John Howard goes all Whitney. (The early years, not the later crack-whore years, sadly)
Just the other day, I found myself thinking, ‘Maybe John Howard isn’t as obsessed with the idealised 1950s family as I thought he was, I haven’t heard him say anything about it for a while’ (apart from the dire threat posed to it by loving homosexual relationships, of course). Silly me, he was just biding his time.
“Prime Minister John Howard today rejected suggestions tax cuts and extra money for struggling families in the Budget were bribes to win votes.
He said when the economy was strong the first thing the government wanted to do was help families because they were the future of the nation.
“It would be seen as a bribe if it was not sustainable, if it was something that clearly we could only afford this year and would have to claw back in future years”” (Age)
Can I quote you on that when you claw it back in future years, John?
“Mr Howard said the government wanted to give incentives to encourage hard work and effort”
“If you don’t have an economy that encourages hard work and effort, then you don’t grow.”
As long as you’re in power, John, and the Liberal party is presenting policies like yours, the Australian economy will be growing without me. How would my hard work be rewarded, if I was there?
I like this piece in the Australian (via Single and childless? You’re screwed
“Having finally recognised that the traditional family of working father and stay-at-home mother is going the way of the Sunday roast, it seems the Howard Government no longer cares what you do for a crust, as long as you leave time for a little unprotected copulation in between.”
“If you are a productive, independent, creative but childless Australian, the most you can expect from this budget is $42.21 a week in personal tax cuts. … But if you’re 14 and want to drop out of school and have a child, you can expect a cheque for $5000.”
To counter that, some feminist resources: and The F Word, because Howard makes me too mad to be articulate.