The latest Morgan survey combines two weekends of face-to-face polling, and it confirms the message elsewhere that Labor has opened up a lead to rival its honeymoon period early last year. Labor’s primary vote is up 2.5 per cent on the last survey to 51.5 per cent, while the Coalition is down 3.5 per cent to 33 per cent: its worst result since May 2008, and 1.5 per cent below the previous worst result on Malcolm Turnbull’s watch. The two-party split of 61.5-38.5 compares with 59.5-40.5 last time. Furthermore:
• Talk of Attorney-General Robert McClelland abandoning parliament for a diplomatic post had escaped my notice, but the St George and Sutherland Shire Leader has reported on the implications for his seat of Barton should it come to pass:
The reports said he would make room for NSW Senator Mark Arbib who wants to be a minister in the Rudd cabinet and had set his sights on Mr McClelland’s seat. If Mr McClelland was “white-anted” he would take a diplomatic post and Rockdale councillor Shaoquett Moselmane would be called in as a potential powerbroker to help Senator Arbib take Barton in any preselection fightthat might arise for the next federal election.
The story is denied by all concerned.
• Paul Austin of The Age gets a bit over-excited about the Victorian Electoral Commission’s ruling on independent candidate Les Twentyman’s complaint of misleading electoral material during last year’s Kororoit by-election campaign. Twentyman argued that a Labor pamphlet stating that “a vote for Les Twentyman is a vote for the Liberals” constituted material “likely to mislead or deceive an elector in relation to the casting of the vote” under the meaning of section 84 of the Electoral Act, an offence potentially punishable by six months’ imprisonment. Those familiar with complaints of this kind will not be surprised to learn that it was rejected, on the grounds that the section is narrowly concerned with matters such as how-to-vote cards that deceive voters into backing the wrong candidate. The VEC’s report on the by-election states that “legal opinion is that the pamphlet is misleading in its suggestion of an affiliation or agreement between Mr Twentyman and the Liberal Party”, but since this is neither here nor there as far as the Electoral Act is concerned, I can’t help wondering if it’s the commission’s place to say so.
• The Derwent Valley Gazette reports that the Tasmanian Liberals have named six candidate for Lyons at next year’s state election: incumbent Rene Hidding, “Brighton councillor Leigh Gray, vascular surgeon Philip Lamont, transport operator Geoff Page, business consultant Jim Playsted and Meander Valley Mayor Mark Shelton”.
1,210 Comments
Julian Grill acquitted and compensated. Looks liken the WA CCC is nothing more than a star chamber.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,25147446-2761,00.html
The only reason that Cossie is still in the dock is that nobody in the private industry will give him a job.
He was so desperate last night on Q&A, that he wanted to steal Tanner’s job and begged for a job from the Ruddster.
from Crikey:
Peter Costello has one thing on his mind – to preserve his legacy as the worlds greatest something.
What was very telling last night was the way Cossie refused to say “Workchoices is dead”. For heaven sake according to Turnbull that is party policy. Obviously Cossie doesn’t think so. He could have killed it stone dead or at least have gone some way there.
GG Star Chambers are good
Morgan also has the New Zealand National Party on 56 per cent.
Nice ‘take’ on the Costello situation by Crikey. Nailed it.
Anyone else finding this McClelland/Arbib thing completely unbelievable?
I knew it! Glen is the Earl of Strafford.
Just for the record, from the last thread:
I have no idea what happened here.
I couldn’t get onto Crikey at all for two hours or so this afternoon.
Costello: The Opposition’s ‘weapon of mass distraction’
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/06/2509615.htm?section=justin
Good one Joe.
William,
Offtopic request, but can we have a reply button like The Worst Of Perth’s, where you can respond to a post and it is threaded ?
http://theworstofperth.com/2009/03/03/worst-media-connections/?replytocom=15993#respond
Same here GB
Crikey servers shat themselves.
GB, yes, there was an “outage” this arvo for Crikey and PollB. Bilbo’s revenge?
the only reason why Captain Smirk is still in parliament is that no-one in the private sector will employ him. Hewson nailed it when he mentioned his laziness as treasurer. He is enjoying bringing down the party (why wouldny he rule out a leadership tilt EVER, why wouldnt he declare Workchoices dead as Turnbull said??) the didnt give him the leadership he felt entitled to.
and from the other thread GP fell into the trap of counting books SHIPPED with books SOLD in relation to the costello book. Its like when record companies say an album is platinum, which is based on albums shipped rather than sold.
GG and ShowsOn
It just had to be you two who ended the dream Snip-Free run didn’t it?
Even though Digital Downloads may have stopped that practice, apparently there have been allegations that Record Companies have created dodgy download accounts to artificially boost download “sales”.
Though back in the olden days before electronic scanning of Albums, artists and/or Managers and Record Companies would find out where the chart shops were and would buy up copies so as the song would enter the charts.
10/11, me too, I couldn’t get on from round about 1-ish Perth time until close to 2 hours later. It wasn’t an ISP issue either, was just confined to PB, as other sites would load without any issues. Glad to see you back now, William
Btw, since you are here in Perth too, William, did you have any issues of your own getting on with your ISP today?
Not to my knowledge, Julie – I was out all day.
2nd test Vs South Africa. Australia is batting and the Pakistanis are crying.
I don’t know that Barton’s quite so safe a seat for Labor that they could lever McClelland out and install a party heavy without risk of defeat. Why not boot out someone like Julia Irwin or Roger Price? Mega-safe Labor seat for life.
Sorry to be a killjoy, but can we please not do the whole ball-by-ball cricket commentary deal.
I couldn’t get Pollbludgers or Possum for a couple of hours this afternoon, at all. Does anyone else think Costello is trying to do Turnbull slowly? And might this be, sooner rather than later if these abysmal polls keep up. Next Newspoll should be interesting.
I have a friend in the music industry. A few years ago a box of 1800 copies of Demi Hines (Marcia’s daughter) arrived in his store by courier with the express instructions that the box remain unopened. A different courier arrived later that same day to collect the box. Rumor has it that this unopened box was moved across Melbourne to several retail music stores. Guess what? Demi Hines single hit the #1 spot on the charts.
My guess is that only a handful of copies were ever sold.
Record companies will do anything to distort the charts. I don’t see why book publishers wouldn’t do the same thing.
Question: If Costello had taken the Oppo Leader job after the election, as Beazley did in 1996 in comparable circs, would he still be in the job now? Labor gave Beazley a very long clear run, despite bad polling, because we respected him and knew there was no-one else. Would Costello have got the same consideration?
#26
Would Costello have the Liberals in the position they are now? That’s probably the question.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25148337-601,00.html
hehehehe
Fools one and all
In June 1997, 15 months after the 1996 election, Howard was still at 53.3 in Newspoll. But there was not a whisper against Beazley’s leadership. At the same stage in the cycle, the Libs have trashed one leader and are trashing a second.
steve K my understanding was the charts were ACTUAL sales but the platinum/gold status is items SHIPPED. So basically you can ship 50,000 and get a GOLD album. Happened with former Australian Idol Casey Donovan. The album was “double platinum” they shipped 150,000 but far fewer than that.
re: these polls. Turnbull should be glad of the Costello distraction. When are those in the MSM going to point out that he has TANKED as Opposition Leader and his 2PPs are as bad as Nelson. Question: Why did Nelson get such a hard time for similar numbers yet barely a word is written or spoken about Turnbull’s ratings
Another couple of points, Adam.
1) Labor’s defeat in 1996 was indisputably a rout. I suspect few in the ALP seriously expected Beazley to win govt back by 1998. After a loss like that there’s nothing to do but regroup and look long term, so Beazley was given that luxury. The Liberals are close enough to win in 2010, so the pressure on their leader for short-term results is much greater. In many ways it would have been better for them to suffer a Keating-esque thrashing to force them to get their house in order.
