Many will vote with their hip pocket:

Rod Campbell writes: Re. “John Howard’s forgotten people” (yesterday, item 1). You ask if the punters will vote with their head or their heart. Many will vote with their hip pocket. This is a conservative materialistic country up to the neck in debt from mortgages, gambling and credit cards. It is always a hard contest for Labour to win.

Suspending judgement until after the election:

Don Secomb writes: Re. “Rudd risks leaving Labor an empty husk” (yesterday, item 9). Surely you know: First you win the election, and then you have the discussions over principle? What’s the point of doing it before? The vast majority of Labor party members know this and will suspend judgement until after the election.

Niall Clugston writes: While critiquing Kevin Rudd, Jeff Sparrow cannot help himself retailing the slur that Latham thought his successor was “possibly, a CIA agent”. Sparrow helpfully cites the relevant passage in The Latham Diaries (p. 212). But here Latham is merely discussing Laurie Brereton’s view that Rudd is “too close to the US”. He also casts doubt on Rudd’s story that he “grew up in poverty in rural Queensland” – as has been canvassed in the press more recently. Latham concludes: “But a Maryland candidate in our midst, I doubt it.” Can I point out that this “Manchurian Candidate” reference is humorous, or has anti-Latham hysteria – along with a lot of other things – become compulsory?

Too easy on Abbott:

Peter White writes: Re. “The Howard government ducks for cover” (yesterday, item 14). Crikey was too easy on Tony “sh-t happens” Abbot’s refusal to commence negotiating a new health agreement with the states at Tuesday’s national conference of health ministers. I couldn’t believe the words that came out of his mouth (but do give full marks for being so candid). He said that electioneering and getting re-elected were his current priorities and he didn’t have time for such negotiations at the moment. If he hasn’t the time or inclination do the job he is being paid for he should go to the back bench or resign. It really was one of the more remarkable statements I have heard from a politician and I am at a loss to know why it has not received more scrutiny.

Jenny Morris writes: If Tony Abbott won’t start discussions about the next Commonwealth-State health agreement because his main job at the moment is to focus on re-election, he should resign as Health Minister. He’s certainly not earning his money. We aren’t paying him to be re-elected, but to run the Health portfolio – something he’s responsible for until the government goes into caretaker mode, and even then, he has some responsibilities for the portfolio. I assume his department remains ready, willing and able to serve. The arrogance of this lot is breathtaking. Doesn’t the policy and law formerly known as WorkChoices give us some power to sack a Minister who won’t do his job?

A Stirling view:

Ross Copeland, electorate of Stirling voter, writes: Re. “What’s Howard doing in the golden West?” (Tuesday, item 2). John Howard may have taken the mike to mingle with the crowd when he was at the Stirling Community morning tea on Tuesday, but the fact is that these events are carefully orchestrated so that only the party faithful and friends get invited. The rest of us who would really like the opportunity to tell Howard a few home truths can’t even find out where these events are on, let alone get invited. On the other side of the coin, the ACTU Right to Work campaign in Stirling organised a community forum on IR last Sunday. The ALP, the Greens and the Democrats had speakers but Michael Keenan the local member couldn’t/wouldn’t attend and nor did he have anyone attend on his behalf to represent the Liberals. It would seem there were no Liberals in the audience either as no one indicated any support for WorkChoices. If even the Liberals can’t support their IR policy why should anyone else.

Glenn Wheatley:

