Does Chris Trotter realise what happened at Waterloo?

Chris Trotter spends an awful lot of time waxing lyrical about the French Revolution and the appearance of a short Corsican to the leadership of France.

Apparently Napoleon Bonaparte was the savour of the revolution…and apparently Chris Trotter thinks Andrew Little might be Labour’s Napoleon.

One hesitates to describe Andrew Little as Labour?s Napoleon, but what cannot be disputed is the eagerness with which both the membership and the caucus responded to his calls for?unity, focus and discipline, and to his passionate reaffirmation of Labour?s radical political mission.

Sheer exhaustion may also explain the New Zealand Labour Party?s curiously subdued reaction to the rank-and-file revolution that installed Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the British Labour Party. It wasn?t that the Kiwis were all secret Blairites, more a matter of New Zealand Labour having ?been there, done that, sold the T-shirts ? lost the election!? ?? Read more »

Photo Of The Day


?Napoleon’s little Napoleon

People have been fixated on Napoleon’s penis since Napoleon’s doctor allegedly cut it off during his autopsy. The penis, which was not properly preserved, has been compared over the years to a piece of leather, a shrivelled eel and to beef jerky. In 1927 when it went on display in Manhattan, TIME weighed in, comparing it to a “maltreated?strip of buckskin shoelace.” It’s enough to give anyone a complex!

Napoleon died in 1821, likely of stomach cancer, and was originally?buried on the island of his exile, St. Helena. At least,?most?of him was. During the autopsy, the doctor allegedly decided to take Napoleon?s penis, presumably as a bizarre souvenir. The doctor gave it to a priest for safekeeping, and the priest smuggled the part to Corsica. After that, Little Napoleon was passed down as sort of a perverse family heirloom for decades.

Read more »

They should have a coin of the French marching backwards


The cheese eating surrender monkeys are having a massive sook because of plans?for a ?2 coin to celebrate the 200th anniversary of the historic battle fought by the Duke of Wellington against Napoleon Bonaparte in 1815 because it would be a ?symbol that is negative?.

I would have thought that having an army with a reputation for only winning when not led by a French man and being one of the world’s best at marching backwards would have been more negative.

The French government is attempting to block a coin commemorating the Battle of Waterloo, claiming it is a ?symbol that is negative? and would undermine the unity of the eurozone.

In an extraordinary intervention, France wants to block plans for a ?2 coin to celebrate the 200th anniversary of the historic battle fought by the Duke of Wellington against Napoleon Bonaparte in 1815.

A draft design of the coin was submitted to the Council of the European Union by Belgium, the site of the battle, in February this year.

However, just days letter France objected to the coin, claiming it could cause ?hostile reactions in France? and undermine the eurozone.

Read more »

Photo Of The Day

? Abbas/Magnum Photos

? Abbas/Magnum Photos

?Marriage by Proxy

Read more »

As stupid as the Argies

? The Telegraph

Queen Sofia of Spain has been ordered to turn down an invitation from the Queen to a Diamond Jubilee lunch for the world’s sovereign monarchs because of an escalating diplomatic row over Gibraltar.

Someone needs to tell the Spanish they are dreamin?. They aren’t going to get Gibraltar back. Ever. British politicians will be thrown out of office if they let Gibraltar go, and the Spanish have never beaten the Poms in a war, and are suspected as being almost as good at marching backwards as the Italians.

Maybe they should consider giving back Ceuta and Melilla.

Someone else could point out that a good part of New Zealand is named after Poms who saved the dagos sorry arses from Napoleon. Wellington, Nelson, Salamanca Road, Trafalgar Park are all named after Britain fighting to save the spanish from the french and their own uselessness.


Why do politicians break the no rooting rule?

An article in the Sydney Morning Herald investigates why politicians are inveterate rooters:

Richard Nixon’s secretary of state, Henry Kissinger, said: ”Power is the great aphrodisiac.” (Although it has to be said his planned seduction of the B-grade movie actor Mamie van Doren went awry when she was repelled by his smelly socks.) He regretted saying that famous bon mot but it’s true. Because political leaders are the alpha males in the community, women are attracted to them, even though the men may be ugly and much older, as was Bill Clinton when he and Monica Lewinsky indulged in kinky cigar sex in the White House.

It’s the same with the recently resigned Italian prime minster, Silvio Berlusconi, whose orgies, or bunga-bunga parties, have become notorious. What repelled many people was the thought of this plump former cruise singer in his 70s, with a rigid, shiny face courtesy of plastic surgery and Botox, bedding teenagers.

But, as I know from my own past, the allure of the dominant male is strong.

A relative of mine was a prim and proper woman and a fanatical Labor supporter. Although she was married, she had flings with a charismatic prime minister and an unappealing but highly intelligent state premier. She not only admired these men but justified her behaviour as a feminine way of supporting the Labor Party.

Many political leaders have had enormous sexual appetites. Chairman Mao Zedong was a legendary sleaze and the recently murdered Libyan dictator Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, fuelled by dangerous amounts of Viagra, had sex five times a day with any women his aides could find for him. Mussolini and Napoleon were just as voracious.

The thing is that we might be shocked by the amount of sexual excess but not surprised, which is why it’s strange that we continue to have politicians’ careers ruined or besmirched by sexual allegations.

So it appears that politicians break the no rooting rule because they can.

What appears common to most of these politicians is the risks they take, whether it’s sex in the Oval Office or mooching around for hookers in a Paris park. But then it could be said that most politicians succeed by taking risks.

It’s the nature of politics to gamble on making a grasp for leadership or to outfox one’s opponents with a risky strategy. Fuelled by a lust for power and driven by vast reserves of testosterone, which he needs to make it to the top, the alpha politician regards women as a just and proper reward for someone in his position.

Politics is about power and with it comes the exhilaration of being the dominant male. The risks of discovery these men take in their private lives is a part of the allure of such adventures. The excitement of the risk of being caught is underpinned by their arrogance and feelings of invulnerability, something that was clearly evident in Clinton’s dangerous fling.

But there’s more to it. The art of politics is being able to seduce your backers and the public to vote for you. It’s only a short step to these men thinking it’s only natural that they can also seduce any woman they want. If you believe Tiffanie – and there are many reasons for doing so – then Macdonald said to her: ”If you knew who I was, you would be very surprised.” It sums up both a politician’s massive ego and the thrill of being a powerful man.



Trotter picks wrong Battle

Chris Trotter has written a tl;dr post about how Labour is?Napoleon?and National are the Mamluks?at?the?Battle of?the?Pyramids, how Labour will form square and waste the charging hordes of National.

I think Trotter chose?the?wrong Battle. He should have picked The Charge of?the?Light Brigade:

The brigade was not completely destroyed, but did suffer terribly, with 118 men killed, 127 wounded and about 60 taken prisoner. After regrouping, only 195 men were still with horses. The futility of the action and its reckless bravery prompted the French Marshal?Pierre Bosquet?to state “C’est magnifique, mais ce n’est pas la guerre.” (“It is magnificent, but it is not war.”) He continued, in a rarely quoted phrase: “C’est de la folie” ? “it is madness.”?The Russian commanders are said to have initially believed that the British soldiers must have been drunk.?Somerset Calthorpe,?ADC?to Lord Raglan, wrote a letter to a friend three days after the charge. He detailed casualty numbers, but he did not make distinction between those killed and those taken prisoner:

“Killed and missing. Wounded.
9 Officers 12
14 Serjeants 9
4 Trumpeters 3
129 Rank and file 98

156 Total 122
278 casualties;

? besides 335 horses killed in action, or obliged afterwards to be destroyed from wounds. It has since been ascertained that the Russians made a good many prisoners; the exact number is not yet known.”The reputation of the British cavalry was significantly enhanced as a result of the charge, though the same cannot be said for their commanders.

Yes troops such as Shearer and Davis will be in a significantly enhanced position while the commanders, Goff, Mallard and King will be put against the wall.