2) Beazley started to make ground fairly quickly due to various Howard stuff-ups in his first term- travel rorts, Ministers getting the boot, etc. There’s no sign Rudd is making similar mistakes.
Excellent question, I suspect that the Libs would have grown impatient with bad polls and their would be ongoing squabbling and recriminations.
Tom.
i dont think the coalition have a chance 2010 and i think they know it as well, it just depends if Cossie wants to cool his heels in opposition for a second term, he’s so lazy that it might just appeal to him,the glaring lack of business suiters banging on his door might just keep him in parliament.
some bluddy idiot put up a profile for Von Einam under the name Bevan Spencer on facebook, he hasnt got internet access so it’s either a pal of his or someone stirring, the government is trying to get it closed down.
The problem is obviously that he doesn’t think he has a better economic argument than the government. If he knew what to do and say to attract more support to the Liberals, surely he would currently be adopting that plan. But he knows that he was only ever as good ast he advice he was given from Treasury, and that he isn’t good enough to attack the government at this time.
Sorry OT but
Can someone remind me how to change the symbol next to your username?
Only if he was doing ok. Otherwise Turnbull would be destabilising him.
Having said that, Costello is behaving like a fool atm. Turnbull is the Leader: either support him, or challenge.
No 36
Forgive me, but where has Costello denied his support for Turnbull? It’s the media that is presupposing leadership instabilities.
Most recently on Q and A, where he was directly asked the leadership question
and stonewalled
yet again
The outage today was all of Crikey. Not sure if it was just their site, or their server.
GP are you SERIOUSLY telling/spinning that the Costello instability is all a media beat up? He wont deny a leadership tilt. He could close this down in a minute
meant rule out not deny
I have thought what crikey is saying about Costello for some time now – that he’s in pure wrecker mode, ‘it should have been my party and if I can’t have it, nobody can’.
After all, if you REALLY believed (and I think he did) that Howard was going to lose the election, and you REALLY believed that your party was the best for Australia, then surely you would risk ANYTHING to get rid of JWH. To say, in this situation, that challenging for the leadership was not in the best interests of the party or the government was (at least in Cossie’s eyes) an untruth.
And, similarly, if you really believed you were the best hope your party had of taking back government and you really believed that Labor was doing an atrocious job….
So, either (i) Costello believes that his party is crap and Labor is the best possible govt at this time or (ii) he believes that Labor is crap and the Libs are the best possible government but he’s happy to have both Australia and the Libs suffer cos neither of them realised how wonderful he is and one day they will and then won’t they all be sorry…
Anyway, I found it interesting that he’s offered to give Rudd advice when he’s refused similar offers from his own party…
GP @ 37, a wolf in sheep’s clothing is still a wolf
…. a la the old looney tunes cartoons where the coyote dons sheeps clothes to try to steal some sheep for his next meal and the real sheep puts him off, I think their names in that episode are “Frank” and “Ralph” (and yes, I know I’m showing my age)
It looks like Wilson Tuckey supports Costello:
“But fellow WA Liberal MP Wilson Tuckey defended Mr Costello’s right to speak out about issues, and said those who were accusing him of destabilising the party were the real destabilisers.”
GP: So you did see Costello’s appalling performance on Q and A.
Is it Liberal policy to bury work choice or not; wouldn’t be able to work that out from the performance of the spoilt brat. Is Turnbull the leader of the party or not; wouldn’t have twigged from the discraseful effort seen on Q and A and the response from the happy clappers. It was the most appalling self promoting drivel I have ever seen from a senior politician.
When Beazley became opposition leader in 1996 he rightly suspected that he would never be Prime Minister. However he did it because he was the best placed to rebuild after such an election loss. He did it for the good of the party, not just out of self interest.
What I don’t understand is that Costello was in exactly the same situation after Rudd won, yet Costello seems to think that it is ore important for him to maneuver himself into a position where he may become P.M., rather than taking over for the good of his party.
Costello likes to say that Labor has the cult of the party, whereas the Liberals have the cult of the leader. Well, why doesn’t he support the best interests of the party, rather than his own best interests at this time?
Oh well if you’ve got Tuckey’s endorsement what else do you need?
An ANU political expert on Turnbull’s failure as Liberal leader:
“ANU political scientist Dr Norman Abjorensen said Mr Turnbull had history against him because he was only the second person to be Opposition leader.
He said it usually takes the third leader to win an election and become Prime Minister.
He said it history is to be taken as indicative of what may happen in the Liberal Party, it may taken Mr Costello a couple of strikes to seize the leadership.
“If a Liberal leaders not going to deliver the goods they are gone. Brendan Nelson’s problem is he never got out of the doldrums and Turnbull’s been going backwards since he came in,” he said.
“Turnbull’s got a black mark against him in terms of the Liberals very instrumental view of the leadership he is not delivering either a rise in popularity or the prospect of winning the next election.
“That brings the weight of history against him.”
Gee thatt will really wont it Bree??
“vote for costello or I’ll belt ya”
Costello really blew a hole in everything when he told the media about the supposed ’secret deal’ between him and Howard. I think that hardened Howard’s resolve not to hand over the leadership. If he’d have kept quiet I believe Howard would have left late 2006 and given Costello a run.
To be fair, I understand his decision not to challenge Howard after this point. From late 2006 onward it was increasingly likely the government would be going down. Why would he want to inherit “the fag end” of the term (as Keating put it)?
(Oh and if someone could answer #35 I’d be very grateful)
If you’ve got Tuckey’s support, nothing else can save you.
So what. Rudd only looked after his own interests by kicking out Beazley when he was travelling along quite nicely towards 2007. Rudd had a chance to lead the ALP in January 2005 and he refused. Rudd put his own ego ahead of the ALP when he kicked out Beazley.
The only people in the Liberal caucus that support Turnbull at the moment are about 5-10 MPs. The rest support Costello. Having said that, I think Costello will lead after 2010. So, Turnbull will lead us to defeat next year.
To change your avitar ( the picture to the right of your name) click on it and follow the steps
#52
Actually Bree I’ll pay you that one.
I was never impressed with how Rudd knifed Beazley after he’d done all the hard yards and was in a competitive position.
That’s what the party room wanted. Rudd won the contest by 10 votes.
If Costello called for a leadership challenge tomorrow, he would win it easily. Turnbull doesn’t even have the numbers, yet he is leader.
No he didn’t, he didn’t have the numbers then.
Rubbish! The caucus didn’t want Beazley to be leader, that’s why he lost a leadership ballot!
Sorry gravatar
Beazley has never said rudd knifed him.
Unlike the Libs the Labor party is gentlemanly in its disposal of leaders.
EXACTLY! This is precisely the point I made. It is just poisonous to go to an election where the leader doesn’t even have the support of his own party.
What advantage is there for Costello being leader after 2010 that he doesn’t have now? The economy will be starting to recover next year, so Costello will be taking over at the point in time that the government can crow about getting teh economy through the GFC. Surely it would be easier attacking the government when the economy is going poorly, rather than when it is starting to recover?
A knifing would’ve been if Rudd and / or his supporters spent a heap of time undermining Beazley. But they didn’t, Beazley sadly undermined himself by forgetting Chapelle Corby, and confusing Karl Rove with Rove McManus.
Now, Beazley and his supporters certainly spent a heap of time undermining Crean when he was leader, because Beazley realised he should’ve held on to the leadership after the 2001 election.
Beazley was still in a strong position in late 2006. No need for Rudd to challenge.
#54
I’ve done that but when I return here it doesn’t carry over.
Costello will never lead the Liberal party – he is out to destroy it. It is payback time for all of the Howard sycophants that didn’t have the guts to stand up to Howard even when it became apparent that they would lose with him at the helm. For Costello to have had a cnace of victory in an election, he would have needed to replace Howard at least 12 months out (preferrably 18 months or more). All of those sycophants that knifed Costello in the back are now targets for him. Costello is just playing games with the party.
