Prev
Next

Where was the passion? Obama falls flat at debate

Daniel Piotrowski

by Daniel Piotrowski

04 Oct 01:30pm

Must Reads

The Punch is moving house - this is a caption

The Punch is moving house

385

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this? - this is a caption

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

122

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming” - this is a caption

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

251

Filed under: Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Mitt Romney, Us Election 2012

50 comments

The US election is going to be a squeaker. An absolute squeaker, if the presidential debate today (mostly about the US economy and the president’s health care reforms) was any indication.

Only smiling because he won. Picture: AFP

Obama sounded like he needed a strong cup of coffee. Maybe with a double shot of something much stronger.

He was lethargic and mathematical - sometimes incomprehensibly so. That was particularly the case in the first half of the debate, which focused on the economy.

Instead, Romney was grandfatherly (the guy has five adult boys and isn’t afraid to reference his enormous family), vague about his plans and surprisingly empathetic.

The Republican nominee’s campaign has been sinking in the polls for the past month. Remarks he made in May to wealthy donors that “47 per cent” of the country were dependent on Government and not willing to work their way off welfare struck a sour tone with voters.

This time was different. He sounded energetic, punching in all the necessary buzzwords with gusto and empathy. Hello, battling “small businesses”! Hello, repeated examples of his encounters with female voters on the campaign trail (he’s struggling with the fairer sex).

But passion - that was supposed to be Obama’s forte. One of his rallying cries during the ‘08 campaign was “Fired up! Ready to go!”, but Obama was holding a pretty weak flame this time around.

Persuasion is all about perception in these debates. It has been since the first televised debate, that of Kennedy v. Nixon, where Nixon looked old and unconvincing whereas Kennedy was fresh and vigorous (and victorious).

But Obama only tapped into a vein of passion talking about healthcare - his pet issue – and how Romney’s plans for office are mostly hidden from voters. The rest of the time he looked lame against an punchy Republican.

And then there was the moderator, Jim Lehrer. If Obama needed a super-sized coffee, then the moderator needed a vodka redbull to give him a bit of buzz.

There was no fact-checking and the two candidates, particularly Romney, just talked over the top of him. It was a pissweak effort of journalism. Who cares about keeping the candidates accountable to the facts?

Anyway, the Obama camp will probably be spinning that he’s too busy off running the country to practise being a compelling debater. Romney has been practising for this debate for a month, learning things by rote.

This was immediately apparent in the very first question when Obama waffled about how he’d create jobs and, in contrast, Romney listed a five-point plan. Which he’d clearly committed to memory in anticipation of that precise question.

But Obama’s communication skills have been a problem for the president his whole term.

Over the past three-and-a-half years, his efforts to connect his policies with voters’ aspirations have been fleeting.

And when he’s gone out of his way to talk to the Average Joe, he’s done well, passing crucial job-supporting tax cuts.

Voters in some must-win American states have already started voting. Most of them won’t line up until November 6.

Now, Romney has looked like a loser the whole campaign, flapping around four points behind Obama in the polls of late. But he looked like a winner tonight.

Obama has been leading the country for four years, but he didn’t sound he had the fight in him for another term in this debate. He’s got 33 days and two more debates to change that.

Most commented

50 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Charles says:

      01:48pm | 04/10/12

      Not happy your boy (Obama) didn’t do too well?  Perhaps he is just finding the true level of his ability without all the hyperbole about his race and leftwing ideological positions to support him

      Reply

    • Rolls Canardly says:

      06:11pm | 04/10/12

      Good call, Charles.
      Obama is basically a man of the teleprompter. The great “orator” is just another set-piece robot, who struggles when things get a little ticklish in the heat of spontaneous interaction. He’s basically a dud.
       
      I knew a bloke who proudly told me that he cried (presumably in a good way) the day Obama was elected. All I could think of, as I struggled to find the words to reply to this revelation, was “what a f***wit!”.
       
