Cowards’ Castle: Wayne Swan is an arsehat

By skepticlawyer

Regular commenter fatfingers draws my attention to this little expectoration from within Cowards’ Castle’s protective walls.

Memo to Wayne: the first vote I cast – in 1989 – was for the ALP. I stopped voting Labor in 1996 because I got the distinct impression that Labor viewed me and my kind with contempt. Having Kevin Rudd as my hardworking local member for three years was almost enough to tempt me back, but not quite. I’m very glad I never returned to the fold, because I now have confirmation that Laborites are still, by and large, moral cowards. This is the second time a Labor pollie has smeared me from inside Coward’s Castle. The first offender was Terry Mackenroth, a bloke chiefly notable for his physical resemblance to Chad Morgan.

My official response is below the fold. Feel free to quote me.

28 Comments

  1. conrad
    Posted September 24, 2008 at 5:33 am | Permalink

    I’d be rather pissed off at that too — I personally find it quite disgraceful that our politicians behave like a group of six year olds (imagine if you did the type of name calling etc. that they do at any workplace) and then legislate themselves out of any possible action when unrelated people get smeared in the process.

    I guess you can try and look on the bright side, which is that at least some people must have enjoyed the book enough to remember it.

  2. Patrick B
    Posted September 24, 2008 at 8:08 am | Permalink

    I have no idea what you are talking about. The comment about Laborites being moral cowards is infantile. “Suck it up” is the trendy term I believe.

  3. Patrick B
    Posted September 24, 2008 at 8:11 am | Permalink

    Ah … I see now, a passing reference to your literary fraud is enough to have you post some more ego stroking rubbish. I think your 5 mins of fame expired sometime ago.

  4. Lacquered Studio
    Posted September 24, 2008 at 8:57 am | Permalink

    It’s not about YOU, Helen. It’s about Julie Bishop. Get over yourself. I”m inclined to agree with Patrick, above: If you bring yourself into disrepute, as you so spectacularly did some time ago, then it’s a bit much to feign moral offence when a politician refers to the joke that you yourself created in years past. Big deal. Is your public profile REALLY dealt such a hard knock just because some politician (who no one really listens to anyway) makes a joke out of it under parliamentary privilege? These are the trappings of popular culture, Helen. You chose the manner in which you entered it.

  5. pete m
    Posted September 24, 2008 at 9:47 am | Permalink

    Oh Dear – it seems anyone who writes using a pseudonym is a fraud, according to Mr Patrick B. Perhaps instead of relying upon 3rd hand versions of what happened and for what reasons, you do some actual research and easily find where SL has at great length set out her side of the drama.

    ps Patrick, be sure to keep us advised when your 5 minutes of fame turn up – I’d hate to miss it!

  6. Posted September 24, 2008 at 10:41 am | Permalink

    I’d let it pass without losing sleep, but I do see your point- without going into the detail of that particular past affair I don’t think the allegation was ever related to plagiarism…

    I think it’s a case of having become part of the vernacular!

  7. DeusExMacintosh
    Posted September 24, 2008 at 10:43 am | Permalink

    (To the conga tune – sings) “Wayne Swan is an arse-hat, he’s such a flaming arse-hat. Ta-da dar dah, ta-da dar dah…”

  8. conrad
    Posted September 24, 2008 at 11:24 am | Permalink

    I’m with Pete M on this — many writers use a nom de plume (some quite famous books — see e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pen_name), and we don’t complain about that (and in fact, many people have enjoyed some of those books written under these names), and nor is it related to plagiarism. Sitting around being an asshole and using your absolute power in parliament because you can is really the low of low.

  9. Nanu
    Posted September 24, 2008 at 11:40 am | Permalink

    The comment just highlights how dumb & smarmy politicians can be, both left & right. Its not a big deal really, and while I dislike the tone of some of the above comments, I think comment by Swan really doesn’t warrant a response. That being said he is an arsehat !

  10. Robert da Manne
    Posted September 24, 2008 at 11:54 am | Permalink

    I must say, I have no sympathy for people conned by hoaxes. Unless the work satisifies the rigorous scientific standards of the Bringing Them Home Report you are all conspirators to the Holocaust.

  11. DeusExMacintosh
    Posted September 24, 2008 at 12:56 pm | Permalink

    If Helen had done HALF the stuff she’s been accused of … well, let’s just say a Supreme Court Judge & an Oxford College might, just might mind you, have noticed something as serious as plagiarism in a Masters candidate. Especially after two blameless honours degrees (the first in English literature, the second Law) at a well regarded Uni over the decade since the book won the Miles Franklin. Take a hint from the clue-bat, its bollocks – THAT’S why she’s pissed. And rightly so.

  12. Posted September 24, 2008 at 1:21 pm | Permalink

    What I think is that personally attacking people on their own blogs is an indicator that one was raised by wolves. Doing so pseudonymously and linklessly from behind the shelter of teh internets is worse.

  13. Nanu
    Posted September 24, 2008 at 4:03 pm | Permalink

    Anyone notice the hypocrisy, we haven’t heard anything original from Labor so far except the usual platitudes. In actual fact their election campaign was based on ‘Blairs New Labor’ and ‘Obama 08/Change’ . How many me too’s did Rudd & Swan give us. They’ve the keys to government but don’t know what to do with them as they’ve no left to copy.

  14. DeusExMacintosh
    Posted September 24, 2008 at 5:35 pm | Permalink

    It reminds me of the Philip Adams moment, making a snide remark on air and then complaining about SE not having ‘a sense of humor’.

  15. Posted September 24, 2008 at 6:57 pm | Permalink

    I’m a little unclear as to your response to the shadow treasurer or what you actually think of him. 🙂

    Wayne Swan’s a bloodless technocrat. I dealt with certain of his underlings (who did his dirty work for him). They got burned badly, he got the seat of Lilley.

    Not to mention a brown bag full of money to a certain fringe party in exchange for preferences.

  16. Posted September 24, 2008 at 6:59 pm | Permalink

    In actual fact their election campaign was based on ‘Blairs New Labor’
    .
    Blair’s New Labour was based on Hawkeating’s New Labor. Clinton too. A direct line of influence that in both cases ran sharply and steeply downhill fast. Say whatyou like about the ALP they don’t boost serial rapists and psychotic gargoyles.

    Just the good old fashioned son-of-a-bitch.

  17. Posted September 24, 2008 at 7:14 pm | Permalink

    Anyone notice the hypocrisy, we haven’t heard anything original from Labor so far except the usual platitudes. In actual fact their election campaign was based on ‘Blairs New Labor’ and ‘Obama 08/Change’ . How many me too’s did Rudd & Swan give us. They’ve the keys to government but don’t know what to do with them as they’ve no left to copy.

    Bit rich for people to whine about New Labour being old labour etc etc. What do the conservatives give us? No need to repackage it because it always the same old stuff. That’s why I think many are backing Obama, he might not be able to change anything but at least he is trying to think differently whereas most conservatives won’t even do that. He’s also not dumb enough to suggest that looking out one’s back door towards a foreign country is a pre-requisite for being a VP.

    Stick to the old ways they be the way forward for us all! Yeah sure we’ve given them a run for the last 20 years and now have a financial crisis, various looming environmental problems of literally global proportions, children starving so we can drive on cheaper biofuels, terrorism like we’ve never known it before, loss of personal freedom, increased levels of taxation, looming recessions across the world, health care is a shambles, increasing separation of wealth… . People on the Right just dont get it: We don’t want it like that.

  18. Posted September 24, 2008 at 9:56 pm | Permalink

    As Andrew Norton pointed out, the original attack was bullshit from the go-get.
    http://andrewnorton.info/2008/09/does-plagiarism-by-politicians-matter/
    What is the problem with getting stuff out of news reports, it is public information, a clerk with initiative could have paraphrased it or put it in quotes to make it kosher but what the heck.

  19. Posted September 25, 2008 at 7:06 pm | Permalink

    we’ve given them a run for the last 20 years and now have a financial crisis, various looming environmental problems of literally global proportions, children starving so we can drive on cheaper biofuels, terrorism like we’ve never known it before, loss of personal freedom, increased levels of taxation, looming recessions across the world, health care is a shambles, increasing separation of wealth

    Yeah but look on the bright side John. Take a balnced view. KBR shareholders are doing super. 🙂

  20. Posted September 25, 2008 at 7:28 pm | Permalink

    No bright side for me Adrien, just a bunch of homindae scrambling about either chasing after or running from Imaginary Friends or Enemies. Listening to Joy Division for too long can do that to you. You have been warned:

    Someone take these dreams away,
    that point me to another day ….
    Dead Souls, they keep calling me.

    Dead Souls, Joy Division, A Must Have for your Ringtones.

  21. Posted September 25, 2008 at 7:48 pm | Permalink

    Rafe and Andrew N have a point. I mean, this flap is clearly utterly central to good financial governance in Australia – in the middle of a global financial meltdown, no less. No? It isn’t? Really, you could have fooled me 😉

  22. ennui
    Posted September 26, 2008 at 10:30 am | Permalink

    Lacquered Studio (5) clearly captured the essence of this post. Little more can be added apart from the misfortune of witnessing the rather unedifying spectacle of the”official response”!

  23. DeusExMacintosh
    Posted September 26, 2008 at 12:44 pm | Permalink

    Well diddums… did that nasty working-class girl lower the intellectual tone, ennui? Is the question of the use and misuse of parliamentary privilege not interesting enough for you? Perhaps you should find another blog(ger) to patronise.

  24. ennui
    Posted September 26, 2008 at 3:30 pm | Permalink

    D…E….M…
    I do admire your loyalty if not your perceptivity! Just a couple of points to help you
    1 The unedifying spectacle adds nothing to her argument – in fact distracts from it.
    2 The ‘moral coward’ comment re Labor is simply peurile drivel – but does fit with the above.
    3 Personal abuse and chidish sarcasm does not enhance your case
    4 The feigned moral outrage displayed by Helen is way out of proprtion to the Swan comment – being far too precious.
    5 To suggest that the Swan comment in regard to Julie Bishop is a significant abuse of parliamentary privilege indicates a high degree of naivety regarding parliamentary processes.
    More generally, it would seem the only person really smeared in the whole exercise is Julie Bishop.

  25. DeusExMacintosh
    Posted September 26, 2008 at 4:57 pm | Permalink

    Not ‘feigned moral outrage’ ennui, genuine anger. Plagiarism is a vicious slur on someone working in the academic field, hence the annoyance with having her name constantly (and falsely) associated with plagiarism. I wonder how relaxed you’d be to have your name constantly (and falsely) associated with theft or paedophilia? How would it effect your employability, do you think? How trying would you find it?