Rather than public office, Mark Latham should seek help
After being dropped by virtually every media outlet in the country, Mark Latham is aiming to return to what he (thinks he) knows best – sucking on the public teat.
After finishing an economics degree, Latham was elected to the Liverpool City Council at age 26, becoming mayor at age 30. At 33, he was gifted a safe seat in federal parliament via a by-election and nine years later, became leader of the Labor Party, leading them to an ignominious defeat in 2004 and resigning a year later.
And it’s all been downhill from there.
Latham is, to use the words of Media Watch’s Paul Barry, “offensive, abusive and a bully.”
I would add a misogynistic, racist, homophobic boor with a vastly over-inflated sense of his own intellectual capacity which seems to have been spawned in the front bar of pubs in Western Sydney – oh for the days when the snowflake sheila’s were banned from darkening the doorstep.
I mean a man want’s the right to say “fuck, cunt, poo, bum” whenever he feels like it as Latham told a bemused audience at the 2015 Melbourne Writers Festival.
It’s people like Rosie Battie, that “spokeswoman for the left feminist movement”, who have spoiled it for Aussie blokes.
“I worry that the domestic violence debate is being used as a trojan horse to push a left wing feminist position saying that we are a patriarchy. Demonising men and making them feel worse about themselves isn’t going to solve the problem,” Latham said on a Triple M podcast.
“I don’t think it’s about how men look at women, it’s how the men look at themselves. Blokes have lost their self esteem, they’re welfare dependent, they’ve got other troubles, drugs, alcohol in their life, it’s that loss of self-esteem where I think they use the domestic violence as a coping mechanism to get over all the other crap they’ve got in their lives,” he said.
“Surveys show women are safer than ever before, that, sure, there are some unacceptable incidents of domestic assault in the community, but they’re no worse than they were 20 or 30 years ago. Why this big national push?”
And any male who sticks up for women is a “dickhead [or] gay”, as Latham described a group of students from Sydney Boys High who made a video in support of International Women’s Day.
Mark seems to revel in picking on women and kids. When the governor of the Reserve Bank, Philip Lowe, revealed in a speech that it was a comment from his 15 year-old daughter that had motivated him to think about the equality of opportunity for women at the RBA, Mark attacked the kid on that silly show of his on Sky that he later got sacked from.
“Her concern, the daughter of the governor of the Reserve Bank, of one of the most privileged households in the country, her concern wasn’t about poor and disadvantaged people, it was about people like her, and Lowe has taken this up and said he won’t be making appointments strictly on merit, he’ll be shoehorning women in,” Latham said. “This daughter is getting a bigger say at this taxpayer funded institution than any Australian voter.”
When Wendy Harmer tweeted that she was unimpressed and may cancel her Foxtel subscription, Mark turned his popgun on her.
“Now Wendy, of course, we know her well. She’s a proven commercial failure, so naturally she got a job at ABC radio at the sheltered workshop there for all the lefties. She fits the criteria: she’s female, she’s got a disability – that’s what they mean by diversity. So we say to Wendy Harmer on this Sunday morning: get a life, love.”
He has tweeted vile abuse at all and sundry. To Australian of the year finalist, Cate McGregor, he sent this raving rant:
… When you were wearing a nappy asking to suckle middle aged women, you looked like a he/she. Or was that a different person?
— Twitter, @RealMarkLatham, 10 August, 2015
Considering all that, and a whole lot more I could add, you’ll be pleased(?) to hear that Latham, who according to Antony Green, will be elected to the NSW upper house in a couple of weeks’ time in his latest iteration as NSW state leader of One Nation, has an education policy for a total reform of our schools, their curriculum and staffing. Despite having zero teaching experience, he knows what’s best for our kids!
The idea of Latham sliding in on the coattails of Pauline Hanson is hilarious. His education policy is not.
Commonsense tells us that critical and creative thinking is impossible without a strong foundation in knowledge, logic and rationality – that is, the qualities of the Enlightenment and the classics of Western civilisation. Extensive research studies in education have confirmed this point. Pressure and resilience also play an essential role in the learning process.
Under the banner of ‘mindfulness’ and ‘mental wellness’, NSW schools are dropping their standards, testing requirements and homework expectations to achieve a different type of classroom result: less stress, less anxiety, less discomfort. Naturally, some students are milking this new approach to minimise their workload. Like other parts of society, ‘anxiety’ (what we used to call ‘worrying too much’) has become an all-purpose alibi for avoiding effort and responsibility. The rise of the ‘snowflake school’ model in NSW has coincided with the State’s slide down international league tables.
There has been an attempt in NSW schools to sideline parents and indoctrinate children with notions of ‘gender fluidity’ as a regular, even desirable part of life.
They hope to make young people confused about their gender and sexual identity, dismayed by what society has supposedly done to them. In these circumstances, young people are more likely to rebel against the existing social order – a key Marxist goal. Gender fluidity teaching is not designed to help young people but to use them for political purposes.
Schools need to drop the modern obsession with turning themselves into political laboratories, gender fluidity factories, mental health clinics, social work centres and cultural propaganda tutorials. Students have parents, extended families, local communities and other government services to help them address non-educational issues in their lives.
I wonder if Latham has actually looked at suicide rates in our young people, or domestic violence statistics, or if he would even care.
People of NSW … we MUST prove Antony Green wrong.
This man is dangerous.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
966 total views, 2 views today
38 commentsLogin here Register here
On your header pic…There in that moment, Latham should have taken the opportunity to give that little prick a “Liverpool kiss”.
Mark Latham’s Downfall Started With This Very Intense Handshake
That handshake made Latham a loser.
Howard losing his own seat was infinitely more pleasurable for me.
Wonderful piece of writing on the lunatic Mark Latham,and like you i also hope Antony Green is wrong!
Uhm ….. I think you mean NSW Leader of the James Ashby Only Nutters Party having Porelein as the offensive mouthpiece.
VOTE ANYONE BUT NAT$ & SAVE THE MDB COMMUNITIES
(OK, OK … You can put the Only Nutters Party second last.)
Completely agree with everything you have said Kaye. However it also tells me something about the federal Labor Party. Whatever possessed the Labor caucus to elect somebody like this to the position of parliamentary leader?
Have been thinking same since Latham appeared on my “not to be trusted” radar. The Handshake confirmed my misgivings. Then, everything Latham has said, done since … I have never met the man, but Labor party members did, perhaps, any concerns were only raised by women and those weak girly men?
Plenty of ‘Latham-alikes’ in Oz politics on all sides of the spectrum, they were there in the past, they are there now….hopefully not in the future….? Some females fit the bill too…
I actually shook his hand (well, he came up and shook mine) during the 2004 election campaign. It was a normal handshake … must be just Howard that he disliked.
But on more important issues: what has Latham become? Three weeks out from the 2004 election – while sitting around with his team one night discussing the day’s campaigning – one of his party members asked him why he’s not playing dirty like Howard. The response – relayed to me by one of his security team – was; “I will not scoop to that c*nt’s standards.”
Julia Gillard, former Labor PM, discusses life after the Misogyny Speech, oh, and when Rudd returned, because he had to be better, again.
Of course, as helvityni so adroitly pointed out there are truly awful women as well. We must never forget that, ever.
I believe it was Gough Whitlam who marked him as a future leader of the Labor Party.
Latham must have displayed a very different personality in those days.
Like Julia Gillard, Latham was betrayed by some weasels within his own party…but unlike Gillard, HE lost the plot…and his self-respect…still, I would have liked to have seen him give that “Liverpol kiss”…everytime I see that replay, at that one particular moment I cannot help but cry out..: “YES!!…DO IT NOW!!”………..Oh..if there truly was a God in the universe……
I agree. Unfortunately, weasels often first appear to be bunnies 😋 not unusual. Many narcissistic or sociopathic people know how to appear charming and engaging. Male or female.
“Beware the Ides of March.”
Or, in the Aussie context: “Watch out for the Smiling Knives.”
Not so much sociopathic as psychopathic, Diannaart.
The ability to present a charming countenance while poisoning your friend is a common trait of the type.
Kaye Kee: Yet another great article Kaye, Yeah, latham is a shocker, but isn’t craig kelly just as bad? I would suggest that kelly is actually more dangerous, he is still an “elected member”, still living and still has a LOUD voice and his disciples….God help us!
The amazing thing is that Latham annihilated Howard in the one and only debate.The handshake is only thing remembered.
Michael Taylor and Kaye Lee:I have to say that I winced at that handshake event, but after that it all looked good for a while. I attended a ‘town hall’ meeting in the lead up to the 2004 election, and found him perfectly reasonable, with good policies. My recollection is that it all suddenly went weird around the time of that strange arrangement he made with the Tasmanian forestry industry. I wonder if he did not suffer some sort of ‘event’, which has affected his judgement. I know one member of the FPLP who shared that view.
How many nutters can this parliament bear?
I am not going to claim I can determine whether Latham is socio or psychcopathic. He is a danger, a potential horror that needs keeping as far from any type of public position as possible.
Of course there are socio and psychopathic women as well, which Mark Latham would remind us, him being treated rather badly by ex partner, which apparently means the woman must’ve been psycho.
His former chief of staff, Dr Mike Richards, who fell out with Latham, pinned him with a “narcissistic and paranoid personality” prone to purple bursts of “anger, rage, envy and resentment” in a post-mortem of his 2004 electoral defeat
‘ How many nutters can this parliament bear? ‘
That’s what I’m concerned about, I regard Howard et Latham as yesterday’s men…too much ( too many men/women) to worry about today…
I remember Latham on Andrew Denton’s Enough Rope. My recollection is of a future leader ,charming, empathetic, Visionary. Worth watching. Not once did he display the imbicilic behavior we see now.
Mark Latham may be yesterday’s man, and I fully agree. However, he appears to be making a return to the political arena … to add to the ranks of other yesterday’s men (🙃) still in parliament.
I’m not sure, but I think if you or other AIM writers are going to comment on males, in future, to maintain balance, you’ll have to dig up some ghastly woman. For example, Kathy Jackson, she’s awful AND (formerly) Labor. This will save your readers much time in writing their comments, because both genders would already have been mentioned, so we can then focus on the topic (provided it is gender balanced). Of course, for you, this will be time consuming, inconvenient, detract from focus on a particular person, but I’m sure you understand.
However, if you are writing about, say, Ms Cash, you do not have to balance out with some man, seems many readers are quite happy with this and never point out there are ghastly men as well.
Please contact me if you would like to discuss further.
My previous comments on male/female were merely inspired by a previous commentator and I probably should’ve refrained.
As soon as I hear a woman politician excusing domestic violence as a coping mechanism for women to get over all the other crap they’ve got in their lives, I’ll be right on it.
Latham is a strong advocate of free speech. He hates the rise of political correctness from the Marxist left.
He should be able to call someone a Negro or a Mussie or unf*ckable without being called a racist or sexist.
And he thinks he’s rational?
Let me explain Mark
You have the right to say racist and sexist things if you want to sound like an anachronistic bully boy and we have the right to call you on it.
Or…..we could just treat each other in a civilised manner.
PLEASE don’t vote for him. Or David Leyonjhelm. Or Fred Nile. And I haven’t even got to the “build them a stadium, a casino, and a few CCTV cameras and they won’t look at the environment” crowd.
I am sure there are female politicians who think complaints about DV doesn’t apply to them, a weird a kind of dichotomy, such women have. It’s like, Julia Banks, not very empathetic towards people on Newstart, but when she is bullied by men, ditches the Libs. But, probably, still retains her views on the unemployed. Oh, it gets complicated.
Besides I know if some female politician gives a knuckle cracking handshake to another, or becomes increasingly unhinged, turning to Andrew Bolt or Pauline Hanson, denigrating others she previously supported. Generally acting like a brain dead loon AND seeking political office again. I know I can trust you to write a pithy piece of analysis. Power to your arm, Kaye Lee, as is being recommended a lot these days.
I did actually write a piece about Julie Bishop where, in an interview with Harper’s Bazaar, she reiterates she is not a feminist and tells women they should “stop whingeing and just get on with it.”
“Please do not let it get to you and do not become a victim, because it’s only a downward spiral once you’ve cast yourself as a victim,” Bishop told the fashion magazine.
Domestic violence would all go away if we just got a job that pays hundreds of thousands and covers all our costs, and read Harper’s Bazaar for advice while travelling around the world to red carpet events (with security).
And I did write one about Michaelia Cash….
“In terms of feminism, I’ve never been someone who really associates with that movement. That movement was a set of ideologies from many, many decades ago now.” – Senator Michaelia Cash, Minister assisting the Prime Minister for Women, March 2014
“I consider myself a very lucky person whose parents told their four children to achieve, you work hard… All I know is that I believe in women … but I also believe in men.”
Right. Let’s not alienate the men, as advocating for women’s rights is bound to do. Know your place and don’t cross the line or you will be labelled a misandrist. Just ask Julia Gillard.
And as for working hard, Michaelia decided to work hard at entering politics from a young age. She is the daughter of Western Australian state MP George Cash and, by age 18, was an executive member of the Curtin University Young Liberals from 1988 to 1990 where she studied public relations, politics and journalism, and then the Western Australian Young Liberal Movement, where she held numerous positions including state vice-president. She is a member of the state council and was the president of the Moore Division. She also served on the party’s state executive.
And this one on Kathy Jackson….
Equal opportunity for all to disappoint me
Well then, perhaps we can simply move on and discuss the protagonist of your latest article, instead of being sidetracked into “women are awful too” diatribes. I am happy with that.
Now, as suggested in the title, should Mark Latham seek help?
Absolutely. However, some men do not seek help, being too, er, manly and all. I suspect Latham to be of the stoic till he drops type. No help for the likes of him, he is strong, resolute, indefatigable right up until when he’s not.
Yeah, more like him governing our nation, and we wonder why adapting to change is near impossible for the LNP and quite difficult for Labor as well.
So it goes …
My real problem is that he legitimises this sort of behaviour to some people.
If he loses it this badly in an interview as a guest on Sunrise, how will he react if challenged as a politician? How disruptive will he be? What sort of vile personal attacks and dismissive putdowns will we have to endure?
Perhaps Latham has finally found his proper home in One Nation – and NSW Leader of that Party too so he will have all the right bullying tools and a soapbox to spruke from! Yes, he does need to seek help, Kaye Lee – some incident triggered this appalling streak in the man in the mid 2000’s and it has taken over his life ever since. But, when he gets to Macquarie Street he will be able to nip down the road and consult with a top specialist whenever the urge to bully, swear and be totally offensive overcomes him – I hope he takes that opportunity.
I see Ms Cash has been let off the hook by the AFP – let us hope that the coming AWU court case into this deplorable incident orders her out of hiding.
My understanding of the Latham handshake is that it was a retaliation for Howard doing the same to Latham’s wife a day or two before.
And I do not think he is sucking on the public teat. He does have some principles, though they’re hard to find. He could have delayed his departure from parliament by only a few weeks to get a far greater payout, but chose not to.
A great article, just the same!
Thanks, Kaye Lee.
Now I’m reliving Saturday afternoon …
But that’s not important.
A shame Tonightly was axed, I wonder what Greg Larson is doing now?
And what will Latham do this Australia Day?
Steve, yes I read that story. I just have a lot of trouble believing that Howard could hold anyone’s hand hard enough to hurt it.
I heard on the rumour-mill after the Handshake, that Howard was noted for his hard grip. Something I found possibly plausible, but felt did not justify Latham’s behaviour.
Tried to locate anything further on whether JHs handshake was too harsh. All I found was more about Latham excusing himself claiming Howard had hurt Latham’s wife with his handshake.
Howard strikes me as someone who would try to impress in many ways his superiority either intellectually or physically. Just because he’s short doesn’t mean he necessarily gives a weak handshake.
In the link below, Latham claims Howard shakes hands “flappily” but also bone crushed his wife.
The truth will never be known.
I have little reason to believe Latham, seeing him more as a thoughtless opportunist than calculating.
Latham and Hanson aren’t gonna make it like he couldn’t with Leyonhjelm’s Liberal Democrats. It will be two egos at war soon enough. Why – Latham couldn’t even last with Rowan Dean and Ross Cameron as a modern day version of The Three Stooges.
If he can’t monster Hanson, there’s always the odd Uber driver in search of a broken arm
Re Howard, these days he moonlights as a domestic violence interrupter.
Throw Ashby into the mix.
Latham’s already thought of that – what with a bit of gay bashing – paedophilia linkages – think of the publicity when they split. Latham has.
Oh we already have that in the mix….
“Aussies DO love the taste of Milo… Mark Latham shares passionate KISS with Milo Yiannopoulos”
This relationship may be more complicated than it seems.
For those who may be interested in when and why Latham changed (or if he did), this is a very revealing article.
(PS I fully understand not giving a toss about him and his past. He really isn’t worth the time)