      The left constantly brag about passion this, blah blah, charisma that blah blah, and social responsibility blah blah, as they promote their candidates as saviours of the human race. It’s great copy when the honeymoon is still under way, but when it all boils down, all you end up with is a whole lot of hot air, and genuine failure to live up to expectations. What strikes me, is that otherwise intelligent people have bought this charade, hook-line-and-sinker, and now, like Daniel, they have to struggle with the reality that their political god is just like any other fairly average politician. Crazy, crazy stuff.

    • Zeta says:

      01:54pm | 04/10/12

      The incumbent is always at a disadvantage during debates. The contender can drill for a debate endlessly, but the incumbent has to actually govern, and then cram in his debate prep sideways.

      I think it was Bush Snr who wrote about going up against Buchanan in the primaries and then Clinton, and walking out of meetings where he was looking at satelite imagery of Somali warlord’s hideouts they were trying to raid, and then he’d get questions at debates about when was the last time he’d been to a supermarket.

      In 1992, he had US troops in like, 5 theatres, they’d just saved Kuwait, the Israelis were knee deep in the first intifadah, and Clinton wants to know if he’s stood in line at a check out lately. Campaign got sidetracked with that for weeks, about Bush expressing amazement at bar code scanners in supermarkets.

      That’s really the problem with Obama right now - the guy’s stretched thin. He can’t just saw to the members of his secret kill panel, ‘can we not drone murder anyone this week because I have to get ready for a debate’, you can’t blame him for phoning it in.

      Reply
    • Daniel Piotrowski

      Daniel Piotrowski says:

      02:59pm | 04/10/12

      True that. Speaking of which, I’d love them to ask some questions about drones at the next debate. The big silent topic.

    • Al B says:

      03:07pm | 04/10/12

      Romney and Obama both scare me on defence/offense policy ...but if Mitt put Peter Schiff or Ron Paul as treasury head, there would be no choice but to scale back the overseas military bases and bring their troops home. Where they can actually defend rather than interfere.

    • St. Michael says:

      03:08pm | 04/10/12

      The incumbent being at a disadvantage during debates is about the only disadvantage an incumbent suffers during an election, so let’s not get all weepy on the subject.

    • Super D says:

      03:15pm | 04/10/12

      Obama is so stretched thin that he hasn’t been able to attend national security meetings yet has plenty of time for fundraisers and soft spots on The View.  Hell he probably has found time for golf, not that this would be reported mind you.  More likely he’s been convinced of his own brilliance and just assumed he’s walk it in.  Lets see what he’s got for round 2.

    • Ripa says:

      03:33pm | 04/10/12

      @ Zeta
      If Obama has time to appear on talk shows hes got time to prepare for debate, the incumbent always has the advantage they should have already proven themselves and know what they have achieved.

    • AdamC says:

      03:57pm | 04/10/12

      Zeta, that is an interesting perspective, however, I would agree with SuperD that, if he can find time for the fluff spots on TV, he should be able to do some debate preparation.

      Daniel, I think both candidates have the same view on drone strikes. Unless the Pakistanis can get their act together, what alternative do the Americans have?

    • Zeta says:

      04:21pm | 04/10/12

      @ Daniel Piotrowski - Well the big question is for Romney, not Obama. Obama will claim he can’t disclose because national security, meanwhile, his advisers will wink and nod at all the journos they’re leaking the juiciest drone assassinations too.

      Romney has to say wether or not he intends to continue the suspension of habeas corpus on US terror suspects overseas, continue the panel selections, and keep the drones in the air over the Pakistan border.

      This isn’t just a plank in Obama’s national security policy - this is the national security policy and it’s working. Shock & Awe failed, COIN failed - what worked was cute little white robots.

      My gut tells me Romney wants to pursue an overt military solution over the Pakistan border. He’s going to want to increase deployment tempo to Afghanistan and start flexing his muscles in the mountains. The theory behind that, which is the theory the Council on Foreign Relations has, which is to say, it’s Republican doctrine at this point, is that you kill two birds with one stone: you keep killing Taliban where they live, but you also have a quick reaction force that can air lift into Iran if (or more likely, when) Romney wants too.