Tom.
He didn’t have the support of the caucus, a leader in that position should be challenged.
Jenny Macklin, Stephen Smith and Tony Smith were all big Beazley supporters. They are not happy with Rudd as leader or PM. I think Gillard’s union mates will get the numbers for her in the caucus and she will challenge Rudd himself after the next election.
I don’t think I’d go that far
I meant Tony Burke not Tony Smith @ 65.
Funnily enough I agree but later events also lead me to believe.
1.Internal ALP/lib polling was showing rudd hadf the “it” factor
2.Kim was worn out/down by howards ,ahem, politics
3.The dynamics of the electorate had subtly changed ,in that many people wanted a “cleanskin”
4.of course worstchoices also brang together alot of diverse groups that neede to be massaged. rudd being the consumate diplomat fitted the bill
In summary more a gentle bump as opposed to a full bloodletting in the forum
I could accept what Rudd did if he led Labor to a massive landslide ala Kennett shafting Alan Brown. But the victory wasn’t that huge- no better than what Beazley could have achieved. And given all the hard work Kim had put in to keep the party competitive, he deserved to lead them in to office.
Costello wouldn’t want the job unless they were in with a reasonable chance of winning. However if they were in with a good chance of winning I doubt they would want to change horses. Thus Costello wont be leader.
Costello no doubt planned to have left by now but there being no other opportunities and there being the matter of payback to Howard and his precious Liberal Party and a certain enjoyment in playing with Turnbull.
Turnbull probably looks on Costello with contempt for having no drive or guts. Costello no doubt knows this and may want Turnbull to fail. It was bad enough that he play second fiddle to Howard for so long and make himself a quiet doormat, it would be galling to see Turnbull take over and do well when he had rejected the option.
Costello appeared fairly lazy and loose during the last election campaign, how is he going to fare as Leader during a campaign?
Tony Burke voted for Rudd:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/factions-left-behind-in-leadership-vote/2006/12/04/1165080880899.html
Of course Macklin voted for Beazley, she had to do so if she wanted to remain Deputy!
I wish I could have dreams as psychedelic as yours.
Howard had the wood on Beasley (remember the no ticker jibes) whereas he couldn’t lay a glove on Rudd, at least Rudd had the guts to throw his hat in the ring twice, he ran 3rd to Beasley and Latham but didn’t give up and got the top job on his second go. I say thank the good lord for that
That’s what I think too.
Labor won with the Ruddster, thus ending 11 years of the Dark Ages. (shudder)
How he got there doesn’t matter. In this case, the end justifies the means.
65
(i)The unions aren’t that strong in the modern ALP – if they were, Julia would have not had to settle for Deputy to start with.
(ii) The ALP isn’t stupid. While Rudd continues to get stellar poll figures and win elections, he’ll be unchallenged. A more likely scenario is that he does a Bracks and hands over when the time looks right.
As for the Rudd/Beazley thing – I can assure you that the ALP recognised that Kim wasn’t it – there was an audible despair at branch level when he became leader again, the average branch member could see Julia and or Kev were the go. The caucus was a little slower on the uptake, they were personally fond of Kim and recognised the extent of his contribution – as did Julia and Kevin.
Beazley’s biggest failing was simply that he couldn’t understand how bad Howard was.
Join the young liberals
MDMConnell
try clearing your cache
http://kb.iu.edu/data/ahic.html
There is always the next election to get a landslide, I think most laborites would accept gvt as the minor prize this time.
One can be biased and say Rudd hasn’t done much since coming to power. Whether or not that’s true, the main thing is that the nasty Howard is no longer there dividing the country. That in itself is an achievement Australians can be proud of.
Ooooh, even Bree has given up winning the next election. What a telling sign.
I agree. I think it will be sometime in 2014, a year or so after winning a third election.
Did anyone feel the small earthquake in Melbourne?
Rudd had to have a big enough gap to over come that late swing back to the government as election day approached, fear of change from something familiar. Beasely couldn’t get that gap. I suspect Howard would have snuck over the line against Kym.
And Rudd totally bamboozled and rattled Howard during the campaign, totally out played him and just about gave him a breakdown. Even so, there was the narrowing come election week.
Rudd had to work hard to beat Howard. He had the strategies worked out. I very much doubt Beazley would have done that over 2007. Howard needed to be negated. Rudd did it to a perfectly. I’m just not convinced Beazley could have pulled off the last election.
On a different tack, we’ve just experienced an earth tremor in Melbourne. I bet Turnbull will blame Rudd for it. He’s done so for everything else so far.
Diog,
While you are around.
Snipping is an occupational hazard. I never complain about what people say about me or ask for special consideration. But neither do I resile from what I posted.
William has a tough job to maintain standards and balance all the egos that strut around here from time to time. I think he does a pretty good job.
Yes GB felt that too. Doesnt seen to have hit the news yet…
Given how large Rudd’s leads were heading into the election and the fact that he got a 52.7 2PP, I think Beasley may have lost or just snuck home
just on sky news….
#77
Done. Meet my new lab puppy.
# 81
Yes, the glassware just started jittering and the floor rumbling under my feet. Wonder where the epicenter was?
Not that it can ever be proven or disproven, but I feel people were much more sick of Howard in 2007 than in 1998 (when Beazley Labor got 51% of the national 2PP) or 2001. The polls were in his favour when he left. If Beazley did win, it wouldn’t have been on 52.7% 2pp/83 seats, it would have been less, but who knows if he would have won or lost.
Mate, my missus just asked the question, “Did the earth shake for you too?”
bob
Remember in the months leading to the last election when we were all thinking what could happen to get Howie back in. There was (1) a terrorist attack on home soil, (2) a major terrorist attack in the region, (3) a Rudd scandal, (4) a financial crisis (The Libs really lucked out on the timing of the GFC).
Now all those things are off the table, have already happened or will benefit Rudd if they happen. If you were a Lib, the only possible chance they have is a monumental meltdown in the Oz economy, as bad as other developed countries. The GDP figures show that’s not going to happen.
They have no hope in the next election.
#81 The windows in my house were really shaking
62
I think the fun part is cleaning your browser cache so you can see it. Try
a)Closing the browser and resarting
b)Cleaning the browser history
c)Restart you computer.
The steps needed depends on your browser and version.
#91
Where are you? I’m in the outer east.
Thanks fredn it’s sorted now.
GG, What About Me?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzQKECQgjW8
The earthquakes must be punishment for Victoria’s abortion laws.
MDMConnell
cute pup, GG got someone to play with now
55,
I’m solidly in the Labor camp and I was happy to see Beazely go anywhere, as long as he went, I didn’t care if he went of his own accord or if someone turfed him out, as did Rudd. Beazely is a nice man, I’ve nothing against him personally. However, he had his chance (in more than one election) and with Howard turning the country inside out, it was to the greater interest of the country that we get an electable Labor leader in. Damaged goods are just that, no matter how you try to sugar coat them. That is the only reason I wanted Beazely out.
There’s no other logical explanation for it.
juliem, but imagine if Beazley did win. We wouldn’t have someone so socially conservative as Rudd.
#93 berwick
#100
Really? Beazley was pretty conservative too.
No 45
Costello’s performance was fine. Lindsay Tanner also performed well – much better than Swan. Tanner should be Treasuer, as I have always said.
Not as socially conservative as Rudd.
Interesting report from ABC
“Suburbs in Melbourne’s north and north-east have reportedly been shaken by an earthquake.
Reports to ABC News Online say the suburbs of Frankston, Knoxfield, Lang Lang, Caulfield North and Yarra Junction have felt tremors”
Yep, all those areas being to the south and east of Melbourne, not north.
