Possums Pollytics

Politics, elections and piffle plinking

What a Coalition Apology Would Look Like.

Posted by Possum Comitatus on February 8, 2008

crikey1.jpg This was me in Crikey earlier today.

We apologise to the Stolen Generation” – pretty simple stuff and not really rocket science, unless you try to make it complicated.

The new Opposition, under the leadership of Nick Minch … sorry, Brendan Nelson, have demonstrated that over the last few months they are not a group to take simplicity lightly. So what would such an ordinarily simple apology look like if the Coalition had to write it?

Well for starters, the word “stolen” doesn’t technically describe the reality of the situation according to Tony Abbott:

Some kids were stolen, but some were rescued and some kids were helped, so you have to be true to the real history of our country, not to a fanciful history of our country.

Brendan Nelson believes that “forcibly removed generations” is more accurate, while professional contrarian Dennis Jensen tells us that “I think separated is probably a better word than stolen, personally“.

Ian Macfarlane, in his contribution to reconciliation reckons that: “Some of these children were not stolen from their parents, they were taken by church groups and welfare groups in the belief that these children needed to be looked after“.

These aren’t merely simple definitional quibbles – they are the pursuit of accuracy over the meaning of the word “stolen” and would surely need to be taken into consideration for the wording of any apology. Sadly missing from the field, however, is amateur semanticist Senator John Herron now that he has so unfortunately retired. His contribution to specificity with his ground breaking work on whether 10% of people constitutes a “generation” should continue to be recognised in the Liberal intellectual pantheon.

The other part of that very simple statement is, of course, “We apologise“.

Here too, the Coalition believes that we ought not to let the allure of simplicity stand in the way of definitiveness. Brendan Nelson thinks that “In my view we have no responsibility to apologise or take ownership for what was done by earlier generations“, and that, “I have great difficulty with the idea of intergenerational responsibility for the good or not-so-good things done in the past“.

Senator Stephen Parry appreciates that “we should acknowledge what has happened, feel sympathy for what has happened, but we can’t take full responsibility for something that has happened well before we were born.”

While not to be outdone, Senator John Watson professes that “There is a possibility that some of the genuine people could feel a little bit hurt when they did it with the best of motives. Many are still alive in northern Tasmania, some of them are friends of mine“.

So how would the two versions of the apology stack up? On the one hand we would have the Coalition version:

We acknowledge and sympathise with, whilst not being able to take full intergenerational responsibility for, those Aboriginal people of the forcibly removed group of individuals that may or may not be accurately described as a generation, whilst simultaneously recognising that many members of this group of separated Aboriginal people were actually helped, rescued or otherwise looked after by the well meaning church and welfare bodies at the time, including the genuine people that participated in these organisations with the absolute best of motives.

Or the alternative:

We apologise to the Stolen Generation.

It’s quite obvious which one would do the job.

So despair not dear reader, WA Liberal Judith Adams reassures us that should the proposed government apology not meet the Opposition’s high expectations for accuracy, the Coalition will head back into the bunker once more and “…have another party room meeting and discuss it again because I’m sure it has to be right for us to go along with it“.

Oh the anticipation.

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

add to kwoff

About these ads

55 Responses to “What a Coalition Apology Would Look Like.”

  1. kwoff.com said

    What a Coalition Apology Would Look Like. « Possums Pollytics

    “We apologise to the Stolen Generation” – pretty simple stuff and not really rocket science, unless you try to make it complicated.

    The new Opposition, under the leadership of Nick Minch … sorry, Brendan Nelson, have demonstrated that over the l…

  2. Islander said

    Polly – you missed one important component of the Coalition’s version – the demand for (presumably) non-inter-generational forgiveness from indigenous people as proposed earlier today by Peter Lindsay – the libs new intellectual pin-up!

    http://www.bigpond.com/news/breaking/content/20080208/2157397.asp

  3. Jason said

    LMAO. Good addition to your nice new line in snark, poss.

