<< TRUTH SPOKEN TO POWER ~ MAIN ~ LATHAM LUNACY LATEST >>

“I HAD MORE SUCCESS WITH WOMEN THAN HER”

After becoming Labor leader, Mark Latham complained—almost to the point of tears—about media examination of his sexual history (the poor baby). In this week’s Bulletin cover story, Bernard Lagan reveals Mark Latham’s vicious hypocrisy:

Latham alleged that in 1997, his former wife informed him that she wanted to pursue relationships with other women.

“Well root my boot,” said Latham’s email to me. “I wished I had known she was bisexual when I married her. She said that this little fact went back to her days in nursing but she was too embarrassed to tell me. A very weird person, I can tell you.

“And my attitude once the surprise had abated? If she could chase other women, then so could I. Effectively our marriage ended at that point. When I had more success with women than her, she went savage and psycho on me and the rest, as they say, is political history. Not really an event I could talk about as leader of the opposition, but happy now for the full story to be known.”

Latham was unhappy that he’d married an attractive bisexual? How ... old fashioned of him. Also in The Bulletin:

* Tony Wright probes Latham’s idea of “political poison”:

Latham presents his diaries as an open, honest account of his political career – more honest than the scribblings of journalists using off-the-record briefings. A refreshing approach, perhaps, though he notes early in the book his disdain for Beazley’s speechwriter and author Bob Ellis for taking his audience “down the American way, where all that is private is ultimately made public”. Ellis, he declares is “a dangerous lard of political poison”. Which leaves Latham and his recital of private conversations where, precisely?

* Laurie Oakes imagines a Latham-led Australia:

The weird and ugly mind that penned The Latham Diaries would be running the country. The anger, viciousness and near-paranoia evident in the attacks on just about everyone who matters in the Labor Party would have been let loose upon the land. The responsibility for dealing with a terrorist attack or other emergency would be in the hands of a man whose temperament, it now transpires, could not stand up to an election loss or even a bit of intra-party argy-bargy. Our most important alliance, that with the United States, would be in jeopardy under an Australian leader holding the private belief – one which he kept from the electorate – that it is a form of neo-colonialism and should be ditched. It does not bear thinking about.

* And this week’s Continuing Crisis column quotes Latham, Tex, Tony Abbott, Margo Kingston, Maxine McKew, Matt Price, Bob Carr, Michael Duffy, Paul Keating, Michael Gordon, Craig McGregor, Alan Ramsey, Superman, Andrew Bolt, Bill Clinton, Dick Morris, Peter Costello, Louise Dodson, John Hartigan, John Howard, Alan Ramsey, Dr. Peter McMahon, Robert Bosler, Paddy McGuinness, Phillip Adams, Michael Moore, Paul Kelly, Peter Beattie, Bob Hogg, Antony Green, Phillip Hudson, Dr. Paul Norton, Geoffrey Barker, Peter Garrett, Louise Dodson, Ken Parish, Elaine M. Mclennan, Michelle Grattan, and David Burchell.

Posted by Tim B. on 09/20/2005 at 11:40 AM
  1. Latham was unhappy that he’d married an attractive bisexual ?

    I know what you mean Tim, but in this instance I suspect it’s a case of,
    ‘sorry - two’s company, three’s a crowd’.

    Posted by JAFA on 2005 09 20 at 03:22 PM • permalink

  2. Latham was unhappy that he’d married an attractive bisexual? How ... old fashioned of him.

    Surely more a case of unhappy he’d married an attractive bisexual and didn’t realise he could have doubled his fun until after it was all over.

    —Nick

    Posted by The Thin Man Returns on 2005 09 20 at 04:37 PM • permalink

  3. Hey, I thought Google and Yahoo could give me a photo of most anyone.  Well not his ex-wife.  Sadly.

    I wonder what the old gender bender looks like?

    Posted by wronwright on 2005 09 20 at 04:44 PM • permalink

  4. Reminds me of George from Seinfeld saying that he had driven women to lesbianism before but never to a mental institution.

    Latho would drive a girl to both.

    Obviously his missus wasn’t even interested in rooting his boot.

    That she was afraid to tell him of her past lovers suggests the kind of personality he was: a dominating bully. Personally they both give me the tom tits, but doing it with chicks, while also being attracted to men, doesn’t make one a “weird person”.   