Finns,
You misunderstand. I don’t care!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRIpc_QtSMc
GG
I’m not chastising you. I’m just disappointed the record for good behaviour had to end eventually. And it just had to be religion didn’t it. I have a mental list of the most controversial topics here.
1. Becoming a Republic
2. Nuclear power
3. The Dismissal (can’t you people get over that!! It was 34 years ago)
4. Palestine vs Israel
5. Questions of religious tolerance
Each one is like lobbing a hand grenade into William’s hands.
And now they don”t have the guts to stand up to Costello; the punishment does fit the crime.
They are better than Howard, or any other Liberal government that would always be beholden to its religious nutcase faction.
I see two major problems with the current Governmetn’s social policies, it won’t support gay marriage or civil unions. But that will change in 10 years time as it is strongly supported by voters under the age of 35.
And of course… the internet filter which seems to be an attempt to placate social conservatives.
90 Diogenes – I agree with you. However Mark Riley on channel 7 in his political summary of the days events decided to quote some report suggesting our downturn will match that of the US. No contrary view put of course. Where do they find these people?
Tell me about it…
GP @ 103
Swan wasn’t on the show.
Not to mention the Rudd government won’t fix the shortcomings of their gay superannuation legislation that disadvantages older gay couples that was created by the legislation.
First, Peter Costello
Second, the bushfires,
Now, the earthquake,
Then, seven years of drought, followed by
seven years of deluge,
Then, swarms of locust
Then, the mice plague,
Victoria, Victoria, beautiful one day, total disaster the next.
No 112
I was referring to Swan’s performance the last time he was on the show.
No-one in upper reaches of the ALP thought Beazley couild beat Howard. Sad but true.
Yes you would.
No 109
Even social conservatives that I know are opposed to the filter. It sounds more like a plaything to appease Senator Fielding.
Just a gravatar test people, as you were…
Tom.
What are these shortcomings and how do you know the Rudd government won’t fix them?
Somthing the Howard government NEVER did of course.
#118
You look a bit young to be on the computer, Tom…….
Finns,
You’ll love this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vIpSHJWWes
Did anyone check to see if the epicenter was in Higgins……..Cossie might of hurt himself falling out of the hammock
Where are you Ron?
BTW Australia kicking backside in the Test. 0/119 at lunch.
What! RSA don’t even have a second slip first thing after lunch. It just cost them a wicket.
bob1234, given what has happened during the Howard years with Cornelia Rau, children overboard et. al (general immigration issues across the board) I would argue that Rudd looks quite peachy in comparison
….. You have to pick and chose your battles and can’t win them all. Personally, I’m miffed that he isn’t pushing in a strong way on the Republic. That doesn’t mean I’m unhappy with things though in general if I dislike one or more policy positions. And purely on being socially conservative, I am not. I support gay marraige, the Republic and other such leftish type causes. Yet, I am still solidly in the Labor camp. Get behind the man that is electable 
(and remember, too, Rudd is from QLD. I’m not sure who is more conservative, native QLD’rs or native WA’rs, but I suspect that they could each give the other a run for their money). Now off to the footy [on delay in Perth 
] and channel switch with the cricket. Sorry, William, you asked for no ball by ball commentary so I’m not giving any but I don’t recall you completely disallowed any mention of sporting words 
Howard losing his seat was probably the last grain to balance the scales, (even though Howard was not a player in those times).
The trashing of the libs economic credibility and a realisation of what Gough actually accomplished in his short time also goes a long way.
But when Gough is elected first El Presidente, then all will be at peace and in balance.
Hees wreeding a diksionery.
Fire, flood, earthquakes… what comes next, frogs or locusts?
Shows On,
You like making fun of people with disabilities?
You will decide who blogs and the style in which they blog?
Lovely.
The wheel turns
I don’t think supporting gay marriage is left wing. It just counts as not discriminating against people because of their sexuality. Like how it is illegal to do so under the anti-discrimination act. I don’t think not discriminating against age, or gender, or hair colour, or religion, or drink preference is a left wing thing, it is just a basic aspect of accepting someone as a person.
Supporting a republic isn’t left wing either, it is just common sense.
Hughes eases his way to 81*
Looking forward to the frogs myself…at least it would mean rain.
LOL!
This is hilarious coming from someone who repeatedly attacked me for cutting and pasting!
Earthquake was 4.7, about 90km (I assume east) of Melbourne.
The US Geological Survey said the earthquake registered 4.7 on the Richter scale, and that the epicentre was about 7 kms west of Korumburra.
No 133
I personally find gay marriage to be an abomination, but on principle I cannot oppose it.
Shows On,
Hilarious, I nearly laughed.
WTF?
I blame the stimulus packages.
You confused lad!
Was Hockey 7km west of Korumburra tonight?
OK GG, you want to play dirty. take this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KI5p17huGzE
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqKHNrHMUQI
Careful, G.G. and Glen will attack you for making fun of someone with a disability.
If only filmmakers still shot films in Todd-AO 70mm.
Those were the days…
Didn’t feel the earthquake at all here.
AIC, in Australia, a deluge of Peter Costello on the air waves might have to suffice. I’m sure Turnbull thinks so.
After the 1998 election, Mark Latham went to the back bench because his education policy was re-written by Beazley’s office. He then wrote an interesting book and spoke out against both Liberal and Labor policies.
It seems that Costello is basically doing a Latham.
Finns, is that you in that ‘Sound of Mucus” rubbish?
Harry Baby, the mucus is mine but not the other bits. Sorry.
Showy, i said about Diog the other day, but i think this apply to you as well.
Were you told when you were young that pain would lead to pleasure?
Diogenes @107
Clearly the answer to the Palestine vs Israel question is too implement the original Kimberly Scheme (albeit a bit late).
I would guess this would stretch the limits of our religious tolerance. Perhaps we should re-examine the religious privilege of child indoctrination.
However the advantages for this country would be great. The obvious one would be the formation of the Australian Republic (simply by importing 5 million new Australians). The would give us the opportunity to fix a dysfunctional system that led to the only illegal overthrow of a democratically elected government in a post-war developed nation.
At a more practical level, this would also provide a large influx of highly skilled migrants who could assist us in nation building projects. An good place to start would be establishing our Nuclear Power (electrical/geopolitical) industry.
Well it took an earthquake to do it but it got rid of Smirk’s ugly mug offa the ABC news site
Musrum @ 155 – best post ever.
“The would give us the opportunity to fix a dysfunctional system that led to the only illegal overthrow of a democratically elected government in a post-war developed nation”
Isn’t 34 years time to move on?
Finns
Boarding school flashbacks troubling you again eh.
There are already people living in the Kimberley, remember? It’s not terra nullius, remember?
Gus, i wish, i wish. we were so poor. we made the Slumdog Millionaire looks like a real millionaire
Geez, while I’m personally enjoying the cricket update, I’ll just bet William is going to be less than pleased.
To repeat what I said earlier:
There you go. A mother (nearly) almost always knows when things have gone too far. The bulge in my cheek ain’t crabapples.
How many folk will get the ‘crabapples in my cheek’ schtick, do you think William?
You were tic looky
We wouldve died or worse to be poor.
Looxury
Why is religious tolerance regarded as controversial?
Provided there’s no direct incitement to violence or discrimination, people should be free to criticise and ridicule people’s religion as much as they want. If people are offended that’s their tough luck.
#162
Catch-22?
Harry, like this?
http://www.middlesexvillagetrading.com/images/NonBiz/MotherGoose.JPG
MDMConnell, @ 164, I’ve absolutely no idea why you’re asking this question. Care to elucidate?
btw Gus, how is the job hunting going?
Finns, that’s very funny. And yep, MDMConnell, you got it. Finns, where do you come up with the amazing array of sublimely apposite and silly stuff that you do?
We were unsure if the Victorian legislation makes it unlawful to criticise religions as well as particular people for ascribing to religions. IMO, if someone can’t criticise religion itself, then that means we no longer have free speech.