    Islander – Peter Lindsay, philosopher-king of the the tropics, or “member for paradise” as he likes to describe himself in the media, has found a whole new way to disgrace himself. I wonder, would the extension of forgiveness need to happen before they could contemplate an apology?

    I’m making an early call – there will not be another Liberal Prime Minister for the next decade.

  4. Possum Comitatus said

    Fark me dead Islander – for the first time in very a long time, I’m speechless. Peter Lindsay, putting the silly into reconciliation (or the con, or the ill – the options are endless!) :mrgreen:

    Jas – better ingredients, better snark!

    These coalition guys (and gals, let us not forget the hypnotic mistress of the dark, that cover girl for Hypnotism Monthly magazine, Julie ‘Mezmerelda’ Bishop here!) are supplying such a rich vein of unadulterated nonsense at the moment that stand up comedians (or even Snarky Possums) can feast like never before.

    I’m finding myself looking forward to Friday Parliamentry sessions, with the new rules that Friday is to become “backbenchers day”. It’s really all just too good to be true!

  5. Julian Watson said

    I’m sort of sorry that the Coalition isn’t sorry. No hang on; I’m regretful that the Coalition isn’t sorry…

  6. dawson said

    Ah, but Julian, aren’t you admitting responsibility for the Coalition’s inability to say sorry? And thereby laying yourself wide open to numerous lawsuits? You can’t be too careful nowadays – careless lips sink ships, you know.
    Poss, a fine apology, but I’m disappointed you didn’t work in the bit about Senator Watson’s friends.

  7. Possum Comitatus said

    Dawson, it was tempting! But I give the poor old Tasmanians enough stick without besmirching their otherwise fine genetics by associating them with Senator Watson ;-)

    I’m surprised that Peter Tucker still talks to me!

  8. David Richards said

    Nonsense is right, poss. Aquaman and SuperHornet claiming that Rudd is to blame for inflation, interest rates, your kids poor test results, the strange smell in the air, the death of Elvis, my missing socks.. and the laughable attack labelling the apology cum sorry statement as wedge politics .. after 11 years of atomic wedgies from Rattus Nonveritas. Speaking of the prevaricating rodent, he has shown his true colours by opposing the sorry statement, despite all the arguments he used against it no longer applying since he has had to hand over the keys to Kirribilli. The libs are sorry.. sorry they lost the election.. sorry they let JWH vandalise Australia’s IR system…….

  9. jocko said

    what im finding amazing is that the libs dont yet realise that they are no longer the govt.Nelson demanding that Rudd tells him the full text of what he is going to say is laughable.When johnny was pm. he did whatever he wanted and if you didn’t like it well tuff shit,he didn’t even tell his own backbenchers. At least Rudd had the decency to give nelson a breifing as to what he was going to say.And what about bug eyes saying awas must stay as they help to keep inflation down how? by fuck you shitkicker you do as your told by your betters and let us rich people and companies get richer.which brings on the ex Packer -lackey whinging that lab. should stop blaming the libs for rate risers when he well knows that they ignored warnings from the fed bank that this was going to happen but hey we are the great economic managers so again f–k you we know better than the fed bank..
    I cant wait for the first time one of these pricks get booted out of parliment by the speaker for some trivial point maybe then they might realise the worm has turned.
    sorry poss if off topic a few beers does that.

  10. Don said

    Garn, Jocko, don’t hold back, tell us what you really think!
    ;-)

  11. jocko said

    i think my feelings are quite clear. i am sure the libs haven’t got a clue what life in oposition is like

  12. David Richards said

    jocko – they haven’t a clue.. period!

    That such a rag-tag mob of incompetent buffoons was in charge of this country for 11 years is a sad indictment on all those who deigned to vote for the sorry lot of sorry excuses for human beings.