      If they do that, they’ll want to suspend the drone program. JSOC will want to be selecting the targets, not Obama’s NatSec panel. The Republicans will pander to internal military egos that will want the CIA out of Afghan operational planning. 90 per cent of what’s been written by US mil operational commanders exiting Afghanistan is laced with contempt for the CIA because they bungled Tora Bora and subsequently bungled getting Osama when he was still in Afghanistan.

      That’s probably his policy, we don’t know, because we don’t know any of his policies, but the US public, and importantly for us, America’s security partners need to know. Drone program and the kill list works. It’s obviously immoral, possibly illegal, but it very much works. It’s taken out more high value targets in Obama’s term than in the previous 2 terms.

      If Romney wants to consolidate those operations back under the Pentagon and put them on a war footing in preparation for a mission to remove Iran’s nuclear potential, he has to say so. He has to say if he’ll do that, but keep the drone program, which would be the ideal scenario.

      That’s not to say Obama’s Iran policy of containment and covert action isn’t working too, the important thing is that he at least says it, and lets his allies put in place contingencies for either Presidency.

    • Robbo says:

      04:22pm | 04/10/12

      Obama is an orater not a debater.  The idea a president is in control of all that is going on is laughable, especially if it is a Bush.  Obama has been an A grade disappointment and there is no need to make excuses for him.

    • Ando says:

      04:32pm | 04/10/12

      One would think actually being president for 4 years would put someone in a good position in a presidential debate with less need for preparation. Hes also done it before. It would be difficult to suggest a clear advantage either way.

    • Craig says:

      01:58pm | 04/10/12

      There were plenty of sites checking the facts.

      And they suggest that both sides lie, lie, and lie some more to win votes. Then lie again.

      Much like Australian politicians.

      The difference is that Australia’s media is too weak, self-obsessed and busy preening itself as an ‘insider’ (which it isn’t) to even check the simplest facts of what our politicians say.

      So don’t blame the US media for not checking facts. Have a long look at yourselves.

      In the US fact checking is now done by not-for-profits, universities and new media.

      That will happen in Australia as well if traditional media can’t find the ball.

      Reply

    • Tropical says:

      02:00pm | 04/10/12

      Obama is not the great communicator the lamesteam media would have us believe.
      Wthout his precious teleprompter and his adoring lefty media there to protect him he was exposed as the fraud he really is.
      As one tweet said: Romney tied Obama to the roof of his car and took him on a cross country drive.

      Reply

    • HC says:

      03:42pm | 04/10/12

      I don’t get the whole ‘teleprompter’ critique?  Romney uses them all the time when giving speeches as well, but I guess if you’re completely one-eyed, which judging by the ‘lamestream’ and ‘lefty’ buzzwords is probably accurate, you probably ignore that inconvenient little fact smile

      I’d be surprised if Obama loses the election but no doubt Romney wiped the floor with him in this debate.

    • Charles says:

      04:58pm | 04/10/12

      @HC No-one uses teleprompters more than Obama, they are his literal second talking head

    • Anubis says:

      02:04pm | 04/10/12

      Maybe Barack needs to take a leaf out of Conroy’s book and go to these things with red underpants on his head.

      Reply

    • Al B says:

      02:10pm | 04/10/12

      Well Romney absolutely just nailed that debate….i doubted all the Romney backers saying “wait for the debate” but they are right. Especially having the economy debate first up, it really shows thru. His tricke down government line was gold. There’s a stark choice americans have now. Oh Barry cool guy… just doesnt look so hot without a script.

      Reply

    • David C says:

      02:47pm | 04/10/12

      I think Obama is going to vote for him

    • zipperc says:

      02:22pm | 04/10/12

      He might have looked like a winner to you, but remember he is fundementally a corporate criminal who wears Mormon magic underpants and makes loads of money at the expense of others. Maybe this is a case of ‘judging a book by the cover’ and forgetting about the content inside.

      Reply

    • Al B says:

      03:29pm | 04/10/12

      A corporate criminal, really? I would lay that on Obama more than Romney with too big to fail banks, hiring Geithner to replace Paulson…debasing the currency and running up debt for future generations for the benefit of the banksters…that is real criminality at least on an ethical level. Though they both support keeping the Fed.

