Leaders Change, Reporters Never Do

Waah. John Howard has successed himself out of a job. Perhaps totally: he's conceded the PM race, but the report says he may lose his seat in Parliament altogether. (In which case, ninme has called dibs on him.)

On another note: how can we tell the U.S. is still the world's superpower? When reporters explain the significance of other nation's elections thus:

Voters warmed to his promise to pull Australian troops out of Iraq and sign the Kyoto Protocol on climate change, further isolating the US, which had received strong backing from Mr Howard.

Right. Because who cares about what's good for Australia, right? Or for Great Britain (source of the story). Just so we're busting the Yanks' chops: humanity's highest calling.

What are we to make of the fact that a mere sentence later the report utterly reverses course and tells us in fact Kyoto and Iraq had little to do with it?

The election was fought mainly on domestic issues, with Labor exploiting widespread anger at workplace laws and rising interest rates.

Update: Let the weeping begin. He lost his seat, too. Mark Steyn reflects briefly.