  13. Greeensborough Growler said

    I take a more sanguine view of the Libs on this issue. Clearly, by Minchin’s words the selection of Nelson as leader was driven by his preparedness to communicate with the Party on the Apology rather than megaphone like Turnbull.

    So now those very same conservatives (who have taken as much consultation as you can possibly use)have to reconcile the fact that a majority of their Party wants the Apology and even more importantly the nation is demanding it.

    No doubt there will be a few recalcitrants who hold out, but the Apology will pass the Parliament with overwhelming support. This to me is a good thing for the Aborigines and a great step forward for Australia.

    Don’t give a stuff about political point scoring on this issue.

  14. Hans Durer said

    Tony Abbot says we must not feel ownership or make apologies for past misdeeds
    Goodness…we have had a half-a-century of apologies and regrets for the Nazi Holocaust,and still counting…it’s one of the staples of the Jewish Lobby ,and will come as a relief to the current generation of Germans,who are still lectured about their guilt!!
    …..and what about an apology for the Palestinians,for the theft of their land!!

  15. Brian McKinlay said

    What is the problem for the Liberals with just a single word…”Sorry”..do they need hours in the Party Room to talk about that..just S.O.R.R.Y ..or are they really slow learners ???

  16. Crikey Whitey said

    The Lib stuff is pewkienese.

    Sorry, like hell! The Libs can barely say it, let alone feel it, mean it. Never will, until the force of law is upon them.

    I wonder what ‘sorry’ means, given the begrudging attitude.

    Even the words Kev may put forward.

    What will the words imply? They had better be good, for my money, which I would gladly give, and the Government must do.

    If this is just a form of words, I will be mightily displeased.

    Whatever is said, it must foreshadow, at minimum, a form of legislation, which both Houses are obliged to consider, then pass, or think of the consequences. Don’t ask me what that should be, but words are cheap.

    Legislation is a commitment. Subject to the people.

    Law.

    Fine words are not.

    Legislation must be considered, passed or rejected. It consolidates a matter. Any present or future Government or Opposition must amend or repeal something, which is under consideration or has been passed into law.

    Which puts them on the line.

    Legislation embodies what mere words do not.

    Kev. Put our money where your mouth is.

  17. Ron said

    I think the Aboriginal leaders want the word “sorry’ not ‘appologise”

    I think the Australian white & black people want to hear separately from the ‘sorry’ statement ,is a tangible achievable vision of what Aboriginal leaders want their Aboriginal communities IDEALY to look like (socially , economically culturally, politically) as a FINAL solution

  18. Meng Tan said

    If they’re so concerned about semantics, they should worry less about the accuracy of the term “Stolen Generations” and more about the accuracy of the name “Liberal Party”.

  19. Crikey Whitey said

    I have just expressed my opinion on where ‘sorry’ is to take us, in a discussion with Fred Cheney, compered by Rod Quinn, on ABC Radio. A most unsatisfactory response, in my view.

    Sure, Fred Cheney understands this and that, but I did not gain the impression from this advocate, that the first people should regain or keep their lands. I may be mistaken, but it is all about forging economic relationships. So different from spiritual.

    Minutes thereafter, I hear that John Howard may be granted a knighthood!

  20. [...] commentator Possum Comitatus has been helping the Liberal Party draft their version of an apology and Betty Sue looks forward to watching Brendan ‘bad-boy’ Nelson choke on it. John [...]

  21. David Richards said

    Hans – what about white Australia beating Japan over the head over what happened in the 1940s?

    Fair enough to beat them up over whaling tho..

  22. Bushfire Bill said

    Howard’s version of “Sorry” the the aboriginal community was along the lines of, “I’m sorry it happened. What a shame.” It’s the kind of thing you’d say to your neighbour if their dog got run over in the street.

    Which is why “Sorry” is a bad word in this particular context. It can be taken two ways: “Sorry, and I hope they catch the bloke who did it,” and “Sorry for what my country did.”

    There should be an apology, with all that entails: asking for forgiveness and a determination to do better. The word “Sorry” is a convenient and concise – but inaccurate – shorthand, more suitable as a pithy newspaper headline than a formal apology.

    We here may not have had anything to do with the abuses perpetrated on aboriginal people, but we still directly benefit from them. Take a look around you. We live in Australia. It used to belong to them. Now it belongs to us. We’re riding on what our predecessors did – sometimes with good hearts, sometimes with evil intent – to bring the transfer of ownership about. In a starkly practical sense we must take ownership of what was done in the past in the name of future generations.

    From a philosophical point of view, as a nation we have a corporate responsibility for all that has gone on before our time, especially that which benefits us to the detriment of others. So, in a very strong moral sense it is as if we, the present Australians, stole the children, murdered whole tribes, introduced exotic diseases and raped the land ourselves.

    An apology makes sense in practical, philosophical and moral terms. Because we may be merely the receivers of stolen goods (and not the actual thieves) it does not mean we have a right to keep them, or that compensation does not have to be paid… [i]by us[/i].

    Compensation? I’m against a cash compensation, paid on a case by case basis, as if it was legal damages. Those who argue against compensation usually put the case this way, the worst possible light in which it can be seen. Keith windschuttle, in one of the biggest dummy-spits I’ve ever read, said today in The Australian that $50 billion would be a minimum, as if by raising the figure to ludricrous levels he could make us see how impractical paying compensation would be. What a slimy rat that man truly is.

    But compensation can be paid in other ways: better health, better housing, more inclusion of aboriginal people in decisions that affect their race: a [i]genuine[/i] and meaningful compensation that will do some good.

    But first the apology. We’re not “Sorry”. We apologize.

  23. Paul Dowden said

    The intergenerational argument is irrelevant. Australia has a parliament. There’s only been one parliament since Federation, it made the laws and led past society to perform actions about which present society is (to put it simply) ‘sorry’. It’s the same parliamentary system: if certain current members can’t cope with accepting parliamentary responsibility for the actions of past members then they should not have placed themselves within a system they don’t understand. Resign, it’s simple. Making weasely excuses is lame.

  24. Enemy Combatant said

    Bushfire Bill, you speak for me too, but ever so much more eloquently. Windschuttle and his ideological cronies attempt to frame Wednesday’s nation (re)defining moment as one that should be experienced as primal fear of monster payouts for punitive damages. In so doing Keith & Co. excise the last vestiges of their humanity and stand naked before us in their buck-lust and their bigotry.

    Clark and Dawe got close with plain language that all could understand. No ifs, no buts, no lawyers, no bullshit.
    Straight from the heart!

    http://www.smh.com.au/news/general/apology-by-john-howard-actor/2008/02/08/1202234144333.html

  25. Ron said

    Bushfire Bill

    A well argued case.

    The words (‘appology’ and ‘sorry’) are not a question of semantics but a question of what they mean culturally to a white man vs a black man

    I think both words should be used because I suspect:
    a white man regards ‘apology’ as a more complete contrition
    a black man regards ‘sorry’ as more strong
    (despite Mr Wedge Howard trying to taint the word ‘sorry’)

    The Future after (‘apologise/sorry’) ?
    I feel it would be a mistake for white Leaders to articulate the
    ‘Aboriginal’ future.

    As I’ve bloged before I would like Aboriginal leaders to articulate what Aboriginal leaders want their Aboriginal communities IDEALY to look like (socially , economically culturally, politically) as a FINAL solution

    Then we can EITHER debate that vision , fine tune it or implement it as is…..
    BUT ultimately complete a final solution , then move on united

    Mr Wedge (Howard)

    I thought the Aborigines wanted the word ‘sorry’

  26. Klaus said

    Ron @ 25

    ‘a FINAL solution’…?

    ummm…

    A great way to put people in a box…and perhaps there are more appropriate phrases to use, connotation-wise and all.

    No doubt there will be a plurality of ‘solutions’ in different communities, and these will evolve over time. We don’t ask non-Indigenous people to come up with FINAL solutions to social problems; and it’s my guess the solutions that Aboriginal leaders’ come up with would involve compromises (over land rights, mining revenues, etc.) that the non-Indigenous community wouldn’t be (or at least to date haven’t been) willing to make.

  27. B.S. Fairman said

    “If we have wronged you in the past, we are sorry”.
    The apology for when your not quite sure what you have done wrong. I would like to send it out to ex-girlfriends.

    Nelson demand to see the exact wording is crazy. What next; he’ll want to see the budget before Swan releases it?

  28. John VK said

    I notice none of you fine scribes has apologised, Prime Minister Rudd, offers it from a Parliament of Peers.

    So if you support the apology do it yourself as well.

    There is a lot wrong with Indigenous affairs in this nation sorry won’t fix it.

    But then I’ve been working on a real apology for a large part of a decade.

    It’s just a political game for most.

    While the apology wheel spinnings been going on thousands raped bashed and murdered, since your noble bridge walk.

    Anyway have a talk amongst yourself or donate some money to the doctor’s and nurses up the territory and other places, trying to sort out third world conditions, which you ignore in this debate about how rude Howard and Co were, at least they tried to do something besides, sorry. Even Labor supports most stuff they did.

    Pretty shallow debate Possum.

    Enjoy Tuesday.

  29. George said

    John VK write: “Anyway have a talk amongst yourself or donate some money to the doctor’s and nurses up the territory and other places, trying to sort out third world conditions, which you ignore in this debate about how rude Howard and Co were, at least they tried to do something besides, sorry. Even Labor supports most stuff they did.”

    Your ignorance is breath-taking if you think Howard and Co tried to do anything other than use the plight of Indigenous Australians as a wedge in the last election.

    And if you think Garn or Jocko above spoke their mind on the Libs and reconciliation, then here’s my response to Janet (fascist) Janet Albrechtsen’s recent blog rubbish-writing in the Oz:

    And who will apologise for you Janet? For the continuous stream of noxious, racist, right-wing articles, month-in, month-out? Brainless, thoughtless, predictable and uninspiring – who will apologise for that? You? Your editors? Rupert Murdoch?

    You will never understand the reasons behind a national apology to the stolen generation – you will never understand what it means to be removed from your family. You will never understand what it means to be under privileged. You will never understand how personal tragedies can inflict a lifetime of pain and anguish, and an inability to deal with anything else in one’s life without reconciliation – true reconciliation, not “regret”. You will never understand because you don’t wish to understand. Deep down you have nothing but contempt for Indigenous Australians, for ethnic Australians, for boat people, for refugees, for anyone non-white or even slightly different to you, and for any concept of multiculturalism, social justice and compassion. You are most certainly bereft of a conscience.

    I look forward to the day you retire and put down your poison quill. And being much younger than you, I know the day will come. And it will be one less toxic “commentator” to have to deal with in the mornings as I read the papers.

    The aboves goes for Janet, and most everyone else in the Liberal party.

  30. Bushfire Bill said

    Speaking of noxious and right wing, John Howard is tipped to receive the Royal Order of the Garter: http://www.smh.com.au/news/people/garter-gossip/2008/02/08/1202234157863.html

    I wonder what he’s getting it for? Couldn’t be for his apology to the aboriginal people, now, could it?

  31. Ron said

    It seems some are not listening to what the Aborigines are asking for !

    THEY (not me) want to hear the word ‘sorry’

    If we think apologise is more appropriate , do we ignore the aborigine’s wishs for the word ‘sorry’ to be used ?

    I simply suggested using both words so that

    re ‘sorry’ we satisfied aborigine’s wishs and

    re ‘apologise’ we made unambigously clear for the future that
    our contrition is not the conditional context the word ‘sorry’ CAN be used for nor the copout context of the Libs

    I commend you Bushfire Bill on an excellent case as to why an apology is warranted and why Compensation should not be monetary

    My earlier blog simply was trying to add to your argument in that I’d like to hear the Aboriginal Leaders articulation of their desired future in practical terms (rather than white Leaders vision) to enable informed debate

  32. Harry 'Snapper' Organs said

    It’s also my understanding that Jenny Macklin has been consulting with many Aboriginal people about not only the wording but the breadth of the apology. If they can get it right in terms of what the Aboriginal people want it to include and how it is to be expressed, I think that’s what’s important. The Opposition (God, it feels so good to say that) can wallow in their semantic quagmire for as long and as loudly as they like. They just look like fools.
    Maybe the Royal Order of the Garter is a consolation prize for losing both government and your own seat, Bushfire Bill? Though I would have thought it more apt for Dolly.

  33. Dockerman said

    Possum

    What these 1950′s Liberal/National politicians’ absolutely fail to realise, is that we’re not talking here about intergenerational GUILT, but, about healing intergenerational HURT.

    Dockerman

  34. David Richards said

    There was a rare sighting of the Howie, (a mythical creature said to once have ruled the country), yesterday.

  35. David Richards said

    Chivalry? Howard? Chicanery more like.

  36. Rod said

    To get official recongition that you have been wronged goes along way to healing and giving a sense of justice.

    The libs think money, they do not seem to undersstand that the common folk have a sense of dignity whether they be a worker seeking fair treatment in the workplace or an aboriganl seeking recognition for past wrings or gays seeking ti recognised as normal couples.

    The proposal of “forcibly removed” is a joke and an insult, like the bullshit they spin when they want to avoid any hard issue and it avoids acknowledgement og a great wrong, which it was to take achild away from their parents and culture for no other reason than they were of mixed race.

    The wording of “forcibly removed” shows they still have their sly weasel cunning in their physce, you can forcibly remove someone for their own good, eg somenone who does want to leave a burning house,or a other dangerous situation like a flood.

    These kids were forcibly removed because they were of mixed race and they were stolen.

  37. Just Me said

    …at least [Howard&Co] tried to do something besides, sorry.

    What a bunch of crap.

    And as to the claim from that professional establishment apologist, Windsuckhole, that we would be paying out 50 billion… So what? Even if true, it would be a trivial amount compared to what we have gained economically and socially from the theft of their land and resources.

  38. Muskiemp said

    The good Christians and Catholics of the Liberal party, don’t want to accept the responsibility of what their fore bearers did to the aboriginal people. Yet they all accept the sins and responsibility of Adam & Eve and carry it through all our generations, for thousands of years and the pain of that Original Sin can only be removed through Baptism.
    Why then is it so hard for them to accept a sorry (baptism)from the Australian government, the same descendants of the past Australian Governments, that passed the Laws of taking children away from their families.

  39. [...] tyranny (although I think that choice of words is inflammatory) or whether Labor supporters want to poke fun at the Coalition (although I think that at least some of the Coalition’s concerns are [...]

  40. Thomarse said

    Just watched Rudd make the apology. I thought it very moving. I was also heartened by talk of this being the start, of practical work to follow.

    Another piece of Howardism scrubbed off, like dog shit rubbed off the sole of a shoe!

  41. fred said

    Possum you accurately picked the thrust of Nelson’s speech.

  42. mate said

    fred Says:
    February 13, 2008 at 10:52 am
    Possum you accurately picked the thrust of Nelson’s speech.

    You sure did poss… One comment I read somewhere the guy reckoned Horatio should have just stood and said…”onya Kev,spot-on I agree” and sat back down again…

    that would have been much smarter

  43. CL de Footscray said

    Dear Possum, a presciently good take on what Nelson actually said, which was of course calculated to appeal to a mix of bizarre views on his own backbench, and thus successfully satisfied no-one. Wilson Tuckey, that appalling Sophie Mirabella and several other non-apologists absconded, by all accounts. Mean-hearted stupidity, thy name is Liberal. Rudd was terrific, IMHO; Nelson, naturally, was dreadful. My favourite moment was the other night, though, when Brendan told a breathless nation that the most important person for Rudd to be negotiating with over the apology was him (Brendan, that is). I wonder when he’ll realise he’s in OPPOSITION? And for good reason.

    Those guys are all so 20th century, (not to mention 19th in the case of Wilson and Sophie, et al). Rudd will be PM for a fair while yet, I’d say. Unless Brendan (or more likely the next one, due any time now) can clean out that party and bring it in to line with something approximating contemporary thinking.

  44. Rod said

    Another piece of Howardism scrubbed off, like dog shit rubbed off the sole of a shoe!

    What a great way to put it, and what a scared little puppy he turned out to be, still in hiding from the public, maybe it is tru he is on anti-depressants as some one else said.

    This should have been a day for all Australians, Fraser, Hawke, Keating and Whitlam made the effort, he was notable by his abscence , a very strong case of sour grapes.

  45. George said

    Rod says: “What a great way to put it, and what a scared little puppy he [Howard] turned out to be, still in hiding from the public…”

    Rod, I hope I speak for many Australians when I say that if we never see or hear from the rodent again then we lose nothing personally, or as a Nation. To describe him as scum would be to offend what naturally grows at the bottom of a pond….. and yes, I have taken my pills today.

  46. paul said

    yep, Nelson didn’t disappoint, sorry, but not really.

  47. Orden e Progresso said

    Poss., the only thing you leave out of the hopeless Opposition ‘apology’ is a denial of the need to pay some reparations…

    Then again, he said that himself didn’t he – rotten bastard.

    Mind you Rudd’s not promising compensation either. I think he should.

  48. Possum Comitatus said

    Funny isnt it, what was supposed to be a piece of satire highlighting the utter silliness of the Coalition position, somehow turned into being a little piece of political prophecy.

    The mind boggles.

  49. The Doctor said

    The problem with Nelson’s address on the floor of the House, was that it repeated the excuses Howard used to not apologise, and the material on the NT Intervention was unnecessary. It therefore seemed insincere.
    He made a speech at the Member’s Hall morning tea that was much better, either because he had heard of the crowd reaction or it reflected his real feelings rather than the party line that he put to the House.

  50. Cat said

    Possum wrote: Julie ‘Mezmerelda’ Bishop

    After watching her expression during Nelson’s speech yesterday that descriptor suddenly makes sense.

  51. Possum Comitatus said

    “Look into my eyes Cat”

    “You will love your AWA”
    :mrgreen:

  52. Cat said

    I listened to the apology on the radio (no tv access at the time) and thought well done Mr O’Seven and then started listening to Lord Nelson. When he started in with his qualifiers I thought – “you had to go and spoil it you lousy prick” and turned it off. I thought later I might have been a bit harsh but then I saw the coverage and that I was far from alone in seeing it that way. Perhaps in the minority given the talkback criticisms of the apology but thankfully not alone – and there in lies your true value Poss.

    Speaking of Ms Bishop – as I watched her yesterday evening I did kind of picture her as one of the matrons at the Cootamundra girls home disciplining her ungrateful charges. I suspect we do not actually inhabit the same planet Julie and I. :)

  53. Ambigulous said

    While Dr Nelson was speaking (I can’t say “apologising” – a workmate said Dr Nelson was “sorryish”), I watched Julie Bishop. She glared. She looked very angry.

    How sad.

    cheerio

  54. Báo Hưng Yên…

    [...]What a Coalition Apology Would Look Like. « Possums Pollytics[...]…

  55. Hello! I simply wish to give an enormous thumbs up for the
    good info you’ve got here on this post. I will be coming again
    to your weblog for more soon.

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

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 57 other followers

%d bloggers like this: