't really apply. he's doing ok with his own guff. answer+ is for inhibited and painfully polite japanese students who give one word answers. you know, "how are you? good" type speakers, instead of "how are you? good, great in fact. last night i did a bunch of homework and now i really get it about past participles as well as present and past perfect usage!"

but back to pete.

in a nutshell, he's managed to place himself at the centre of the monthly/sally warhaft controversy. he's tried to be contemporary and used eddie mc dick's term "boned" in relation to warhaft, then goes on to express his personal opinion about morry schwartz as a person and a publisher in a most undignified manner. everything about peter costello is undignified. why doesn't he just get it? is no one telling him, or he's just not listening? this is a man who just doesn't know when enough is enough. he's like the person at teh dinner party who when it's 1am wants to have another coffee, or glass of wine, and tell another "funny" story, and everyone else has gone, his wife is nodding off, you are so fucking tired and sick of him, you know there's the dishes to do, and there he is, opening another bottle of wine!

the point at which i stopped reading the article and grabbed the computer to write this was when he said:

"i have plenty of other opportunities to publish, so it's no skin off my nose to be blackballed by schwartz and editorial board chairman robert manne."

again, it's all about him.

so it's a whingy piece, about feeling sorry for warhaft, about how manne has flip-flopped to right, left and right and left and who really cares? i don't. i don't care if the monthly is left-leaning. don't the conservatives have their own publications? the monthly is not a newspaper, from what i gather isn't supposed to pretend to be unbiased. i don't know what the monthly's editorial policy is; if it's meant to present more than one side, then costello's comments are fair enough. but it's just the way he makes those comments that makes me wish the age would stop publishing his articles. i'm sure he's submitting them, i'm sure the age isn't chasing them, but maybe i'm wrong.

now i've gotten that off my chest, i can settle down and do some work.

and so it starts, with lots of words.

can we believe in this man?

so i stayed up and watched the inauguration. once everybody had arrived, the actual swearing in ceremony was quite quick. like princess diana, obama muddled the words of the oath, but it seems that was because the chief justice got in a mix. it was an endearingly human moment.

a snapshot of my impressions:

- first, let's get the cosmetic out of the way. why did michelle wear that outfit? the avocado green gloves were distracting and the glitter of her dress and coat, with strange ribbon-tie seemed inappropriately glitzy, and the colour was bad. this girl is gonna go down bigtime as the fashion vultures have been circling, squawking since she wore that "butcher's apron" on election night. also, she has some serious posture problems going on. she looks like a tall woman trying not to be. i'm sure she'll settle into it. he already looks the part, michelle just doesn't yet. but she's got the makings.

- i was glad to see obama in an overcoat, and i was interested to note he didn't wear a scarf, unlike bush. i suppose bush had nothing to prove, but after just watching the end of west wing, where santos didn't wear an overcoat to his inauguration, as a show of "youth and vigour", it was something i looked out for. he wore a red tie, while others adopted purple (ie the senior bushes) purportedly as a sign of bipartisanship (purple = a blend of red and blue). the clintons had yellow accents - from memory, a scarf for bill and earrings for hillary.

- the kids had obviously NOT been told to sit up straight, be on your best behaviour. and i like that. they were natural kids, fidgeting and the oldest one malia bowed her head a few times, and had her eyes open during the prayers

- the pastor who spoke first, rick warren, is already receiving some criticism for concluding with the lord's prayer. one thing i noticed was in his listing of jesus' akas, he pronounced a word "isa". the transcript of his speech has it written as "esau" who actually was, according to wiki, the son of rebekah and isaac, not jesus. the word "isa" is the arabic word for "jesus", and is in the koran as so.

- the other pastor who spoke, the reverend joseph lowery, all i have to say about him is he the man.

 "Lord, in the memory of all the saints who from their labors rest, and in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get in back, when brown can stick around . . .. . . when yellow will be mellow . . .. . . when the red man can get ahead, man; and when white will embrace what is right."

the delivery of this part of his benediction was timed perfectly, and he had everyone smiling if not laughing at his racial commentary schtick.

- the poetess, elizabeth alexander, who delivered her poem, was stilted and robotic, perhaps an effect of speaking in front of millions, and perhaps also a result of her intention to be plain and clear. her words were prosaic, not flowery, and while some are criticising this, i think it rendered her words all the more poignant. they were stark, they were plain, they were clear. an omen perhaps of what is to come with the obama administration?

- i thought an olive branch was extended to the muslim community, as well, or an indication of inclusion. i also liked that non-believers were also included by obama. we were last on the list, but it's better than being left out. i also noticed that when obama was introduced, it was as barack h. obama. strange, i thought, is it meaningful? i wondered. i was sure clinton had been introduced with his full middle name. but later, during the swearing in, "hussein" was spoken. maybe there was no getting around it, and a president elect's full name must be used.

- obama's address, too, was plain and clear. he spoke without the "soaring rhetoric" and i for one was glad. i felt he wasn't trying to use the moment for his own personal glory, to feed the ego, to butter people up with words. one writer has said the speech presented "the most sophisticated view of the world and our role in it of any inaugural address in history" and without being able to compare, i instinctively agree. this is a man, who because he has spent a lot of time figuring out where he belongs in the world, and who because he is bi-cultural and bi-racial with more fluid and multiple identities than most of us, has a handle on many perspectives. he has an overview of the world, of america and of himself that few (if any) u.s. presidents have before him. he has an understanding of what it means to be different, to feel like you don't quite belong anywhere, but can manage to belong everywhere. this layering of identities is something that will be a great asset for him; strength in hybridity, and his ability to move between worlds. "passing" is a loaded term; it implies some sort of subterfuge or deceit, that a person who is half black and half white can be equally as comfortable or effective in both environments. but barack obama is a human bridge who will hopefully use his knowledge and understanding of how the world works and how identity and power works, to fix things.

and oh my, i could see no tele-prompter, no notes. he was just talking, speaking, as if discussing his ideas (well thought out, and well prepared) with a bunch of people, asking for their help, telling them what needed to be done. i bet he has been thinking about how to fix his country, if not the world, for years. this is a man who lives in his head alot, but who also is such a fine writer and communicator, that he can translate his ideas well. his voice is rich and beautifully accented, no evidence of the hoarseness that dogged clinton, another great communicator.

it's a big ask, expecting one man to fix the world, and anything can go wrong. i hope that politics don't get in the way too much, and i hope that his slim shoulders can carry the load for all of us, for the whole world. everybody loves hope, hell, we can't help ourselves.

west wing and obamarama: it's all coming to a wonderful, political, exciting, throbbing CLIMAX

this post is about west wing. if you don't want to spoil it for yourself, don't read it.

clokes and i have been watching west wing, from the beginning, on dvd.

last night, we saw josh and donna kiss.

FINALLY.

i have been hanging off the edge of my couch, night after night, yelling at the screen "kiss her!" and saying to clokes, during odd moments, like preparing dinner, "when's josh going to kiss donna?" and "i want josh to kiss donna!"

i can get quite petulant like that.

it was so good last night, i was bouncing on the couch, squealing, and generally behaving like a real girl. and for those that know me, they would say "melba? she's not a real girl. not in a girly girly type of way."

so, i am shuddering even now as i write. legs are crossed and mind is spinning.

first there was a kiss, a kind of excited, jump up and down together congrats, we did it, things are going well in the campaign don't you think? kind of kiss. but it went on, and became a pash, complete with several camera angles circling around, and it would have kept going had not people started to go into the room.

then, another episode, a couple later, where the campaigners start slipping away from the congratulatory bottle of scotch in the hotel bar. it's the night before the election, polls open in the morning, finally,  

FINALLY, josh follows donna and they end up in bed.

of course, we don't see any sex. we just see them lying bed, supposedly asleep, after the lurve. josh opens his eyes, looks at the clock, it's after 3am, he starts to reach for her, but then doesn't. she gets up, goes to the bathroom, he jumps out of bed and follows her, hovers in the doorway oh so casually. he is so cute.

i think my out-of-proportion investment here is because if i got to choose which west winger to do it with, it would be josh.

i mean, look at him:



i love it that his hair is longer in this final season, again. it went short somewhere in the middle there, but it's back to its clown-like length, all the better to complement his maniacal grimaces over polling data and the like. i love the way he clenches his jaw. and the looks, oh the looks he gives people. there's something vulnerable about josh, despite his ragingly large intellect and capacity for understanding the masses and the mechanisms of politics, that makes me think he wouldn't know how to boil an egg. and i do. so we would be perfect together.

donna annoyed me in the early days. her rabbity face and seemingly stupid questions were irritating. as they'd stride the corridors, holding papers and doing lots of parallel talking, i found myself becoming bugged to the max by her. but now, i see, her early questions marked an inquiring and quick mind, she was learning on the job from her boss in a way that allowed her move up and away (pissing him off in the meantime). i imagine josh has never been abandoned before, even amy was still buzzing around him towards the end of their thing, it seemed he had dropped her. and then, at the end, donna has come back in, joined their campaign as media person, has her own status, her own mad skillz, which josh can appreciate, and now they can do it because their position is not a boss-assistant one any more.

COOL OR WHAT?

the last ep. we watched last night was the one where polls opened, exit poll data was coming through, polls closed, things were looking very even between the two candidates AND ALL THE STAFF WERE GETTING A ROOT. apart from arnie vinick, who was nursing some sort of hand-shake rsi. we had mrs santos "helping" her husband have a nap. we have donna asking josh if he "wanted to go for a walk, or something" during his meltdowns. we had the staffers all jumping each other, which had been going on for a while; donna knew, josh didn't. even will and kate back at the white house are doing it. strange, that for a tv series, that went for so long, it wasn't until the end that characters started hooking up. maybe it's end-of-term euphoria. i don't know, but for quite a while there, it was only the president and abbey who were getting it on.

so we are up to the election day part 2 episode, and have 6 eps to go.

the other funny thing is that somehow, we have managed to calibrate the final section of west wing with the inauguration of barack obama. this means that fiction and fact are blending into each other in a very satisfying way. i know west wing is old, but i never watched it on tv and clokes got pissed off and stopped when they started fucking around with timeslots, etc. so we have only watched it properly for the first time, from beginning to end, now. i can see myself wanting to start all over straight away. i want to see them all when they were new staffers. god, even rob lowe seems a distant memory now.

what i might do is stay up all night, watching west wing, culminating in a live cross to washington dc for the inauguration.

only problem is convincing clokes to do the same. he's back at work.

yes, i know, i know. time for something of substance.

while i've been going on orgiastically and self-indulgently about fabulous dictionaries and the like, and buying myself new season peonies at the market, and getting pissed off at the amount of bread we go through each week (4 loaves plus. doesn't include fancy-pant d.chirico loaf or two on the weekend), i am aware, dear readers, of the momentous unfolding happening over the seas, in the usa.

like most other people being vocal about it, i am thrilled that obama has won. new era, fresh start, first black president, victory for minorities; it's all fantastic. i'm guessing the kkk and other bovver-booted, shorn head nazi-typepeople are gathering in dark corners, plotting something. i do fear for barack.

and today in the paper, a small article caught my attention.

i am going to be watching this man closely:





it's rahm emanuel. first pick for chief of staff. a lot better looking than leo mc garry, and with a shit-eating grin that promises some good times. with clinton experience, that can only mean good in the oval office, and good on the hustlings. apparently he also swears alot, and can use his favourite expletive as a verb, adjective or subject, depending on the context. and this is his only flaw? i think not.

so, is it goodbye to "diva, whack-job" sarah palin? the george negus nightline show the other night had a commentator who suggested 2012 will be hillary vs sarah. quite serious he was.*




will mccain get a head reduction? i did like his gracious acceptance of defeat and his good wishes to the obamas, though. there was no evidence of the snark we get in australian politics, the bad loserish sour grapes crap.



i do feel they've got it quite in hand, we can all relax. what a handsome pair.



and back here, with mr rudd, i have to say i'm sick of seeing him with his arms around people, looking all matey matey. it gives me flashbacks to howard; small man, glasses, trying to be popular and "down-to-earth." while i'm ok with rudd thus far, and i think his handling of all things recessionistic/financial etc is pretty good [insert technical jargon here] i don't like the way he's picked up on howard's way of responding to issues using the expression "i think i can speak for the majority of australians when i say..."

i also didn't like the way he reacted in such a strong and personal way to the henson thing, and more recently didn't get what keating was on about re gallipoli. i got it - why couldn't our prime minister? am i smarter than him?

also, i heard george negus refer to barack as "the boy" during the program. not quite as bad as the bert newton slip way back when, but still, i cringed and i'm sure negus did too. and all the producers. and the panel sitting there. he would have been referring to obama's age, but it sounded bad.