    Adultery is not a good thing whoever you are doing it with (yes, I know what some boys get off on, Jafa). Fancy making it a competition. Now that’s weird.

    Posted by Major Anya on 2005 09 20 at 04:44 PM • permalink

  5. Won’t somebody please think of the American readers for once?!?

    All these articles about an attractive bisexual woman and not one picture.

    Criminy!

    Posted by tim maguire on 2005 09 20 at 04:51 PM • permalink

  6. Actually, the first Mrs Latham is denying the bisexual claims.

    —Nick

    Posted by The Thin Man Returns on 2005 09 20 at 05:03 PM • permalink

  7. Personally they both give me the tom tits ...

    The what?

    Posted by wronwright on 2005 09 20 at 05:12 PM • permalink

  8. When I had more success with women than her...

    Please, Mark, ...more success than she

    Posted by cuckoo on 2005 09 20 at 05:19 PM • permalink

  9. Isn’t it possible that she genuinely might have thought she was bi?  Since Mark wasn’t exactly lighting any fires (a la Michael Keaton in Night Shift)? 

    And when he left she found that she wasn’t bi after all?  In fact, she liked men quite a bit?

    Posted by wronwright on 2005 09 20 at 05:33 PM • permalink

  10. Well, well, well…here is someone Latham likes-

    Redhead with Leather Strops

    Posted by madawaskan on 2005 09 20 at 05:40 PM • permalink

  11. This is beyond pathetic. So bloody what is she wanted to check out the bi side of the house? In a strong, stable relationship, that would not be much of an issue. Knackerlacker seems to have viewed it as a zero-sum emotional game, a sure sign of a domineering bully - and of a fundamentally weak man.

    In such circumstances, what sort of man instantly throws up his hands and says it is all over, I’m off to chase skirt too? Then turns it into a competition? Where is the respect, hell, where is the basic communication to work through the issues?

    As every day goes by, knackerlacker confirms himself as one of the most pathetic excuses for a man I have ever seen.

    MarkL
    Canberra

    Posted by MarkL on 2005 09 20 at 05:48 PM • permalink

  12. hooley dooley, well root my boot…..those lesbian nurses are so hot!!!

    Posted by vinny on 2005 09 20 at 05:56 PM • permalink

  13. Fine op-ed from Janet Albrechtson in today’s The Australian, contrasting and comparing Latham and John Howard:

    Quite accidentally Mark Latham’s book is a brilliant lesson on leadership. When the spleen has been vented and the hypocrisy forgotten the lasting message from The Latham Diaries is about what makes a leader.

    By recording his inability to cope with what my colleague Paul Kelly once called the “traditional rituals” of politics - the disloyalty, leaks, rumours, rebellions and endless speculation - Latham succeeds in reminding readers that political leadership requires more than just intellect. His capitulation and failure bring to mind the tenacity and ultimate political success of others when faced with those same traditional rituals. No doubt to his boundless chagrin Latham’s main achievement might just be to put the spotlight on John Howard as a model of leadership.

    Reading his book and listening to him these last few days Latham sounds like a heartbroken adolescent who thinks he’s the first person to experience heartache. He imagines he is the first leader to be under siege from within his party, a victim of leaks, betrayed by colleagues, gossiped about by the media.

    Here.

    Posted by walterplinge on 2005 09 20 at 07:07 PM • permalink

  14. Married an attractive bisexual?  Look, either offer to lend a helping hand (or whatever), or just buy a camcorder…

    Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 09 20 at 07:28 PM • permalink

  15. Should we assume the bisexual ex-wife doesn’t look like this?

    hot not

    Posted by wronwright on 2005 09 20 at 07:46 PM • permalink

  16. I would like to propose a National Sorry Day when all Labor politicians, leftie media types etc apologise to the Australian electorate for inflicting this creep on it as a possible PM.

    How they can show their faces in public is beyond me. They have more hide than Jessie the elephant.

    Posted by graboy on 2005 09 20 at 08:08 PM • permalink

  17. Australia needs Latham like a fish needs a bicycle.

    Posted by Habib on 2005 09 20 at 08:38 PM • permalink

  18. Here’s a fairly flattering pic of the first Mrs L:

    Posted by slatts on 2005 09 20 at 08:40 PM • permalink

  19. #6 & #18
    Thanks for the pics.
    Attractive bisexual?? She’s nothing I’d be tempted to throw a leg over. ;-)

    Posted by Hank Reardon on 2005 09 20 at 08:46 PM • permalink

  20. I have to chuckle, the leader of the party that represents ‘women’s interests’, the party that has ‘Emily’s list’ and more feminists within its ranks than you can poke a stick at, treating his wife as a chattel. Latham’s ‘if I’m not good enough for her’ smacks of insecurity, a lack of trust and being of a control freak. Added to this the utter hypocracy of any of his utterances about family and rights, makes this a sideshow beyond all belief.

    Posted by Nic on 2005 09 20 at 08:53 PM • permalink

  21. What is it with you-guys!

    When it comes to bisexual gals all of a sudden you’re liberal.

    I’m a French Canadian/American with a dash of German -gal.

    You go gay on me-

    You’re dead....{to me.  ;-)}

    Posted by madawaskan on 2005 09 20 at 09:03 PM • permalink

  22. Here’s a fairly flattering pic of the first Mrs L:

    No WAY is she bi. That’s a full-blown diesel dyke.

    Posted by Dave S. on 2005 09 20 at 09:47 PM • permalink

  23. Maybe being with Latham turned her on to tits.

    Apologies for the image.

    Posted by Dave S. on 2005 09 20 at 09:48 PM • permalink

  24. That the ALP did not know of this when they put him in charge is a bit hard to accept. Are they that ignorant of a person’s views that no due diligence was done? Obviously the human resources machine the ALP has inflicted onto the work place must be totally absent in Caucus.

    Posted by Louis on 2005 09 20 at 09:49 PM • permalink

  25. I want to know where was this swinging nursing home?  Campbelltown/Camden hospitals would seem to be the nearest. Maybe Nola Fraser and her whistleblower nurses could spill the beans . Who knows, perhaps Craig Knowles was one of the swingers.

    There’s a lot more that needs probing here.

    Posted by mr magoo on 2005 09 20 at 09:50 PM • permalink

  26. How can Labour survive this?  What are they going to say at the next election:  “...no, seriously, we’ve, like, totally checked this dude out and HE’s THE ONE!...STOP LAUGHING, NO, REALLY, WE MEAN IT THIS TIME..we’ve hired a staff shrink, recommended to us by Moveon.org, and he’s really convinced this guy is PM material for Austrailia…STOP IT!  YOU’RE LAUGHTER IS CRUSHING OUR DISSENT!...”

    Posted by rc on 2005 09 20 at 10:15 PM • permalink

  27. This weeks ‘continuing crisis’ is a beaut. Who’d have thought Fat Phil would have been right? Nice to see that most of the dunderheads come from the Fairfax teat.

    Posted by Nic on 2005 09 20 at 10:31 PM • permalink

  28. She looks a bit like Julia Gillard with a blond rinse- maybe that’s why Mono Manberry gave her the kiss of death. Can’t see if the 1st Mrs Oddball has as big an arse as Woody Woodpecker though.

    Posted by Habib on 2005 09 20 at 11:01 PM • permalink

  29. #7

    Personally they both give me the tom tits ...

    The what?

    wronwright, it’s rhyming slang for “the shits”

    Posted by pog-ma-thon on 2005 09 20 at 11:08 PM • permalink

  30. This is why the Internet is so awesome. How else would I have known that a candidate for Australia’s Prime Minister was a nutjob with man-boobs and a dyke wife?

    Posted by Dave S. on 2005 09 20 at 11:16 PM • permalink

  31. Man Boobs and Dyke Wife.

    Sounds like a ‘different’ breed of superhero. An anti-Incredibles, if you will.

    —Nora

    Posted by The Thin Man Returns on 2005 09 20 at 11:18 PM • permalink

  32. Madawaskan - you should know the old adage

    ” A conservative is just a liberal who hasn’t had a threesome yet”

    or something like that.

    Posted by Francis H on 2005 09 20 at 11:37 PM • permalink

  33. Man Boobs and Dyke Wife.

    Sounds like a ‘different’ breed of superhero. An anti-Incredibles, if you will.

    With their kids “Bipolar Boy” and “Cutter Girl.”

    Posted by Dave S. on 2005 09 20 at 11:43 PM • permalink

  34. #15

    Should we assume the bisexual ex-wife doesn’t look like this?

    hot not

    wronwright, NOBODY’S wife or ex-wife looks like that…

    Posted by kae on 2005 09 20 at 11:49 PM • permalink

  35. John Kerry’s does (but at least she’s loaded, and I mean with cash, not chemicals).

    Posted by Habib on 2005 09 21 at 12:05 AM • permalink

  36. Congratulations and thank you for a hugely entertaining column this week, Tim. Haven’t guffawed so much in ages. How do you pick a ‘stuck on stupid’ winner from that lot?
    PS. I didn’t realise Geoffrey Barker was such a tosser – thanks for giving him the opportunity to point it out.

    Posted by larrikin on 2005 09 21 at 12:08 AM • permalink

  37. Yes, madawaskan, this broadmindedness is very disturbing. Whatever happened to conservative values?

    Posted by slammer on 2005 09 21 at 12:12 AM • permalink

  38. Continuing Crisis quote:

    Michael Gordon, The Age, December 3, 2003

    That’d be Litium-free Latham?

    Posted by kae on 2005 09 21 at 12:18 AM • permalink

  39. #38
    Lithium-free Latham

    arrgh PIMF

    Posted by kae on 2005 09 21 at 12:20 AM • permalink

  40. Madawaskan — Does watching count?  Even videos?  Keep in mind, lesbian porn does not mean a guy is going gay…it just he and want the same thing.

    slammer — We gotta stay in training in case the Democrats ever get back in.

    Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 09 21 at 12:45 AM • permalink

  41. ...in case the Democrats ever get back in.

    Argh, now I have the mental image of a Hillary threesome…

    Posted by PW on 2005 09 21 at 02:48 AM • permalink

  42. #30. Dave S. That should read “was a ONE-NUT nutjob with man-boobs and a dyke wife”.

    Posted by Lucky Nutsacks on 2005 09 21 at 03:08 AM • permalink

  43. #36 Larrikin
    Is Geoffrey Barker that toffy lawyer git who does that Hypotheticals show?

    Posted by RhikoR on 2005 09 21 at 03:24 AM • permalink

  44. I would rather come home to my wife munching on carpet than waxing a pole. Even if I couldn’t join in I would sit quietly in a corner and….well….you know….Better than cable I would think.

    Posted by wingsndagger on 2005 09 21 at 03:25 AM • permalink

  45. I have resigned myself to never having to think again. Between Bob “the knob” Brown and Phill “I lost my mao hat” Adams, as long as I take an automatic oppisite view to them all is right with the world.

    Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2005 09 21 at 03:38 AM • permalink

  46. #43 No, that’s Geoffrey Robertson. Geoffrey Barker is an entirely different git who’s more brown-nosed (at least when he’s scribbling about the ‘progressives’). Barker writes for the Australian Financial Review, a Fairfax newspaper, and the best one it’s got notwithstanding Geoffrey’s contributions.  cheers

    Posted by larrikin on 2005 09 21 at 04:44 AM • permalink

  47. ‘dangerous lard of political poison’

    If that’s what he said about Bob Ellis, he’s right.

    Did Latham have a speechwriter?

    Or was he the only one not to sub-contract their bile-writing out to freelancers?

    Posted by ilibcc on 2005 09 21 at 07:05 AM • permalink

  48. Call me a retrograde conservative, but if I found out that my life partner was gay, I would be very upset. 

    If she was instead a casual girlfriend, yes, I could see why some men would see it as an opportunity.  The more serious the relationship, the less inclined I would see it that way.

    A life partner should be interested in only his or her partner.  Otherwise they’re not really a life partner.

    Posted by wronwright on 2005 09 21 at 08:30 AM • permalink

  49. Where can I find a picture of this woman?

    Posted by Chris Harper on 2005 09 21 at 08:34 AM • permalink

  50. Apparently the first mrs L is now happily married and has two kids…the second wife is a lawyer and must have rocks in the head???

    Posted by crash on 2005 09 21 at 10:15 AM • permalink

  51. Surely, if the great statesman wishes to improve Ausdtralian literacy by reading to kids, he should set a good example of grammar: “I had more success with women than SHE.”

    Posted by Susan Norton on 2005 09 21 at 10:40 AM • permalink

  52. Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Members:
Login | Register | Member List

Please note: you must use a real email address to register. You will be sent an account activation email. Clicking on the url in the email will automatically activate your account. Until you do so your account will be held in the "pending" list and you won't be able to log in. All accounts that are "pending" for more than one week will be deleted.