      Romney’s sky fairy stories have zero interest to me…though i would rather him than an evangelical christian baying for an end times battle. I’m still with Bill Maher on that one!

    • John says:

      06:41pm | 04/10/12

      Wow - way to include baseless slander and religious bigotry into one post.
      The level of intelligent debate is readily apparent.
      Romney is a successful businessman. Do you really think that if he had done anything illegal that it would not have been front-page news by now? You may disagree with how venture capital and buy-out specialist companies operate. It is certainly true that not all companies Bain took a stake in ended up bigger and better. Some were dismantled and people were laid off. Guess what - as tragic as someone losing their job is, those businesses were already highly vulnerable. No profitable business was harmed in the making of Romney’s money and many were able to thrive (eg Staples).
      As for the religious bigotry - it is as ill-informed as it is meaningless.
      Now, for the ‘content inside’. Romney has made millions of dollars operating successful businesses. He served as Governor and took no salary. He served as Olympic Committee Chair and took no salary. He has consistently given of his time and money to worthy causes and graduated in Law and Business from Harvard. He has actually run stuff successfully.
      Obama was a successful community organiser and the junior senator from Illinois before becoming President. I like Obama but if there has ever been an example of picking a President by his ‘cover’ then it happened just under 4 years ago. They even gave him the Nobel Peace Prize before he had done ANYTHING!!!
      On top of that, he has presided over record deficits and crushing unemployment. That is the ‘content inside’.

    • Ripa says:

      02:23pm | 04/10/12

      Romney has a proven track record as Gov, he didnt need to rehearse his speech he drew from his own experience and sounded every bit a president as Obama once did. Obamas performance just goes to show what happens when you rely on a teleprompter too much. Romney walked all over him in one. Looking forward to the next 2.

      Reply

    • Monty says:

      02:31pm | 04/10/12

      The economic debate was always going to be the hard one for Obama and it looks like he chose the route where he didn’t try and defend the obviously hard hit economy of the US. This was an easy one for Romney, a debate is too short to deliver policy analysis and all he has to do is point to Obama’s failed attempts to right the listing economy while affirming his policies will work.

      I predict in the foreign policy debate and the “free for all” debate, he will pick up steam. Obama is a far more eloquent and comfortable speaker than Romney and this is where his team is looking to make their fightback.

      Reply

    • paul says:

      02:31pm | 04/10/12

      I don’t think Obama has been very good this term, however the fact is Romney is dangerous to the world. His foreign policy is Bush through and through,. How quickly America forgets if Mitt wins.
      This guy is crazy. He still see’s Russia as Americas number 1 global enemy. This guy wants to attack Iran pronto, while not even understanding it is a war for Israel and would totally bankrupt the country, not to mention what it would do to the region.
      First it was the communists that allowed US to bomb countries incorporated with the 3 million dead Vietnamese. Know it’s the arabs, will soon we back to the communists (china) then back to the ol Russians.
      Yes the republicans love war, and have no qualms over the 1.5 million dead Iraqis dead due to a lie. That is right Chris stevens is worth more to the republicans and americans in general then 1.5 million dead arabs. That is simple truth.

      Reply

    • Al B says:

      03:32pm | 04/10/12

      He is a worry on foreign policy…who would be his secretary of state i wonder…maybe someone could talk him around. The upside is his foreign policy isnt based on some kooky evangelical end timer scenario like Bush. Mormons may have some out there stuff, but i’d prefer him to a fundamentalist christian at least!

    • Blagobax says:

      03:44pm | 04/10/12

      Reading this rubbish is like reading the headlines of the old ‘International Socialist’ circa 1994.  In fact change some of the name (Bush to Reagan) and its like the good old days.  Oh the memories…

    • paul says:

      04:31pm | 04/10/12

      @Blagobax you see this the problem. I am a conservative but I call a spade a spade.
      You think it is “socialist” to question and get upset by millions of dead people. Does it not bother you in the slightest that 1.5 million people died due to a lie mate? and worrying and feeling that is “socialist”. Get of it.
      I can only assume your blasé attitude to human life (be that asian and arab) comes from a deep seated racist view. Imagine over 10 MCG’s packed with dead woman , men and children, and you have the amount that died from George Bush’s known lie. Hang on You are probably in that 65% of republicans that still think Saddam had WMD’s.