HE HASN'T FUCKED IT UP!!!!!!

he said it in china.

he said it to chinese.

he said it in chinese.


this was the best thing i could have seen on the front page of the age this morning.

the man has not fucked it up. he is not caving. he is not pussy-footing. he is not tap-dancing. he is not side-stepping. he is not demurring. he is not faltering. he is not puncey. he is not timid.

so i guess we'll see what kind of diplomat he really is now.

exciting times, friends.

GIDDY UP, AUSTRALIA. IT'S NATIONAL SORRY DAY

go kevin

sorry is the first step

to me, there's something epic about knowing that at the moment, and in days past, there has been a slow but steady trickle of indigenous people, travelling to canberra for tomorrow's sorry day. it's a moving thing, and a sad thing, that these people have to travel great distances, simply to hear an apology. but it's also breathtakingly evocative; indigenous people on the move in this beautiful country, wending their way towards what will hopefully be a moment that helps them heal, and makes them realise that there are a lot of people in australia who feel sorry and want reconciliation. a proper reconciliation.

some people deny there was a stolen generation, let alone generations. despite the intentions of the governments during the period of child removal (1910s to 1970s), and whether people were motivated out of kindness to remove children from abusive/neglectful family situations, the impacts on people's lives have been devastating at worst, and "affecting" at best. how can this be denied? even if it was considered in the best interests of these children, can people not realise that it can be said now, without falsity, "well, we got it wrong. we meant well, but we fucked up."

clearly there has been a whole range of experiences for those children taken away from their families. but for some, for many it seems, it remained a blight on the rest of their lives. it's not easy being indigenous in this country - it's unjust when experiences like this just add to the hardship.

and the hardship continues as we know. i'm thinking the sorry should cover past stuff, from invasion onwards, and to today, that somehow leaders in this country can't get it right when it comes to the inequity across many areas (all areas?) faced by the indigenous population of australia. but there seems to be hope. today we are waiting for the apology to be made, formally, tomorrow in canberra. who knows what might come next? perhaps some real policies which translate into real, sustained, beneficial action.

now. let's all be sorry tomorrow.

it's a sweet, sweet week for us left-wing, bleeding heart losers.

the only thing that would make it sweeter would be to see this on the front steps of parliament house:

but i guess, realistically, one dream is enough for the day.

robert manne's position

andrew bolt's position

when the celebs come out and endorse american politicians

if you were an american presidential candidate, who would give you more endorsement credibility?

george or ric?

babs or jenna?

i was amused by a piece in the age yesterday, which detailed who the celebrities are rooting for in the current u.s. presidential nominee primaries.

check the list:

hillary clinton - barb streisand, steven spielberg, jack nicholson, carly simon, janet jackson, hugh hefner, magic johnson, jerry springer and jenna jameson.

pretty predictable apart from the pornographers. mildly interesting.

then for barack there is oprah, gorgeous george, will smith, halle berry, stevie wonder, robert de niro, forrest whittaker, kathleen turner, toni morrison, gene wilder, ethel kennedy and maria shriver.

also pretty predictable.

for john mc cain there is arnold schwarzenegger (married to maria shriver, oooh, potential republican vs democrat election-night tension there), sly stallone, tom selleck, rip torn, general norman schwarzkopf and screenwriter joe eszterhas (sliver, showgirls, basic instinct.) i can see a bit of a theme here, tough guy macho mixed with sexploitation-type b-grade movies.

and then there's that scary wife, featured today at rywhm.

for me, the most interesting candidate is mike huckabee. firstly there's that surname, which none of us can hear or read without imagining this:

then there is the fact that mike huckabee reminds me of gomer pyle:

no really, he does.

look again.

for mike huckabee there is chuck norris and his wife on youtube telling people to vote for huckabee, rocker ted nugent and pro wrestler ric "the nature boy" flair.

who looks like this:

and whose wiki file includes the following fascinating information:

Finishing and signature moves

Figure four leglock
Knife edge chop, usually with Flair shouting "Wooooooooo!"
Belly to back suplex
Chop block
Elbow drop to the knee
Inverted atomic drop
Running Knee drop
Shin breaker (Used normally to set up for the Figure Four)
Stalling double arm suplex
Standing Vertical Suplex
Step over toehold
Small package rollup

Signature illegal moves
Various roll-ups while holding tights or with his feet on the ropes
Eye poke
Low blow
Thumb to the eye
Testicular claw

Other signatures

Throwing an object down (such as his suit jacket or Mick Foley's autobiography, due to their rivalry) and subsequently dropping an elbow onto it.

The "Flair Flop", where after being pummeled (usually in the corner), he will confidently stride out and look to have regained his composure, only to flop flat on his face.

After being floored to the mat, holds his hands up whilst kneeling down submissively and begs his opponent not to strike him (often yelling "Nooo!" in the process); thus catching them off-guard, and usually then resulting in a low blow or a thumb to the eyes.

Being caught and thrown off the top turnbuckle whenever he tries a move from there.

Being thrown towards the turnbuckle, flipping over the top rope and landing on the apron, followed by one of two things: 1. Flair runs along the apron to the next available corner, climbs to the top rope where, almost always, he will be grabbed by his opponent and body slammed back into the ring; or 2. Flair runs along the apron towards the next corner, but is clotheslined (either by his opponent or an opposing partner in a tag match) before he gets to the corner.

Nicknames
"The Nature Boy" Ric Flair
Naitch (Short for "Nature Boy")
The Dirtiest Player in the Game
The Man
Limousine ridin', jet flying, kiss stealin', wheelin' dealing, son of a gun
Space Mountain
The Sixty-Minute Man

i rest my case. surely there can be no better candidate.

also, i was thinking if celebs were to come out of the woodwork here in australia and endorse political candidates, who would they be?

a few thoughts i had. for mark "bad boy" latham, hiding just off-stage where we didn't see them, might have been chopper read, mick gatto and joe korp?

for john howard, perhaps eddie mcguire, guy sebastian and darryl somers?

i don't know. any suggestions for current politico dudes?

what's your excuse, peter?

you know, the more i think about this, the more disgusted i am. look at his t-shirt in that picture

LOOK AT IT.

it says: "what's your excuse?"

now, read these lyrics

power and passion - midnight oil

People,
wasting away
in paradise
Going backward,
once in a while
Moving ahead,
Falling behind
What do you believe,
what do you believe
What do you believe is true
Nothing they say makes a difference this way
Nothing they say will do
Take all the trouble that you can afford
At least you won't have time to be bored
Oh the power and the passion,
Oh the temper of the time
Oh the power and the passion
Sometimes you've got to take the hardest line
Sunburnt faces around,
with skin so brown

Smiling zinc cream and crowds,

Sundays the beach never a cloud
Breathing eucalypt,
pushing panel vans
Stuff and munch junk food
Laughing at the truth,
cos Gough was tough til he hit the rough
Uncle sam and john were quite enough
Too much of sunshine too much of sky
It's enough to make you want to cry
Oh the power...I see buildings,
clothing the sky, in paradise
Sydney, nights are warm
Daytime telly, blue rinse dawn
Dad's so bad he lives in the pub,
it's a underarms and football clubs
Flat chat, pine gap,
in every home a big mac
And no one goes outback,
that's that
You take what you get
and get what you please
It's better to die on your feet than to live on your knees

so Gough was tough til he hit the rough, peter? what about you? rolling over like that.
when i was younger, amongst all the simon le bons and pretty boy bands, amongst our crushes on the cute one from the clash, or sting or suggs, behind all that, was the constant admiration for midnight oil in general, and peter garrett in particular.
he sang his guts out, he was passionate, he believed and he made you believe too, even if you were just a school girl, then a uni student, then a young worker, more interested in going out and drinking and dancing than politics and the environment.
but he was always there, with those arms spread wide, those massive hands stretched in supplication for people to hear him.
so peter, old pedro, vieux pierre. what gives? do they have you over a barrel? did you have to sign something before joining the labor party, saying you would denounce your old ways, leave it all behind. start anew. sell your fucking soul for a chair in the house of politics. and have to make kissy kissy suck arse to the americans, who you also criticised in your songs.
hey, remember, you even sang a song about us bases in australia, you even mentioned PINE GAP.
have you forgotten? you made it rhyme with 'big mac' (and better punctuation with this one, I had to put in lots of possessive apostrophes in the last lyrics)

US FORCES

US Forces give the nod,
IT'S A SETBACK FOR YOUR COUNTRY  (your country too peter).
Bombs and trenches all in rows,
bombs and threats STILL ASK FOR MORE  (they're still asking, and you're helping them)
Divided world the CIA,
say who control the issue
You leave us with no time to talk,
YOU CAN WRITE YOUR OWN ASSESSMENT  (guess you have as well, haven't you?)
Sing me songs of no denying,
seems to me too many trying
Waiting for the next big thing
Will you know it when you see it,
HIGH RISK CHILDREN DOGS OF WAR  (did you EVER think in your life someone might say this about you?)
Now market movements call the shots,
business deals in parking lots
Waiting for the meat of tomorrow
i am so disgusted.* this is the man who everyone in the country relied on to stick to his principles, ideals, values.
i am so ashamed and cross i am starting to write like derryn bloddy hinch.
stopping now.
see you garrett. there is no excuse. whatever the trade-off. live on your knees, peter, live on your knees.

 it's enough to make me want to cry.

* 2012 note - I have to say I am not nearly as disgusted with Peter Garret these days. What was that? Young rebellion? I'm not sure but I think he's okay for the moment. Would love to see him get out there and be The Person Who Does A Lot of Serious and Solid Work in a Political Capacity for the Indigenous People of Australia.

Hicks home etc

david hicks needs to be brought home. i don't care about all the ins and outs, the legalities, the finer points of argument, the this, the that.

it's unjust.
it's inhumane.
it's wrong to keep him there.
here:

what about the geneva convention and human rights? some people excuse the lapse or breaches in human rights and say well, what he did was an act of war and treason, blah de blah. but those standards, that legislation was enacted after war to ensure that barbaric, inhumane behaviour would not happen in times of war.

it's important to read, to know what is going on. i'm glad it's not left the mainstream media; the little i read reassures me that it's still current, still topical, hopefully still in the minds of decent australians.
if we haven't got solid and fair laws, and people to make sure that they are upheld, then what kind of society are we? what kind of humans are we? what separates us from the evil, psychopathic, mindless destroyers who we say we are the enemies of?
have a good weekend. enjoy the sunshine. take off your shoes and give everyone you see lots of hugs. look them right in the eye and tell them you love this or that about them. don't drink too much.

Hicks etc

HICKS

master costello

sebastian costello, 19, poses with one of the country's "merchants of death"

i'm just a humble boy from the burbs who pays HECS, drives a mazda 1990 and works in a video store. i'm also ravishingly good-looking and sleek with the ladies... i'm kidding, really i'm kidding.

so, costello the younger has a sense of humour.

it becomes real when you're walking around and see photos of johnny and your old man looking like merchants of death.

i'm liking him more and more.

yeah, my old man still hasn't discovered board shorts. he wears his budgie smugglers to the beach. it's a bit sad.

heh. nice one.

no, dad doesn't have a dart-board with howard's face on it, but i made him one once, as a joke.

uh-oh.

howard's been around since whitlam's dismissal. he had a few cracks at the top job but always lived to fight another day. dad understands that, he doesn't sit at home plotting a coup.

mmmmm. i think you'd better shut up now, seb.

they (the young liberals) are a bunch of wankers...

actually, no, keep going.

i met a young liberal once who told me his most prized possession was a polaroid photo of him and my dad.

errr, better stop now, seb. a polaroid?

i'm not sure whether this is good for costello's image, or not. but it's funny as fuck. it appeared in the saturday herald-sun, the bit with johnny depp on the cover.

tim fischer, i think i love you.

tim fischer has got it down. the man is talking sense.
he's saying israel is targeting civilians and the un positions. he says it's happened before, that israel bombed/missiled a un outpost in exactly the same place as the one done a few days ago. the previous time 104 fijian un peacekeepers were killed. he said, there is "form" on this subject, and there is a "rogue element" in the israeli "military machine." he also said he is getting lots of emails from israel-supporters, which is what always happens when anyone speaks out against israel, the government. not israel, the people. [this is not necessarily in the article above; i heard him on the radio. and apart from him not being able to pronounce 'reco[G]nise' he was pretty damn good.]
anyway, it's just not like me to agree with a national party politician. because i'm one-eyed, biased and clearly can't look at both sides of an argument. i also like to wholly embrace stereotypes, and paint all people with the same conservative brush, including alot of labor people.
things that have shitted me so far today:
have you noticed the plastic bags in supermarkets are getting thinner? I KNOW, I KNOW, THE GREEN BAGS. stop shouting, i use those, but on the occasion where i have a leaky jar of golden syrup, like today, i ask for a separate plastic bag. so kill me. and then once i have that plastic bag, i want to load it up, make the fucker work in penance of the environmental havoc it is going to cost our planet. so in goes a bag of bread, in goes 2.5 kilos of meat, and then it starts to break.
the other thing that shits me, but not today [yet] is this. has anyone noticed that "verse" is now used as a verb? ok, we have geelong versus collingwood. and we have "verse" as a noun, ie writing some verse. but now kids of today are saying things like "we versed the other team and beat them". am i the only one who is being constantly deranged by this phenomenon? and it is a phenomenon. it is happening all over melbourne i bet. can we do a small survey? any readers with kids around melbourne please report back to me: do your kids say this? and in which region in melbourne do they go to school? you don't have to say the second bit if you don't want. and if you are overseas and have kids, is this travesty of english happening over there, wherever you are? do you correct your kids? i've corrected princess and she resists me, calls me old fashioned [this is like a slap in the face. moi? old-fashioned?] and says "that's what all the kids say. mum, move into the modern times!"
so, to my today.
i am not taking the gigi to dog training classes.
sad gigi.
i'm also not going to gym.
sad melbournegirl.
reason = i am sick, again, and this is another thing that's shitting me today.
what i am going to do is make boeuf bourgignon (again) and spaghetti bolognaise and upside-down pear cake (this is the best, people have orgasms when they eat this cake. really!). john's family are coming over for dinner. usually we go north to his parents' place on a thursday night for the big italiano feast. but his parents are away in qld having a holiday so i thought it would be nice to have his bro and family and sis and family down south to eat.
it was a good idea, but unfortunately my work has cranked up. the research stuff i am on top of, and thankfully i don't have to go into uni on monday for a meeting, but i am doing stuff for my brother as well, and he has a symposium he's organised at a uni interstate, and i am debugging his software as he writes it, as well as making edits to the userguide. it's really hard and makes my head hurt. i am a text girl, not a computer geek. though i try, and i can use latex and know a bit about using linux. i feel like a hacker when i talk like this. it's like that scene in a fish called wanda where john cleese is wooing jamie lee curtis with his russian and italian etc. and she is going wild. for some reason, hacker-talk does the same to me. i. don't. know. why.
anyway, away. to boeuf. to pears. to mozilla. and to the rest of the day.

bring david hicks home

带来大卫hicks 在家


breng het huis van David hicks


apportez les hicks de David à la maison


holen Sie David hicks nach Hause


φέρτε το σπίτι του Δαβίδ hicks


porti i hicks di david a casa


デイヴィッドのhicks を家に持って来なさい


데비드 XXks을 집으로 가져오십시요


traga hicks de david para casa


принесите hicks Давида домой


traiga los hicks de David a casa


bring david hicks home


komma med david hicks hem


أحضرت دايفيد هكس إلى البيت


david hicks eve getir

on david hicks, waleed aly tells it like it is

this is going to get me on a few more lists, no doubt. luckily i never plan to be a politician, minister of religion, school principal, director of a major corporation or member of a royal family, otherwise there would certainly be dirt to dig and bring out later on.

on the subject of nadine's guilt-free three and fluffy's guilt-ridden three, i've had a lot of trouble working out what mine would be, and where the line is between the two categories.

but for today, waleed aly is my poster boy for justice. it was michelle g in canberra the other day; see how fickle i can be?

check him:














today in the age on page 21, waleed's article on hicks is headlined "rights reduced to rhetoric".

let me pull out two paragraphs:

when several UN special rapporteurs, on behalf of the UN commission on human rights, labelled the treatment of guantanamo detainees "torture", the howard government relied on the assurances of the white house, and spent more energy defending the regime than ensuring an australian citizen's human rights. we have left hicks there for 4 1/2 years. we left mamdouh habib there for three. then he was released without charge.

the right to a fair trial; freedom from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment - in the human rights landscape, these are colossal landmarks. without them, other human rights become mere rhetoric. immediately after world war II, anyone could have told you that.

and:

we talk of human right being as important as security. but in truth, we subordinate them to political imperatives.

that should be unthinkable in a nation that pioneered human rights.

but then, perhaps, we are no longer that same nation.

haiku for hicks*

how lonely you are
in a foreign cell, just one
adelaide boy. shit.

you must be so sad
or are you depressed much?
suicidal, yes?

what do they feed you?
do you get some exercise?
letters from loved ones?

do they beat you, dave?
taunt you, or hurt your psyche?
or do they do worse?

do they leave you there
alone, night and day, alone
with no one to see

not even a rat
a friendly living creature
that might comfort you

just to see whiskers
poking, twitching through the bars
do you have bars there?

do you wear orange
every single day, dave-o
do you have a beard?

are your eyes sunken?
is your skin really pallid?
can you sleep at night?

do you know at all,
do you have any idea
that some people care?

there are people now
who are writing to the press
sending letters in

there are journalists
who are trying hard for you
to bring justice home

to bring david home
not just bleeding hearts and lefts
but normal people

people who just care
about things like right and wrong
and bringing you home









* apols to la nadine, for hijacking her most lovely art form and besmirching its beauty and turning it into a naff form of political protest.

hicks, grattan and me

well, apart from the loverly dxxxx and mars who have left comments, it seems it's me and the other mg on this topic.

say hi to michelle.










i'm not criticising anyone who didn't leave a comment; i know there are bigger and more important issues to focus on right now*, other than a man who has been left to rot in a jail overseas without a fair trial. or any trial.

michelle tells me today on page 9 of the age that the people who are against the government on this are: major michael mori, hicks' lawyer; david mcleaod, adelaide lawyer for hicks; the greens; australian democrats; fairgofordavid (support group). ok, thus far we have a list of people who could be argued to have vested interests.

what about the following?
nicholas cowdrey, nsw director of public prosecutions; law council of australia; international commission of jurists (australia); lex lasry qc, he of the fight for the underdog fame. and cindy sheehan, mother of killed us soldier, ok she has a vested emotional interest.

then there's lord goldsmith, british attorney-general; reverend john sentamu, archbishop of york; brigadier gerard fogarty, a soldier somewhere i guess, doesn't specify and gerard brennan, former australian high court chief justice.

oh, plus 76 lawyers who signed an open letter to the pm; people who were willing to put their names to this protest.

and then there's me, and maybe you.

against this is listed, as supporters of america's treatment of hicks:

john howard and the federal government
kim beazley and the federal opposition
george bush and the us government

the final word has to go to mori, hick's us lawyer. he's a marine, and he looks like one. he says that "marines love underdogs. i'm a marine" and always signs his emails with "sf" which refers to the expression semper fidelis (always faithful.)

again i ask.

send david hicks home.

and if howard says one more time "i believe, and i think most people would believe" i will fucking scream. i am not most people. most people in this country are idiots because they voted that government back in again. i'm sorry, if you voted liberal at the last election, you are no friend of mine. let's get that out there.



and by the way, are people not commenting because:

a. they don't give a rats about this

b. they're scared of being associated with me, ms sedition? in which case i will have to do the GOB cocococo chicken dance at you most promptly.

c. i have no readers?




i welcome feedback, even in email form so you don't have to have any visible connections to this most incendiary of blogs.

melba_grrrl@yahoo.com






* this is my disclaimer. if you happen to have a post currently on any of these topics, DO NOT TAKE OFFENCE. it's not aimed at anyone in particular, i'm just trying to be funny, so please don't get cross my friend. you know who i'm talking to. yes, you. just move your little green hand away from the delete-melbournegirl-from-blogroll-button, nice and slow.

[insert smiley face here]


i'm mad as hell and i'm not going to take it anymore.