Ben Morris writes: Re. ‘Wheatley dudded by bureaucratic leaks and zealots” (yesterday, item 3). Chris Seage seems to lose sight of the fact that Glen Wheatley stole $300,000 from the Australian taxpayer. That money would go a long way to sort out problems at my local public hospital. As Chris knows since 1989 there have been fingers pointed at the ATO over leaks but how many prosecutions have there been? Some times the leaks have come from others outside the ATO trying to get a better deal for their clients. When the ATO is embarrassed, it tends to negotiate much more readily. Michael D’Ascenzo wasn’t waving the white flag last week when he declared an amnesty. He was making an offer which the law allows the ATO to do with voluntary disclosures. It is great to see that this deal is in the public arena. Transparency in the tax area goes a long way. As Seage knows when taxpayers get caught in tax office audits they whinge loudly and widely, mount campaigns against the ATO and generally end up receiving a smaller penalty and sometimes win by having all penalties removed. D’Ascenzo is trying to negate the attacks he will receive when the remainder of the Wickenby cases get their knock on the door. Is all the information in tax havens or is some of it is already on shore? This case shows that foreign activities part of the Act is tough. It brings home the old tax adage that “laws instituted to catch the big players usually end up catching the smaller players.”

Maningrida:

Kayt Davies writes: Re. “Maningrida: Watching the intervention roll out” (yesterday, item 5). I notice a few people knocked it in yesterday’s comments. I almost wrote on Tuesday to congratulate you for running it, and am doing so now. His tone rings true to me because he is there, unlike his critics. He doesn’t sound like he hates the locals he lives with but he has on a couple of occasions described them and their patterns of behavior. This is the kind of thing one expects someone to be able to do about the place they’re living in. But for as long as the rest of Australia screams “racist” every time someone tries to describe the culture of the remote communities as being different from the culture in other parts of Australia, we are doomed to be being kept in the dark about what is actually going on up there. Think about it. Culture is shaped by environment and their environment is remote, ours isn’t. Things are different up there and I’m betting that there’s a reason why people who live in the communities tell a different story about what’s happening there, than the city folks or peeps who’ve just breezed over for a day long visit. The sad thing is that this habitual indulgence in pious criticism is making it feel heretical for people like Hamish to speak the truth about what they have seen happening. This pressure to stay silent is the very thing that has caused the issue to fester like an untreated wound for so long. So I say onya Hamish for speaking up, I think you sound more like a realist than a racist. It sounds to me like you’re speaking out in a bid to get some real action happening to help the people you live and work with – while your critics are operating out of other less generous or less considered motives.

Tampa:

Tony Kevin writes: Neil James is ill-informed or disingenuous when he writes on “Tampering with the Tampa” (Tuesday, item 14) that “The rescue occurred in international waters off south-western Java, well within Indonesia’s internationally designated zone of search and rescue responsibility …” Fact is, Neil, this “vessel in distress” – and yes, it really was in distress, read Dark Victory pages 9-13 for a full factual account of the plight of the people on Palapa, and of the two Coastwatch overflights and requests to Canberra for rescue instructions which never came, during the 24-hour period before Tampa providentially came to the rescue – was by Coastwatch records “55 nautical miles west north west of Christmas Island”. Fact is, Neil, Australia obviously had the nearest available rescue craft, and the nearest available landfall on our nearby Christmas Island, for these people who were in manifest distress at sea. One doesn’t need a “proper” port to put on shore rescued people in distress at sea – it only takes a jetty. Yes, Christmas Island falls within “Indonesia’s internationally designated zone of search and rescue responsibility” but Australia manifestly had the duty of care, because we had found the boat in distress. On Canberra’s instructions (Dark Victory notes who may have been involved in these shameful instructions), we shirked our responsibility and waited for the Tampa to show up. We had known Palapa was coming for at least 24 hours before Coastwatch aircraft found it – Coastwatch aircraft knew exactly where to look for it. Does it smell bad? Yes, it does.

Fanning jingoist protectionism:

Mike Martin writes: Re: “Selling the farm to Singapore. And China. And Dubai” (Tuesday, item 27). Despite (or perhaps because of) great reserves of mineral wealth, Australia as a country consistently spends more than it earns and has done so for years. Our foreign trade deficit for last month for example is likely to top a billion dollars when announced next week. We fill the gap by selling off assets but the $4.6 billion of Singapore money tipped in for Alinta won’t keep the country going for even six months. True, Australian money is also invested in other countries, but that outflow simply exacerbates the gap. Remember Dickens’s Mr Micawber? “Income twenty shillings, expenditure twenty shillings and sixpence – result misery.” Instead of fanning jingoist protectionism Stephen Mayne might write about why our highly paid business executives do such a dismal job of making Australia competitive in the world.

The Oz and blogs:

Mercurius Goldstein writes: Re. “The Australian licks its wounds after nasty blog fight” (yesterday, item 21). Mark Bahnisch is right. The recent changes to The Australian’s website have made it less interactive for online readers than the previous version. In honour of the improvements, perhaps news.com.au should change its advertising slogan from “Get Involved” to “Get Stuffed”.

Ray Hassall writes: I couldn’t agree more with Mark Bahnisch’s assessment of the Oz online’s recent metamorphosis. My PC routinely crashes trying to access the content heavy new site (which is also harder to navigate). But I think he’s off the money on the pre-emptive closing off of comments being a technological issue. I recall similar closeoffs on the old site, most recently in relation to a David Nason piece praising the commutation of Scooter Libby’s sentence. I suspect it’s more a case of the moderators jumping on negative feedback. Which brings us to the 64 million dollar question, how can the day to day and investigative journalism on the Oz be so good, and their op ed pieces be so risibly bad? Answers on the back of a beer coaster please!

Vale Bat-boy:

Russell Bancroft writes: Re. “Weekly World News: the end of an error” (yesterday, item 22). I am shocked and disappointed by their decision not to continue to publish (even more so because I am blocked from accessing it on-line at work). The WWN sustained me through two hospital stays. My all time fave front page is the one that shows a photo of Soviet soldiers guarding a UFO. The soldiers were real; the UFO hand-drawn. Thanks to the WWN I have seen the face of Satan, JFK in a wheelchair visiting the grave of Jackie O; I have met bat-boy. I know that the majority of US Congress members are actually “Space” aliens (as opposed to other types of aliens). I have read of the inventor who developed a UFO detection device, only to be captured by a UFO himself. I have read of the discovery by scientists of the “Jerk” gene. Vale quality newspapers.

Zemanek was an entertainer and a damned good one at that:

Peter Peters writes: Re. “Broadcaster Stan Zemanek – The final word” (yesterday, item 20). Reading Alex Mitchell’s contribution to your site highlights all that is wrong with Australia’s Left. Bitter, twisted, resentful, humorless and completely out of step with mainstream Australians. Zemanek was an entertainer and a damned good one at that. He was no more a political commentator than Dame Edna. The only ones who took his comments seriously were those totally anal, ashen faced, zombies who keep popping up like ‘jacks in the box’ when one of their ilk is taken to task for being imbeciles.

Clifford Possum:

Geoff Maslen writes: Re, Bruce Armstong (yesterday, comments) about linking art to money in regard to the sale of the Clifford Possum painting. I should point out that in my final report for The Age in February, after covering the art market for close on 25 years, I drew attention to just this issue saying: “The avaricious began invading the salerooms, boosting auction turnovers but also distorting the way the public views paintings. Media coverage of high-priced art has been so pervasive that many people now look at a picture and see dollar signs instead of a work of creation. The focus on the sum a picture fetches at auction rather than its artistic merit has drawn a new breed of cold-eyed investors who treat art as a commodity to be traded like pork bellies or coffee beans.” Aboriginal art, likewise, has become a commodity and I, too, regret that.

Brilliant poetry, Graham Ring:

Dave Liberts writes: Brilliant poetry, Graham Ring (yesterday, comments). As an Adelaide resident, my choice of newspapers is limited to the Advertiser and The Australian, and thus I subscribe to The Australian as the lesser of two brain-drains. I read it every day in the knowledge that I will disagree with large chunks of it, but I will never look at it the same again having read Graham’s superb poem.

Send your comments, corrections, clarifications and c*ck-ups to boss@crikey.com.au. Preference will be given to comments that are short and succinct: maximum length is 200 words (we reserve the right to edit comments for length). Please include your full name – we won’t publish comments anonymously unless there is a very good reason.