    • Blagobax says:

      07:29pm | 04/10/12

      Paul says - 50 million chinese, 20 million russians, 6 million jews, 1million cambodians.  You seem to be inspired by numbers.  Here have a field day!

    • pa_kelvin says:

      02:38pm | 04/10/12

      Ms Gillard wants Obama to win….....

      Reply

    • Blagobax says:

      02:46pm | 04/10/12

      The big “O”‘s too busy appearing on Oprah. If he was running the country it would in a worse mess. Thank god he’s got so many celebrity fans to cuddle up to!

      Reply

    • neo says:

      02:50pm | 04/10/12

      Thinking before opening your mouth is a bad thing for sure!

      Instead of thinking about the question, I reckon it’s better just to repeatedly say that your state has the best schools in USA. And if people don’t get it the first 10 times, just repeat it again.

      Romney is one boring person.

      Reply

    • Ronald Jock says:

      03:09pm | 04/10/12

      I agree with the drones comment. Obama makes jokes about them regarding his daughters future boyfriends after millions of civilians are killed by them. Sick. I’m not a Romney fan either.

      Reply

    • Baloo says:

      03:46pm | 04/10/12

      Millions?

    • David C says:

      03:19pm | 04/10/12

      Wayne Swan will be shaking in his boots about now

      Reply

    • jaki says:

      04:12pm | 04/10/12

      I thought that snivelling little prick wore socks and sandals.

    • BruceS says:

      03:27pm | 04/10/12

      Obama took a bad situation and ” hope and changed”,  it into a disaster, deliberately, in order to discredit the world beacon of western capitalism. He has been a great success for his UN masters, but not the people of the US.

      Reply

    • K2 says:

      04:06pm | 04/10/12

      Why do we, as Australians, care so much about what happens in the US elections?  I think Australians are more objective about American politics than they are about their own system/debate.

      Its easier looking from the outside - in.  Its easy to make comment and take a position when its just a placebo position anyway, because love or hate either of them, you’re going to have zero say in who actually gets elected.  The real discussion should be that Americans have almost zero say in who gets elected either.

      Obama, Romney…meh who cares, neither of them can dig America out of the multi-trillion dollar, escalating hole they have themselves in the one man that could was ousted by Romney because people saw his overly conservative approach as a bit too crazy for them.  And the media painted him that way too. 

      Wag the dog media, why stop now?  You even wag it here in Australia, like its somehow going to matter.  So sick of the media propaganda circus sideshow.  Give us some real reporting and stop parrotting the same damn junk they feed the Americans, we can’t affect their vote so why not just give us some actual truth for once?  Faux News, CNN, CBS….please!  They are all arms of the freaking government from either side of the fence and they are influenced by the lobby groups and big business there is no such thing as objectivity from these news outlets so why repeat their junkfood?!

      Reply

    • paul says:

      04:59pm | 04/10/12

      I assume you are talking about the legend Dr. Ron Paul. Actually all of his ideas were popular with the conservatives except one thing. He broke the golden rule.
      Thou shall not question the billions of dollars we give Israel every year, or discuss the Israel subject

    • Peter says:

      05:39pm | 04/10/12

      Ron Paul was never anti-Israel, he wanted to stop the annual multi-billion dollar donations to Israel as well as Israel’s enemies. He promoted US neutrality in the middle east.

      But the Republican establishment shafted Ron Paul, so US voters are left with a choice between two Goldman Sachs financed sock-puppets, once again.

    • paul says:

      07:16pm | 04/10/12

      I agree Peter, I actually think he is pro-Israeli. Stop being dependent on america for money and weapons and get on with the job. Americas unconditional support for Israel is actually where the majority of the bitterness and hate comes from towards the US, by Arabs.
      However his foreign policy is the only reason he didn’t get more support.
      That and the fact he doesn’t despise Muslims, which seamed to be a prerequisite at the GOP debates.

