If, to quote from the homepage, the problems lie with 'Big Parties, Big Business and Big Media', is there so much emphasis on the one individual ? Believe it or not, there are parts of the country that prefer Howard to journos (but don't forget that it was while campaigning for gun reform in front of country people that he wore a bullet resistant vest. But that was years ago, and nobody in this country remembers past the budgie cage lining from last week.

Quite frankly, if I judged ALL criticism of Howard by the mindless schoolboy sloganeering (examples from reader reviews include 'Howard and his oligarchy', 'ashamed to be an Australian', 'our own 'Austrian housepainter'') that comprises most of this site, then I would have to assume he was a saint.

I know that ain't so, you know that ain't so, however, you tag him with all sorts of crimes and 'features' and, well, just write/allow plain bullshit about him (eg the Austrian Houspainter line - see Godwin's law). You fail to mention the supine opposition that have failed to present any alternative that is credible AND real. You fail to mention news outlets more interested in advertising than News.

So, basically, what happens out here is you get a lot of people saying 'Well, you're so obviously wrong / off target about that, so why should I believe/listen you on this?' And we've given up waiting for an answer.

Margo: Martin, how about reading my book? It addresses most of your points.