From today's Crikey [on subscription only - worth getting by the way]:
"Howard v Obama: what the US blogs say
When Obama's President, We're Bombing Australia: Is there a reason Howard’s so upset about Barry, considering that all the Democrats running for president are running against the Iraq War — including the usually bloodthirsty but ever-adaptable Hillary. Not even Republicans are in line with Bush’s crazy bullsh-t these days ... One reason might be that Howard noticed Barry’s complexion; John Howard’s government doesn’t care much for the dark-skinned folk -- especially dark-skinned Muslim folk, and we all know Barry was raised in a madrassa by his mom, Mama bin Laden ... John Howard’s not exactly a smarty jones. -- Wonkette
President Bush, however, has not spoken with Prime Minister Howard of Australia since Jan. 9, the White House maintains, with a not-so-thinly-veiled attempt to dispute suggestions that Bush had put his good friend from Sydney and ally in the war in Iraq up to criticism for the Illinois senator who announced his candidacy for the Democratic presidential nomination over the weekend. -- The Swamp, Chicago Tribune blog
Australia's Slime Minister: We all know the Dems have been in bed with Al Qaeda for years but couldn't do anything about strengthening their alliance until they got into power. But it took the clarity of Howard to sum it up, and when you break his statement down, you can hardly disagree with its validity. -- The Huffington Post
Howard’s position is completely understandable: despite taking risks at home to back America, allies will be abandoned when it’s inconvenient for America. If being a friend of the United States will bring you no rewards and hurt you, nobody will be a friend. Indeed, it pays to be neutral or antagonistic. Nevertheless, Howard was clumsy in his criticism. He didn’t need to mention Obama by name; all he needed to do was note that setting a timetable would encourage terrorists. -- Snarky B-stards
As I headed over to Memorandum today, I expected to see a slew of liberal attacks on Aussie PM John Howard after he had the audacity to speak the truth about Barack Obama and the Democratic Party ... Surprisingly, at least so far today, the lib bloggers don't seem to be up to the challenge. Maybe that's because the liberal activists don't like Obama as much as the Democrats in general or maybe it's just because what Howard said is absolutely true. -- rightwingnews.com
Howard has been criticized as a "chickenhawk," for supporting Australia's military involvement in Vietnam and Iraq while personally passing on the opportunity to serve in Vietnam. So I guess this makes him a "double chickenhawk." -- Mark Weisbrot and Robert Naiman, The Huffington Post
Neither Howard’s use of the word “pray as many times as possible” nor Obama’s characterization of Howard as “George Bush’s” ally can be entirely coincidental. Both men were speaking to a domestic political audience. -- Pajamas Media
"Howard v Obama: what the US blogs say
When Obama's President, We're Bombing Australia: Is there a reason Howard’s so upset about Barry, considering that all the Democrats running for president are running against the Iraq War — including the usually bloodthirsty but ever-adaptable Hillary. Not even Republicans are in line with Bush’s crazy bullsh-t these days ... One reason might be that Howard noticed Barry’s complexion; John Howard’s government doesn’t care much for the dark-skinned folk -- especially dark-skinned Muslim folk, and we all know Barry was raised in a madrassa by his mom, Mama bin Laden ... John Howard’s not exactly a smarty jones. -- Wonkette
President Bush, however, has not spoken with Prime Minister Howard of Australia since Jan. 9, the White House maintains, with a not-so-thinly-veiled attempt to dispute suggestions that Bush had put his good friend from Sydney and ally in the war in Iraq up to criticism for the Illinois senator who announced his candidacy for the Democratic presidential nomination over the weekend. -- The Swamp, Chicago Tribune blog
Australia's Slime Minister: We all know the Dems have been in bed with Al Qaeda for years but couldn't do anything about strengthening their alliance until they got into power. But it took the clarity of Howard to sum it up, and when you break his statement down, you can hardly disagree with its validity. -- The Huffington Post
Howard’s position is completely understandable: despite taking risks at home to back America, allies will be abandoned when it’s inconvenient for America. If being a friend of the United States will bring you no rewards and hurt you, nobody will be a friend. Indeed, it pays to be neutral or antagonistic. Nevertheless, Howard was clumsy in his criticism. He didn’t need to mention Obama by name; all he needed to do was note that setting a timetable would encourage terrorists. -- Snarky B-stards
As I headed over to Memorandum today, I expected to see a slew of liberal attacks on Aussie PM John Howard after he had the audacity to speak the truth about Barack Obama and the Democratic Party ... Surprisingly, at least so far today, the lib bloggers don't seem to be up to the challenge. Maybe that's because the liberal activists don't like Obama as much as the Democrats in general or maybe it's just because what Howard said is absolutely true. -- rightwingnews.com
Howard has been criticized as a "chickenhawk," for supporting Australia's military involvement in Vietnam and Iraq while personally passing on the opportunity to serve in Vietnam. So I guess this makes him a "double chickenhawk." -- Mark Weisbrot and Robert Naiman, The Huffington Post
Neither Howard’s use of the word “pray as many times as possible” nor Obama’s characterization of Howard as “George Bush’s” ally can be entirely coincidental. Both men were speaking to a domestic political audience. -- Pajamas Media
Comments