    • Jamie says:

      04:08pm | 04/10/12

      Obama’s poor performance was clearly George W. Bush’s fault.

      Reply

    • Fed Up says:

      05:15pm | 04/10/12

      I thought it was Abbotts fault…..

    • Anon delivers says:

      04:19pm | 04/10/12

      Fapping ?

      Reply

    • Adam says:

      04:41pm | 04/10/12

      I was very surprised by Obama’s performance. Admittedly his weakness without a teleprompter is well known and widely reported, but the debate was on such a narrow set of issues and would (assumedly) have been preceded by significant preparation, it remains surprising.

      To borrow a phrase from West Wing… Mr Fluffy turned up tonight.
      Romney’s back in the game, but that could all change on foreign affairs next time.

      Reply

    • Fed Up says:

      05:25pm | 04/10/12

      Alot of meeping going on….can’t wait for the nom noms to see who ends up winning….

      Reply

    • Peter says:

      05:29pm | 04/10/12

      “Remarks he made in May to wealthy donors that “47 per cent” of the country were dependent on Government and not willing to work their way off welfare struck a sour tone with voters.”

      Except that isn’t what he said. The 47 per cent welfare dependency part is true, but what he said was that this constituency would not respond to Republican policies to reduce tax (because 47% don’t pay any tax), so he would have to promote other, non-financial policies to win their votes.

      He never said anything about them being unwilling to work their way off welfare. Nearly half of the 47% are old age pensioners, most of whom have already paid a lifetime’s worth of taxes. It was just hostile media spin to imply that he said that 47% of Americans were unwilling to work their way off welfare.

      Reply

    • Fanta Pants says:

      06:41pm | 04/10/12

      I think Obama may have peaked in the polls too early. 4 years too early to be exact.

      Reply

    • Spruiker says:

      07:34pm | 04/10/12

      Romney will win. There’s no doubt. Americans won’t want commie health care and will want a tax cut for the rich so they can give them more $7 an hour jobs!

      Reply

    • Jo says:

      08:39pm | 04/10/12

      It’s just so incredibly unfair the media have made Obama the golden boy, when it is obvious the man has no business management or financial sense. I’m astonished at the total block on accountability. Obama is never asked any serious questions, even when it’s starkly obvious the man’s got alot of explaining to do. This is the media’s fault. Though you have to admit alot of the American’s are obviously more sold by celebrity than fact and hard line leaders. Obama’s a celebrity not a president, he made American’s look pathetic and stupid. Romney is exactly what they need now. The good old stars and stripes, war mongering, stand up financial bully, with the all american goody too shoes family. That’s what America is, it’s what sells and works for the rest of the world, and if they can get rid of the unfair cheating that the media is doing, i bet they’ll pull up fast. All that chest pounding patriotic flying eagle stuff that every red blooded american would die for. As for our Julia..She got hung up on all the hype of Obama too. Carbon Tax? Geez Julia..Big mistake..HUGE. It was great to see Romley in action. The man’s got my vote. And you’re right, why don’t Australian’s get this interested in Aussie politics?.. Well for me it’s because i think their inept pussy’s. Lost cause. I don’t bother. Maybe i’ll move to America when they wise up and boot that traitor out.

      Reply
 
Sorry, comments are now closed for this article.

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Malcolm Farr

farrm51 21 May 13 09:12PM

@nigelmcbain I don't see the nexus between gay marriage and gay sex education in schools. ACL does. Health issues should be taught whatever

Daniel Piotrowski

drpiotrowski 21 May 13 08:34PM

@jennijenni a few companies are known to do that - ask for story ideas from job applicants so they can steal them later

Malcolm Farr

farrm51 21 May 13 08:23PM

: Bruce Springsteen: "I get roughed up crowdsurfing… people try to pull chunks out of me" http://t.co/jiHqt8agt9” it was him, @patricklion

Daniel Piotrowski

drpiotrowski 21 May 13 07:36PM

Ray Hadley fires back at Carlton. Great @candacesutton1 get: http://t.co/7fQzk4Xixh

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

by The Punch Team

385

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

by Hannah Harborow

122

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

by Sarrah Le Marquand

251

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter