Fox 7 repeated the strangely irrelevant story Sunday that Australian Prime Minister John Howard bad-mouthed Barack Obama over his Iraq policy.
The outburst has won the Australian prime minister no friends back home (we at Chronic know it’s not scientific, but four out of every five respondents to The Sydney Morning Herald‘s poll said that Howard had “put his foot in it.” But it’s being pimped in the blogosphere and, erm, “legitimate” media like Newsmax are treating it like it’s a death knell for the presidential hopeful.
Of course, many were shocked that some real international news came from the House That Rupert Murdoch Built, and it’s undeniably a good start. But it’s really not overly relevant, as it’s very unlikely President Obama would meet Prime Minister Howard. Howard’s Liberal Party/National Party coalition government is facing a very stiff challenge from the Labour Party in the upcoming elections, and Howard will probably not be prime minister in a year, no matter who wins in ’08.
So why make a big deal of it? Do the anti-Obamists really think they’ll appeal to the internationalist instincts of their audience? Do the core anti-Obamists even have internationalist instincts? What the hell is an Obamist anyway?
This article appears in February 9 • 2007.
