switching off

is anyone interested in this?





i hadn't heard anything about it til my crazy uncle [the nice one] sent me a link. looks like the sydney/melbourne divide is alive and well. or maybe it's just a naff idea and nobody likes it.

what to do you reckon? i think i'll do it. maybe i'll take frank for a walk or soak in a candle-lit bath for a spell.

i wonder if laptops count...

good moon risin'

where to start?

in good news for the union movement [and by proxy, australian workers] the combet rumour was a false alarm. we may all hope he changes his mind one day.

kev continues to make hay while the sun shines. howard's attempts to refocus attention on national security were transparent - there was far more coverage of broadband for all, and the treasurer's criticism of the "future fund raid" backfired. badly. not to mention the revelation about what the future fund was earmarked for. taxpayers love that stuff.

as for the burke fracas, the best thing to come out of that [apart from deepening disillusionment with howard among even his supporters] was the trip down memory lane with the man himself.



and in a hollow victory, david hicks may be home soon.



what else?

oh, and...

i thought i would be a democrat...

not that i have voted for them in a long time but that's what i thought i'd be. apparently not.

who said it?

from a column in today's paper...

NOT even John Howard's stunts now work.

Or, rather, it's only the Prime Minister's stunts that aren't working. Consider his month of mishaps.

Howard attacks the integrity of Labor leader Kevin Rudd, only to find his dodgy minister, Santo Santoro, hid 72 share deals he should have disclosed. He berates Rudd for meeting with the disgraced Brian Burke, only to find another of his own ministers, Ian Campbell, met the Labor fixer, too. He flies to Iraq for nice pictures of him cheering up the troops, only to be filmed scrambling out of a Hercules filling with smoke.

Two ministers lost, Iraq up in smoke and ageing Howard on the run. Terrible imagery.

[and later]

Now Labor has an intelligent, moderate, energetic and articulate leader at last, with a message we haven't heard enough of - of optimism. People want to hear what he has to offer, and don't want to be sidetracked.

I'm afraid -- actually I'm delighted -- that the Liberals' best chance of winning again will come down to something very basic. They'll just have to offer better policies than Labor, and better leadership.

So forget stunts. Forget mock outrage, abuse and hyped-up claims. Forget sudden multi-billion promises of the too-clever kind that come with free steak knives. And especially forget running off smoking planes.

The election will come down to voters simply choosing between the policies of the Coalition and Labor, and between Howard and Rudd. It's the choice we demand. It's a choice we deserve.

bloody hell.

meet me tonight in atlantic city

imagine you were looking ever so much forward to a BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN TRIBUTE NIGHT at the tote and it also happened to be the night your father flies in unexpectedly and insists on taking you and your new husband out to dinner. i guess i could've said i was busy when he called last night [I WAS, DAD, I NEARLY SAID SO] but i imagine my enjoyment of the boss and his awesomeness would be severely curtailed if i knew my dad was sitting in the sofitel getting shickered by himself. of course, i could've also sent the android along on a solo mission to do some male bonding but i don't think he's ready for one-on-one time with big al and besides that's just cruel.

so if anyone goes to the tote tonight, at 7.30, for the barlight cinema, to witness interviews with bruce and the band and other rare screen footage, and generally swoon and scream and maybe even faint, let me know how excellent it was.

actually, don't.

fun ahoy

as well as parlour games, board games, and plummy, twee, outdoor games like badminton and bocce, i also love rides. you know, where you pay your money and get in a little carriage and get hurtled around a track very fast or very slow, depending on what the ride-makers want you to see along the way? i've been to disneyland and universal studios, and was quite uninterested in anything that wasn't a ride. i would get off the space mountain rollercoaster and walk immediately to the end of the queue to go again. i spent a good deal of three days in the queue for space mountain, actually, and it was completely worth it. i've been on rides at dreamworld, sea world, movieworld, expo 88, the ekka*, luna park, ocean park in hong kong, the old tops at the myer centre in brisbane - i even went on rides at dodgy local shows like pittsworth and roma and mt isa. i really shouldn't trust the carnies but i do BECAUSE I LOVE RIDES.

i tell you this because tonight i'm going to the imax cinema for the first time, mostly because i realised that it'll be rather like a ride. and as i've gotten older, i don't get to go on rides so much anymore. i hate going to rna shows now, and last time i took my little cousins to luna park, i was actually a bit scared by the unsafe-lookingness of it all. another consequence of becoming an old lady - you begin to have more concern for your safety/well-being/limbs.** so for now, imax it is.

i've never been to imax. we're seeing haunted castle [IN 3D WOW WHAT WILL THEY THINK OF NEXT?] at the spooky time of 10. at night. are you scared or what i certainly would be if i believed in supernatural phenomena. but i ain't afraid of no ghost. and besides, bustin' makes me feel good.


p.s. check the "plot". i'm excited.


*how hilariously dirt is their site? aah, takes me back...

**i'm sure there's also something there about being "in control" ie. the younger person could care less about surrendering control over the situation and enjoys the unpredictability of someone else in charge. or something. i dunno. it's more the rickety ones that worry me now. i'd still totally waste all my time at disneyland on space mountain.

who knew #2?*

the bill of rights is actually just the first ten amendments to the american constitution. these were/are, in order:

1st - freedom of speech, assembly, religion, the press, and petition
2nd - right to bear arms
3rd - protection from the billeting of troops
4th - protection from unreasonable search and arrest
5th - double jeopardy, due process, self-incrimination and private property
6th - rights of the accused, including trial by jury
7th - trial by jury in civil cases worth over twenty dollars [allowing for inflation]
8th - reasonable bail and protection from cruel and unusual punishment
9th - protection of rights not covered in the bill of rights
10th - states rights

the first is nice, isn't it? we like that one. obviously, the fifth is the biggie. that's the one most people are familiar with, due to its ubiquity in pop culture representations. "pleading the fifth", or the right to remain silent, is a good protection to have if ever you're accused of something [whether you did it or not]. but did you know that the fifth also covered double jeopardy [can't be tried for the same crime twice], due process and property rights? i didn't.

the second amendment is a hoot. here it is in full...

A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.

i'm pretty sure that all those americans running around with their very own guns are not part of a "well-regulated militia". not sure that america needs one so much now, what with the POLICE FORCE, NATIONAL GUARD AND A MILITARY CONSISTING OF A STANDING ARMY, NAVY AND AIR FORCE. but hey, they don't wanna wear selt-belts either. and who are we to say otherwise?

the third basically says that if there's a war, and the government needs to move some soldiers into your house, they need to ask your permission first. it also suggests that they really shouldn't be using your house as barracks during peacetime. phew!

my favourite, though, is the ninth amendment. it's saying 'hey! you have other rights that we haven't thought of/can't fit on here. if you have other rights under any other laws, then we'll honour them using this ninth amendment.' it's kinda like "insert individual right here __________." bless.

the united states went on to add tons more amendments to its constitution, including famous ones like the abolition of slavery [13th], women's suffrage [19th, not til 1920!], prohibition [1919, repealed 1933, the 18th and 21st] and two-term presidents [22nd in 1951].

by contrast, australians don't like their constitution being fucked with [discussed, or even read], which might be because ours pretty much protects the rights of corporations and states, as opposed to individuals. there are only three rights that are constitutionally guaranteed to australian citizens: just compensation for private property seized, trial by jury, and freedom of religion. of course, we're also deeply suspicious of centralised power and grand statements of intent. we didn't blood our country in a revolutionary war, and we weren't in any hurry to codify our rights and responsibilities as australians [we took steps in 1901, 1931, 1942, and 1986]. we still don't have our own head of state.



do you think we need our own bill of rights?




*with apologies to those who a] knew this stuff already, or b] don't care so deeply for americana as i do.

a letter from st paul

"In a brief but colourful foray into political life today, Mr Keating referred to Treasurer Peter Costello as "all tip and no iceberg" and Prime Minister John Howard as a dessicated coconut."

jesus

...

so much better

feeling much improved today and ready to share.

michael mori is a truly wonderful specimen [this is a nice way to spend some time with him]. bonnie commented that he appears to us like a hero from another time. i'd agree. he's unreasonably good-looking, in an old hollywood kind of way. but i think part of it is the uniform - it never lets us forget that he is a united states marine, representing an australian citizen, putting the pursuit of justice before code and country. he's telling us, with his actions, that there are higher ideals than those that underpin the united states and its military. he's talking about human rights and the rule of law and he won't shut up.

completely self-effacing and charming beyond belief, he has all the charisma and eloquence of a trial lawyer [ironic, given david hicks can't get a trial] without sacrificing any of his appeal as the all-american-boy-next-door. he was given a standing ovation when he entered the theatre, which was followed by another one, replete with cheers and whoops, at the close of proceedings - it was after this one that he appeared genuinely moved. we also heard julian burnside, masterful as usual, and larissa behrendt, who was impressive and easily a match for the formidable men with whom she shared the stage.

burnside reminded us that, while appearing to be resolved, the issue of asylum seekers and their appalling treatment is still as urgent as ever. he also did his level best to provoke a defamation suit from either ruddock, howard or downer [he doesn't care which]. he pointed out that neither he nor robert richter had been sued because ruddock wouldn't dare put himself in a courtroom to defend his reputation, as this would ensure a public airing of his worst excesses, something he will avoid at any cost. genius.

larissa behrendt [check this woman! smart as a whip and foxy as hell] delivered a passionate plea to end indigenous disadvantange in our lifetime. she outlined the ease with which the media continues to focus on horrific instances of abuse in indigenous communities [especially remote ones] without questioning the structural causes of them, and without acknowledging the success stories of aboriginal australia. she made an excellent comparison between drought-afflicted farmers and indigenous townships, both fighting for special treatment and sympathy, where one group is presented as an integral part of our national history [and so worthy of assistance] and the other demonised for incompetence and dysfunction. i'm not doing her argument justice but you get the idea. she was amazing.

but michael mori was the star attraction and he didn't disappoint. he stayed on-message [bring david home] and reminded us that australia is the only country to have endorsed the military commissions that david hicks now faces. he told us that among many other countries, iran has gotten its guys out, and that even the us military acknowledges that no american citizen would ever be subjected to this system. so it's not good enough for americans, brits, indonesians, or iranians, but david hicks remains at its mercy. mori is absolutely convinced that if howard requested it, david hicks could return to australia immediately. this is what he's fighting for.

oh, and his middle name is dante. couldn't you just die?

so yeah

nothing much to see here. i wish i had the time or energy or inclination to tell you all about life's goings on but i don't.

i can tell you that we're going to line up to see major michael mori this afternoon. he's talking at fed square with julian burnside and larissa behrendt about australia's human rights obligations/violations. after seeing him on insight, i'd say he'll be bloody good.

maybe we'll see you there...