Why I Love Australia (Krauthammer)

Washington Post ^ | June 23, 2006 | Charles Krauthammer

[West Coast Conservative]

In the Australian House of Representatives last month, opposition member Julia Gillard interrupted a speech by the minister of health thusly: "I move that that sniveling grub over there be not further heard."

For that, the good woman was ordered removed from the House, if only for a day. She might have escaped that little time-out if she had responded to the speaker's demand for an apology with something other than "If I have offended grubs, I withdraw unconditionally."

God, I love Australia. Where else do you have a shadow health minister with such, er, starch? Of course I'm prejudiced, having married an Australian, but how not to like a country, in this age of sniveling grubs worldwide, whose treasurer suggests to any person who "wants to live under sharia law" to try Saudi Arabia and Iran, "but not Australia." He was elaborating on an earlier suggestion that "people who . . . don't want to live by Australian values and understand them, well then they can basically clear off." Contrast this with Canada, historically and culturally Australia's commonwealth twin, where last year Ontario actually gave serious consideration to allowing its Muslims to live under sharia.

Such things don't happen in Australia. This is a place where, when the remains of a fallen soldier are accidentally switched with those of a Bosnian, the enraged widow picks up the phone late at night, calls the prime minister at home in bed and delivers a furious, unedited rant -- which he publicly and graciously accepts as fully deserved. Where Americans today sue, Australians slash and skewer.

For Americans, Australia engenders nostalgia for our own past, which we gauzily remember as infused with John Wayne plain-spokenness and vigor.

[naturalman1975]

The Australians remind us of our cowboy past, all right--except that they have fixed things so that they don't allow themselves to have guns anymore. That act of self-castration has always puzzled me.

OK - Australian gun owner writing here. One of well over a million Australian gun owners owning somewhere over five million firearms, all legally held by private citizens in a country of 21 million people - and God only knows, how many guns aren't being held in full accordance with the law.

The idea that Australians have been disarmed is a myth. It's a myth that has gained great currency in the US for some reason, but it is not true. It is perfectly legal, provided you get a licence - and that licence is easy to get provided you don't have a criminal record - for any Australian citizen to own basic longarms. It is somewhat more complicated to own a handgun, or a semi-automatic weapon, but again most people could do it if they wanted to. Fully automatics are genuinely difficuly to own, but not totally impossible.

Australia does not have perfect gun laws by any means - we have universal registration, we had some overly strict rules on weapons storage. But firearms are not banned and we are not disarmed.

[Brian Allen]

<< I should warn you the Canadians are very touchy. >>

Then I should return the favor and warn you that I went to college in Canada [NB] and have had a place in BC for decades -- and know of what I speak.

And that I should also warn you and -- before any of them, via the projection of their ire, give themselves away -- any interested Canadians, that it is not the lies told about (even "very touchy") folks that most piss them off -- but the truths.

[GMMAC]

Nice little rant but an "F" in History and/or Poli-Sci.

Aside from you having totally ignored the UK's friendship and as but one refuting example, Canada's 'Princess Pat's" were awarded their U.S. Presidential Citation for their exceptional heroism within the time-frame you've cited.

Fortunately, smugly arrogant folks like yourself are a decided minority in America or the dozens of countries which have sent troops to fight & die beside yours in numerous conflicts since WW2 likely wouldn't have bothered.

Logically, supposed 'conservatives' who feel free to ignorantly pee on America's friends whenever the mood strikes them shouldn't complain and/or be too surprised whenever their President has any difficulty putting together coalitions.

[GMMAC]

"I went to college in Canada [NB]"

Equivalent translation:
I went to college in America [Arkansas]

Given you somehow were unaware of /overlooked Britain's friendship, one wonders: 'Exactly which French School was it that you attended?'

BTW, "projection"? - Dr. Phil?
Want the truth? Read my previous post.

[spatso]

Watch out the Canadians are going to attack furiously. They seem to try to beat down criticism through a tag team approach combining a flurry of invective and ridicule against anyone who challenges Canadian strength on the international scene.

[kanawa]

Your patriotism is admirable.
Your hyperbolic arrogance is not.

I respect you as a Freeper,
but I will engage in no further discussion with you.

[kanawa]

ignored the UK's friendship

You only have to look at the bottom of his home page to see what he thinks of the Brits.

[proud_yank]

It seems curious how comfortable you are ganging up on me.

Because its so easy.

But when you encounter a few other comments tending to affirm some of the things I may have implied you appear to react far too strongly to the situation. Perhaps you all need to calm down and ask yourself if Canada does in fact have an image that is soft.

What I would like to know is why you would come to a conservative forum and attack people who share similar views? Your prejuidice views, combined with the fact that you would openly admit you saw Brokeback Mountain, make me wonder if you are a liberal.

I did not think I said anything particularly new or insightful.

I've yet to read any of your posts that I would label as new or insightful.

[Brian Allen]

"Further?"

"Discussion?"

"Hyperbolic arrogance?"

You have a mirror handy, I pray and trust?

Or are you just another poor Trudeaudistanian?

[PS: Lighten up -- or you'll risk find yourself taking me seriously. <];^~< ]

[Brian Allen]

<< You only have to look at the bottom of his home page to see what he thinks of the Brits. >>

That's what he KNOWS of the Brits, maliciously-gossipping Girlyboys.

[Brian Allen]

<< Watch out the Canadians are going to attack furiously. >>

Meeeeeeowwwww??

[As in: -- Don't you mean they're going to do an Anglo-Saxon and gutlessly gang up on me like a bunch of bovver-booted bullying girly-boyish translocated Euro-weanied wankers?

[GMMAC]

Thanks for pointing that out ... I never got that far earlier; having left shaking my head once I got to Voltaire.

BTW, one wonders precisely when America's current principal ally in Iraq turned 'girlie'; given that Churchill figures rather prominently within this intellectual rats' nest.

[spatso]

"why you would come to a conservative forum and attack people who share similar views?"

I hope I have not attacked any person inappropriately. It seems to me this entire matter flows out of a single but, oft repeated observation. Specifically, I believe the Canadian administration had made a serious error by not censuring or at least distancing itself from the two gay Mounties getting married in their dress uniforms. It is my belief that when you take an enormously strong symbol like the Mounties and allow it to be weakened on national tv in a gay marriage scene, you trivialize the already weak image of Canada.

[kanawa]

The idea that Australians have been disarmed is a myth.

Thanks for stating that. It is a myth attached to numerous countries.
Canada, Britain and France among others.

[Brian Allen]

<< Contrast this with Canada, historically and culturally Australia's commonwealth twin ... >>

Better watch it on your next trip to Aus with the missus, Charles.

Comparing Australia to Canada is a darned good way to earn yourself a Sniveling Grub award!

BUMPping [Whenyah gunna jump the Tassie, shaggs? Melbourne needs you!]

[spatso]

"Don't you mean they're going to do an Anglo-Saxon and gutlessly gang up on me like a bunch of bovver-booted bullying girly-boyish translocated Euro-weanied wankers?"

Yes, that is what I meant to say!

[GMMAC]

"... an enormously strong symbol like the Mounties..."

C'mon, say "hunky", you know you want to.

[Brian Allen]

;-)

[kanawa]

I'm rethinking my 'respect' and getting a new appreciation for MadIvan's decision.

Btw, did you get the sense that someone threatened me?
I'm confused by the broken English.

[proud_yank]

It is my belief that when you take an enormously strong symbol like the Mounties and allow it to be weakened on national tv in a gay marriage scene, you trivialize the already weak image of Canada.

Gays in the American Military???

Furthermore, I would venture a guess that Canadian FReepers share that same view. Why so much effort in gay affairs in Canada, when much of the same is happening in America?

How else would you expect people to take the majority of your comments? If the election of Stephen Harper isn't a sign of a major change in direction, I would suggest you learn a little bit more about policy here.

We Americans don't have too much room to point fingers, we had 8 years of the Toon who was pretty buddy-buddy with Cretien & Martin, and shared many of the same ambitions.