This was in the context of some posters suggesting Iran should be bombed using nuclear weapons ASAP.
HSO
I’m to blame. I said anything about religious views and criticism of religion can get ugly.
MDMC
There are Victorian laws about ridiculing religion. That makes it controversial. And there are bludgers with strong religious beliefs who are quite offended when they are criticised or ridiculed. It’s a can of worms.
See post 107.
i knew it. it has to be Diog. I need to have a word with the delightful Mrs. D.
Excellent! Laura Tingle on Lateline.
133, Shows,
Yes, supporting left wing causes are common sense
Nothing changes.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/05/morgan-stanleys-13-payout_n_172259.html
#167 Those above have answered for me.
#170,171: I’m not a huge fan of laws enforcing ‘tolerance’ but if you must have them, obviously they should be used responsibly and not for silencing legitimate free speech criticising religion. If the Victorian laws are against ‘ridiculing’ religion then that’s not good.
No 175
It is not common sense for the government to steal your hard earned money.
SNAFU
WB
I dont mind finns having my email (actually mrs g”s), if you want to drop us a line
cheers
O.K. thanks guys. It’s a weird thing to me, I’ll say. Religious beliefs of all sorts have sustained people through dreadful events, both man made and natural. If that helps people cope with catastrophic stuff, I take the view, who am I to argue with it. I can’t, however, countenance people killing people in the U.S, who perform abortions, for example. At any rate, it is a subject that will engender feirce debate. Not all of it helpful.
It seems to me that over time society becomes more socially liberal. Think about it, first only male property owners get to vote, then all men do, then women do, then indigenous peoples do. Initially it was almost impossible to get divorced, then it became easy.
Surely the fact there is this slow progress in a particular direction means something. The policies are right, because they are fair.
Laura Tingle knows more about the economy than Rudd!
feirce = fierce
And if only we could get the Left to embrace the same level of economic liberalism I’d be a happy man…….
Bree, I don’t know why you bother. Let me spell it out for you. Most people here, including the people from the opposition, don’t take you seriously. Go do a course or something. Try destroying a union. Try thinking.
MDM,
The reality is that people who want to exercise their right to “stick” it to religion generally can’t deal with the blowback.
They tend to get all defensive.
Gus, are you in Sydney?
God’s own garden of Eden,nay the Promised land,home of the free blah blah blah
smack bang in the centre of the Central coast
Sodom is just down the F3
Your theory that taxation is stealing would make Marx and Engels very proud. Marx called a fair distribution of resources through taxation “obsolete verbal rubbish”, because he didn’t believe in justice (the need for justice implies that a society is inherently unfair).
In other news, Turnbull’s essay calls Rudd a socialist, and says he is one of the wealthiest P.M.’s we have ever had because his wife owned a private business.
Can both of these propositions be correct?
I thought Gus was in Quinland, but wherever he is, perhaps he’s gone to bed, as I’m going to do. Kerist, I’m glad we seem to have got through the worst of it. I’ve had the appalling experience of being involved in any number of traumatic events here in Victoria, to the extent they now call me TM (Trauma Magnet), but the bushfires have been the worst.
More on “If We Are in the Death Spiral of Capitalism, Can We Start Using the “S” Word?” at http://www.alternet.org/workplace/130365/
Having just watched that Lateline I don’t think Bree is going to be a Laura Tingle fan for long. She and George speak to much sense for Bree.
You mean like limiting pro-life beliefs to only people who agree with you? Yeah, I’ve noted that sort of hypocrisy.
Gus, i have asked William to pass my email to you. see what i can do.
Adam’s rock from the other day.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/04/asteroid-2009-dd45s-passi_n_171722.html
Shows On,
Laughing at you, not with you!
I think Tingle and Megalogenis are two of the best political / economic journalists we have. They both seem to be pretty centrist to me.
May your camels always keep humping effendi
i havnt seen Megalogenis on the tele for awhile. Seems to have aged considerabley in a relativley short time.
Scotty,
Kids as a guess.
If Tingle is a centrist I wonder how she puts up with her husband. “Shut up Alan you drunken old goat and pass me the WeetBix.”
199 Scotty J – That’s what I thought too Scotty.
Megalogenis kids would Microgenoi, I surmise.
Italy to boycott U.N. conference against racism:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25150569-23109,00.html
Canada, U.S. and Israel also aren’t attending. I don’t think Australia should attend. Essentially the forum keeps being hijacked by Islamic states to attack Israel, while passing motions condemning the publishing of cartoons featuring Muhammad.
The trouble is, if Australia doesn’t attend that probably kills our chances of getting a seat on the Security Council.
That was the best Friday Forum in a long while.
No 201
I feel sorry for her.
LOL! ABC has a clip of Nigela Lawson’s dad explaining why the Bank of England has to print money.
yea kids sure can do that. If he has alot of shares in the stockmarket that wouldnt help either.
Will Steven Long sum up the courage to ask Leigh Sayles out?
Tune in to Lateline next Friday to find out!
No 204
The Italians have more pressing issues at home like solving endemic corruption, liberalising the economy, retiring debt, abolishing generous pensions…..dear oh dear I’ll be here all night cataloguing Italy’s problems.
Sure, but it is good of them taking a stand against the circus that that U.N. forum has turned into. Basically it is now a place for Islamic states to attack Israel and to try to ban free speech, i.e. the right of people to criticise, mock, critique, or otherwise make fun of Islam.
WOW Channel 9 is playing The Wild Bunch, one of the best westerns ever made.
GP,
I forgive everything .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VATmgtmR5o4
wasnt it peckinpah’s first western???
No 212
GG, that song always makes me teary with joy. Awe-inspiring, really.
The Deadly Companions, Ride the High Country, Major Dundee, The Wild Bunch.
And he made some Western TV shows in between.
I haven’t seen any of the TV ones, but all the films are worth a look. Ride the High Country and The Wild Bunch are first rate.
am watching the The Wild Bunch right now
tough cookies or what!!
GP,
Recording/playing music has to be up there with the best inventions of mankind.
Got to love William Holden’s first line in the film – “If they move….. kill ‘em!”
It looked to me like it was partly due to what looked like a dodgy blue screen (or do they use a green screen these days?) the ABC was using so they could superimpose his image against that red background lateline uses.
My Magnificent 7 Westerns, in that order:
1. Magnificent 7
2. The Wild Bunch.
3. Rio Bravo
4. High Noon
5. Vera Cruz
6. Shane
7. Winchester ‘73
#220…….number five is that Penelope’s mum?
#221 – great great Grandma
Butch Cassidy?
Little Big Man?
Alvin Purple?
Great list! I’d have to include Man of the West, The Searchers, Johnny Guitar, Fort Apache, Jubal, The Last Frontier, The Gunfighter, and a heap of others.
Why does Channel 9 show the credits in proper widescreen, then the rest of the film cropped?
GG, you are playing dirty.
He was from West Footscray.
no. 8 – The Professionals – Burt Lancaster, Lee Marvin, Robert Ryan
G.G. Just thought I’d pop in again before going to bed, and wow. I’ve played it twice and will again, and go to bed happy.
I think any western that clint did is worth a mention as well.
My Da loved all the TV serials such as Bonanza,High Chapparel , Gunsmoke,Rawhide etc
I have to say i just loved the Cisco kid and the original Zorro.
Who was from West Footscray?
Great film! I must admit I prefer Seven Samurai to The Magnificent Seven. A better John Sturges Western is Last Train from Gun Hill.
Showy, Kurosawa has said that the M7 is better than S7
Are you saying Alvin Purple was from West Footscray? Not from round here I can assure you.
In fact, probably round here in West Footscray, all we could summon up would be someone like a Bruce Puce.
Agree
S7 has the wow factor but M7 has that extra oomph factor as well
I don’t believe him! Seriously, Sturges made a lot of better westerns IMO, like Saddle the Wind, Gunfight at the O.K. Coral, The Law and Jake Wade, even Bad Day at Black Rock is kind of a modern western.
But the crazy thing is that Seven Samurai was heavily influenced by John Ford westerns. So Magnificent Seven is like full circle.
All the best filmmakers just know who to copy from.
Whatever happened to accepting the umpire’s decision? Another example of how television has corrupted the game. *Mutters darkly*
Blazing Saddles ???
I reckon Cave’s “The Proposition” was right up there in teh genre.
Whatever are you muttering about darkly, Adam?
Harry, what happens to “the bed”
The corruption of the ethos of cricket by television, which has fatally undermined the status of the umpire by second-guessing every decision and forcing the introduction of all these techo gimmicks.
The SAs need more biltong
I think if the third umpire was made responsible for monitoring front foot no-balls the accuracy of LBW and caught behind decisions would dramatically increase. The third umpire should sit there watching the front foot camera angle, and if one is a no-ball they press a button that sounds a siren.
There just isn’t enough time for the standing umpire to go from looking at the front foot to the batsmen and not occasionally make a mistake. (Like thinking the ball pitched on the stumps when it didn’t).
WA Premier Colin Barnett will create 1500 jobs.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,25149401-2761,00.html
Finns, the bed’s still there. Did you see “The Proposition”? William is probably going to be just as cross about the film review breakout as a cricket one….but he doesn’t seem to be around.
No wonder Govts. love pokies
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/files/gambling_stats.pdf
Bree, however, is
Checkout “Skyways” (owned by Woolies) in the Moonee Valley council
Night all.
A piss plant to create 1500 jobs! As if! Glen won’t be happy.
Yeah, he lives on Eastern Standard Time.
Apparently gambling in QLD is down 20%, which prompted Roy & H.G. to propose installing poker machines in schools.
There should be no third umpire. Everyone should accept the umpire’s decision without argument.
nite harry
Im going to watch the rest of the movie, nite all
Except for run outs
I agree. But it wouldn’t / doesn’t happen. The players complain, the commentators complain, some players call other players cheats, etc.
Is it surprising that players stopped walking at the same time they started being paid more?
And stumpings?
Yes, you pedant
Adam: No lost comments (from the last thread), just lost time… had a blogs outage earlier today.
I was just asking a question you pedant.
Indeed
No 252
Why? If the umpire is incorrect, there should be avenue for appeal.
Pauline Hanson in……Seinfeld.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uv_SuBdbQBQ&feature=related
Nope. No appeals, no nothing. Players and commentators should accept the umpire’s decision without dissent or comment. It’s called self-discipline.
No 263
No, it’s called turning a blind eye to clearly incorrect decisions.
But look at the scenario now in the current test. RSA have used up both of their referrals, so what if their is an absolute howler against South Africa now? Should Australia do the sporting thing and use up one of their own referrals so that they can allow their player to be given out? That would be charitable for sure, but effectively now South Africa is playing without the referral system, whereas Australia is. For the referral system to be fair, shouldn’t both teams have access to it all the time?
GP,
It’s only a game.
It’s not like blogging.
Chastity stops teen pregnancy! The same principle can work for cricket too…
Not.
Accepting a clearly incorrect decision without dissent is the highest tradition of cricket. It’s the reason why cricket is not a game like any other. Or wasn’t, at any rate. Now it’s just another television circus.
True, but it drives fans insane who see their team winning as a matter of life and death.
Look what happened when India toured last, both captains came to a gentleman’s agreement than batsmen would accept the word of fielders on contentious catches. That policy lasted only one test and ended when the Indian captain implicitly accused the Australians of being cheats.
Andrew Landeryou reports that Julian McGauran has won third position on the Victorian Coalition Senate ticket, ahead of Ross Fox. Michael Ronaldson in number one as expected.
No 268
It is a tradition of gross imbecility. A wrong call is a wrong call.
Rudd looks really nervous
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRqlsNgiEpU
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25150898-601,00.html
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA *cough splutter cough*
What, preytell, did Howard or Costello do to create a free market opportunity? The free market in Australia was completely and utterly created by Hawke/Keating. Trust The Australian to print such utter rubbish.`
Obama has been coming a very strong synchronised attack from the conservative media in the USA using every angle they can think of. It can be quite vicious and as far as I can simply designed to undermine confidence in him and his plans. The problem is that if they do one day have something of great importance to say no one will know it. However at least in the USA there is a widely available counter balancing liberal media. It looks like open word warfare.
You would suspect that too much of this type of stuff will simply turn people off to the message and they will simply observe Obama directly and make their own assessments.
Adam…
Crikey tells you all you need to know.
http://www.crikey.com.au/Politics/20090202-Equality-for-gay-couples-seems-like-a-good-idea.html
So is Rudd a Socialist or Capitalist?
People might feel comfortable with a bit of socialism at the moment, not that anybody would remember actually what Turnbull is talking about.
I’m glad a state fell to the Liberals. It shows during this time of the GFC that declining tax revenues happen no matter who is in power, and is not due to some “Labor economic mismanagement” myth.
Apparently he is both at the same time!
Notice how Turnbull doesn’t mention WorkChoices? Notice how he doesn’t mention Medicare, or Superannuation, or Enterprise Bargaining?
Everyone should watch this Jon Stewart Daily Show clip dissing the reporting of CNBC:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/05/jon-stewart-eviscerates-c_n_172057.html
Interesting that the ABC radio news report of the Turnbull essay is almost point-for-point the same as Shanahan’s “analysis” in The Australian, listing the same key points, anecdotes and jokes.
Very sad, actually.
Thomas Paine, I got in the habit of watching Rachel Maddow on MSNBC. Here is someone who is one of the best debaters in the media. She really gets her points across with logic. Little wonder, as she is a Rhode scholar, she talks to her viewers as peers, as well as have some fun.
What I was wondering is why we don’t have more shows here in Australia like this? Where is all the talent in Australian Journalism for the openingly centre left? On the right there is Bolt, Shama’s, JA, Milne, Ackers, Neil Mitchell, Alan Jones, and many more on the radio. On the centre left, no one that I can say who is openingly Labor on TV, Radio or print.
I would think that it might be a golden opportunity for some of the networks to look again at having a 30min show on politics for the free to air channels, especially in these times – people want more information on how things are going, rather than the 10sec grab. I think everyone’s had a gutful of reality-tv based tv shows. It’s time for pollies to go more mainstream tv.
Peter Martin’s piece Stop Laughing
There goes Turnbull’s line of attack.
[quote]In a detailed analysis released in Washington overnight IMF staff find that direct government investment of the kind included in the Rudd government’s stimulus packages can boost the economy by as much as $3 for every $1 spent.
By contrast income tax cuts of the kind proposed by the Opposition would boost the economy by just 30 cents for each $1 spent.
Further isolating the Opposition Leader is an Australian Treasury research paper released this morning finding that Australia’s biggest build-up of debt, during the Second World War, was “largely eliminated by the end of the 1970s” suggesting that increases in government debt are generally not left to future generations to repay.
The paper says that when net government debt peaked at 10.4 per cent of GDP in 1985-86 “it took only 3 years to reduce it by around 6 percentage points”. The 1995 peak in debt was eliminated within a decade. The Treasury paper comes after the department’s head Ken Henry was asked in a Senate hearing how long it would take to repay the $200 billion of debt being run up as a result of the downturn and replied that he didn’t know.
…and there goes Joe/Julie’s line of attack.
Treasury research paper on Australia’s ability to pay back debt.
http://www.treasury.gov.au/documents/1496/PDF/01_Debt.pdf
The article by Turnbull shows his understanding of economics, his journalistic skill to make his arguments in catchy word phrases. It also reeks of a well prepared brief full of “bon mots’ to present to a learned judge who will no doubt chuckle along to the arcane points of law that he is making.
These are all skills acquired in his previous lives outside what he is now doing.
His problem is he is now a politician. Making personal comments about Rudd (and the sainted Therese) for building a real business and making money just diminishes the Opposition Leader in the public eye. It draws unfavourable comparisons with himself as a bottom feeding gold toothed shark from the Merchant Banking business (You know, the ones who brought us the GFC). It also re-inforces the ALP’s political message that Rudd is the polite intelligent boy with glasses who seems to know what he is doing.
Turnbull is making Rudd front and centre by responding to Rudd’s agenda. Using Rudds words like “neo-Liberalism” consolidate them in the public perception and in fact legitimises them as an apt description for the Liberals.
Another own goal.
OK
….. now this creep in Harare has really got to go …..
related stories @ [ http://tinyurl.com/b5dcqv ]
More on GM back in the US
Renegade countries should be taken over by the united nations like bad businesses are taken over by receivers. If the united nations was strngthened and was not the joke that it has been made and is- then a use of force if necessary- (but few would be mad to take on the world,) for an occupation, a removal of their flag and substitution of the UN flag, and remain there until a democratically elected government can be elected, there are some jobs, food and basics for all.
GG, the problem is that Turnbull does not know which code he is playing. Soccer? Footie? Union? or League?
GG 284
Completely agree. There’s also the old principle: if you attack the character of a popular person it had better succeed else the attacker will suffer the blows of public opinion. Rudd is extremely popular and Turnbull has simply made himself look foolish and out of touch with public opinion. The truth is of course that neither Rudd’s essay or Turnbull’s reply will play in the minds of Joe Public.
Turnbull must argue policy, policy and policy. Of course the big problem is that his policies are unpopular or discredited e.g. alcopops, bringing forward tax cuts vs. a big cash injection (this one will disappear completely on July 1st) and opposing significant spending on schools, roads etc.
The sooner Turnbull starts to behave sensibly (in a political sense this might be a bit of me-too-ism) and draws distinct lines of difference on sensible, socially responsible policy the sooner he might win back some of the Liberal supporters who have clearly moved to a new home where the air is fresh and clear.
ShowsOn and dogma
The Jon Stewart piece on CNBC is a classic example of what’s so wrong with the MSM. And why does it take a liberal comedy show to tell everyone the truth? There is a great followup article on the HuffPo about why Stewart’s caning of CNBC was so important. It also discusses what is so wrong with the MSM. Everything they say is also true in Oz.
We need a Stewart or Colbert in Oz. What happened to the Chaser boys? They were as close as we got.
Finns,
On best westerns last night you missed…….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lx4hNGrZgSM
Diog, I seen it and loved it. Just peed my pants laughing at Stephen Colbert making fun of Glen Beck of Faux news.
ok heres the link for 292
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/3/6/83220/99676/473/705335
Tsvangirai survives another assassination attempt. The world sits on it’s hands. As do the Zimbabwean people.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25151634-601,00.html
Yeah, about time we sent in the stealths.
If only Zimbabwe had oil.
Yeah, that always works.
GG, of course, of course, of course. how did i miss it.
Diog, if the Big O got any balls. he should send in the troops to Harare.
Zimbabwe is believed to have an enormous amount of natural resources including platinum, gold and diamonds that remain unexploited because no mining companies will invest there.
It works sometimes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_NATO_bombing_in_Bosnia_and_Herzegovina
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/deliberate_force.htm
Zimbabwe also has an abundance of live steam including the largest collection of working Beyer Garratts.
Finns
You don’t need troops. There’s only one person to kill. An unmanned drone could do it. I just can’t believe Mugabe is still alive.
Or Obi could just send Hillary who could kill Mugabe with her death stare.
Yeah, that’s the look where “boners go to die”:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=128354&title=State-of-the-Union
(Scroll to the 4 minute mark)
Countries debt to GDP<a href”http://petermartin.blogspot.com/2009/03/whose-set-for-unsustainable-debt-then.html”/a> .
I’ll try again. Guess where Australia is in the GDP to debt %.
http://petermartin.blogspot.com/2009/03/whose-set-for-unsustainable-debt-then.html
An intervention would have happened long ago had the South Africans not appeased Mugabe…the South Africans are the reason why things have got so bad, they could destroy Mugabe if they wanted (by cutting off electricity to Zimbabwe) but do they do it nooooooooooo!
The controversy over the Pacific Brands executive pay/bonus issue pales into insignificance when compared to these characters. Worldwide there would be tens of thousands of these types. Gives some idea of where all the money went.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,25151519-643,00.html
The problem is, an intervention has to come from African countries. If the U.S. or U.K. try to intervene, it will just play into Mugabe’s propaganda.
Glen, what do you make of the debt to GDP figures posted by dogma?
Does this demonstrate how big an overreaction the Liberals made about the debt, especially considering that they proposed spending just a few tenths of a percent less?
Brian Burke is making me laugh: “The CCC is turning into an embarrassment for the Barnett Government,” he said.
http://abc.com.au/news/stories/2009/03/07/2509997.htm
What a load of BS!
He has a point Bree.
This is from Malcolm Turnbull’s article in the Australian today:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25148674-5013480,00.html
This is from recent NYT:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/08/business/economy/08view.html?partner=permalink
This, my friend, means that I cannot believe my eyes.
This man, our alternate PM, Investment banker (ha ha ha), Business man (he he he) CANNOT tell the difference between an undervalued and overvalued currency.
This man has NO credibility left. Bring back Cossie.
Wow, Mugabe’s thugs have an interesting M.O. – give MDC members sabotaged cars:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25151532-38195,00.html
dogma,
Peter Martin’s comparison table calls “bullshit” on the whole Liberal strategy.
They seem to be determined to scare people with this mindless “debt is evil” shtick.
It is the kind of thinking that got us into this mess in the first place – always cut taxes, always run surplus budgets.
Governments need to be more pragmatic than that, they need to adopt different policies for different circumstances.
Yep Malcolm Turnbull should have had his article proof read by someone, Tanner may have picked it up, Swan perhaps.
#315 – Did Malcolm write the article?
So again all, what is the biggest 2PP margin federally in the history of the Aus polls? I suspect we must be close here.
62.5-37.5?
GG, When you see it in black & white like that, you can really get a grip on how much the opposition have gone off with the fairies. I read OZ politics blogs in which you have catallaxy blog which Sinclair Davidson writes in his first sentence “I think we can all agree the December stimulus package has failed” ….wtf?
Below his blogfeed is Peter Martin’s article I linked to this morning “Stop Laughing”
[quote]So says the IMF, consigning the Australian Opposition’s proposed recovery program to the dustbin of “neat idea, but…”
The Treasury isn’t keen on some of the Opposition’s claims either[quote]
http://petermartin.blogspot.com/2009/03/tax-cuts-smax-cuts-stop-laughing.html
You can’t get more opposing views, but only one has confirmation from the IMF and treasury that Labor Government ARE correct on the handouts and the stimulus policy and it ain’t Catallaxy.
well if he didn’t he is in bigger shit. I think it’s called “doing a Julie Bishop”.
I wonder what GP would call this guy…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Wentworth_(Australian_politician)
A fierce anti-communist to the extreme of the Liberal Party, yet a lifelong keynesianist…
It is fair to say that there are a number of economic commentators in the murdoch papers who are dishonest and endeavour to portrait government measures as failures even before there has been time to measure their effects.
Their goals are of course political and not about honestly informing the Australian people. As we see with the conservative media in the USA there is a concerted sustained and hyped up effort to attack the leader and any and every economic measure. This is all about supporting conservative politics and ideology, at any cost.
But these supposed economic commentators and the murdoch media generally will if they are successful simply add to people’s fears, hurt the economy more and put themselves out of a job. These people even in times of great need still cannot put Australia and Australians before their own petty partisan masturbation.
“Pinko scum”.
Yesterday’s fierce anti-communist is today’s pinko scum. Wonder if that applies to Menzies, as he was less fierce than this guy…
Labor was at 62.5 in the 29 February 2008 Newspoll. That’s was the highest since Newspoll started in 1985. I imagine Morgan/Gallup polls from 1975 might show the Fraser opposition at comparable levels. Maybe also Hawke at his peak in 1983. Howard’s peak was 60.6 in Aptil 1996.
Thomas 322
..Um sorry Thomas, but OZ in this case is not “The Australian” but these blogs…
http://www.ozpolitics.info/feeds/
See http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/the-long-view/
Adam, why does it show 62.5 when Newspoll says 63?
I thought Newspoll always rounds their 2pp figure?
You’ll have to ask Possum that.
It seems the scribes and jocks want Rudd to ‘admit’ we are in a recession so that they can have their headline.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/losing-direction-20090306-8rj7.html
Prime Minister with Neil Mitchell http://www.3aw.com.au/
Rudd is right. He is not in possession of the next quarter’s figures as yet.
Whoever says “recession” first, Rudd or Turnbull, will be accused of talking down the economy by the other.
Joe Hockey has already done it on Sky last week, he said “if we aren’t in a recession already, we are headed for one”, then he spent latter parts of the interview attacking Rudd for talking down the economy!
Obama to lift Federal ban on embryonic stem cell research:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25152080-38198,00.html
I just read Turnbull’s essay. It had some good points but overall its quite desperate and doesn’t have enough evidence. He hasn’t layed a single scratch on Rudd.
He set himself a hard task, i.e. trying to convince the reader that Rudd is both a socialist and a capitalist.
Oh, any ideas Bree why he didn’t mention WorkChoices?
Any idea why he thinks the Chinese Yuan is overvalued, when most economists think it is undervalued – relative to the US$?
Westpoll survey on daylight saving:
If ending in late March, as proposed: 42% support, 57% oppose.
If ending in late February: 46% support, 52% oppose.
If ending in late January: 43% support, 55% oppose.
I presume we’ll be getting results on voting intention on Monday.
Malcolm Turnbull, like Tim Geithner, is a gigantic fool, for different reason. I am really surprised that Tanner or Swanny has not gone for the kill on Turnbull over this SNAFU.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/01/23/business/23treasury.php
We won’t be hearing anything more from the Liberals about WorkChoices … until they win an election. Then it’ll be in-your-face, like it or not.
This from Mumble -
How many depressions have had this happen?
How many involved governments that have tried to spend their way out?
How many were in an era where, due to instant world communications, everyone in many countries understood that their government was not responsible and in fact were seen as doing everything they could to overcome the problem?
Personally, I just don’t see the parallels between today’s woes and something that took place 80 years ago.
Geithner is right, China is keeping its currency artificially low, which creates an effective trade barrier for U.S. exports because the Chinese can’t afford them.
The great majority of people get by unscathed from recession. Even at, say, 10% unemployment, 9 people out of 10 are still in work. Put like that, it’s not such a demoralising statistic.
Prices tend to stay low, interest rates also. There will be some nerves in people about the security of their jobs, but all Labor has to do is remind them that WorkChoices makes a deliberate point of removing job security.
news.com.au 31 December 2008
http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,27753,24858756-462,00.html
Another at worst misleading statement by Hockey at best he didn’t know what was going on when his lot were in govt.
As Swanny says most of the subsidies were given to pacific Brands under the Howard govt so Hockey should allready know the details.
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/swan-says-sackings-beyond-govts-control-20090307-8rth.html
How many of those lose their jobs, and take up another lower paid job in time to get past the statistics?
9 out of 10 people in the Labor market that is. There are lots of young and old people not in the Labor market
The unemployment rate will increase, and the participation rate will decrease as some people just give up looking for work.
So when do we get the 900 dollars from Swan?
Lateline said they start going out next week.
Yours is being withheld until you show a better attitude, Glen.
They could have just made it an even thousand….it would have had a better ring to it
Bull butter i want my 900 dollars!
I pay enough taxes to the Government and when there is a handout i can get ill be taking it!
Funnily enough, people who pay more taxes don’t get anything.
Only if you make less than 80grand do you get the handout…
I know what ill spend some of it on, i think i might buy the Howard Years on DVD…thanks Mr Rudd
Glen,
Whatever you do, don’t visit the Victorian poll site. I fear for your sanity.
Costello says that the government should reintroduce workchoices as we move closer towards a recession. What a policy! They wanted you to take a pay cut when times were good, and now when times are bad. Yes. That’s right Glen. The Liberals couldn’t give a rats about quality of life for ordinary hard working Australians. As long as their rich top end of town mates are doing well and deflating the value of your super, they are content.
To get the $900, Glen, you have to write an essay on the topic: “Why Wayne Swan is the world’s greatest Treasurer.”
you probably dont want to read this crap by the cane toad but i was caught by the headline and for the first time ventured into his swamp, well it’s had me in fits of laughter all afternoon, i knew he could be delusional –but WOW! what a trip to la la land.
http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/piersakerman/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/turnbull_brevity_beats_rambling_rudd/
Adam that’s not funny because Gillard will probably try and mandate that in the national cirriculum…
Are you not receiving your $900 Piers?
Steve T of Sydney (Reply)
Sat 07 Mar 09 (06:11pm)
LOL
LOL but Piers must make more than 80grand so he couldnt get it if he wanted it no wonder he’s pissed LOL
Glen, it is my understanding you are against the stimulus approach. You and your ilk should be handing the $900.00 back. I’m sure the government would accept the donation on behalf of the country.
HAHAHAHA Gary it is hilarious but what kind of a Tory do you think I am? One who doesnt want free money? Is there such a Tory? And Piers doesnt count because he is not eligible.
Yeah Piers wanted $901
When are these MORONS in the media going to ask how in the hell tax cuts (where more money will be saved – to use their argument) would stumulate the economy more than the one-off payments that are targeted?
Also, how in the hell are we going to balance the budget with their proposed ongoing tax cuts?
So Glen, you’re really not that worried about the deficit then. Principles? “What’s are they?” asks Glen.
I cant change that fact Gary, so why should everybody else get 900 bucks and i not, we’ll still be in debt even if i did turn it down…so why should they get the cash?
Not just you Glen but all conservative supporters who agree with Turnbull on the deficit.
Just imagine Glen, if Howard had won the election Piers would have gotten more money with a tax cut than ordinary hard working Australians who really make a contribution to the economy instead of writing utter dribbel in a dirty rag.
That’s why Piers hates Rudd
You and your fellow consevatives could chop the deficit back somewhat couldn’t you? You know in the name of “the principle of the matter”.
But why should you keep the cash if it is against your principles and your opinion of what is best for the economy? Your contribution, together with all the other money returned to the government by other principled conservatives will reduce the government’s debt and improve our economy.
How many conservatives will put their money where their mouths are?
Or, Glen, would you prefer your tax refund to be drip fed to you at $150 per month for the next 6 months?
There are so few Liberal voters left that it won’t make any difference to the national debt if they sent their $900 back.
It’s Time, I’m willing to bet none. Most will be hanging out for the cash just like our friend Glen. As I said, “Principals, what are they?”
No It’s Time and GB. They want everybody to hand back the money so they can then get more money with tax cuts. That’s why the conservatives are whinging!
Where did that Glen go? I wonder why he’s stopped posting. Surely he doesn’t think we’ve made a good point for which there is no decent reply. GLEN!!! GLENN!!!!!
People between $80,000 and $100,000 get $600 instead.
Considering it is essentially a tax rebate, I thought minimalist government / low taxes types would be all for it.
There’s no such thing as “the national economic interest” for conservatives. It’s every man for himself. Self-interest. Not national interest.
Exhibit A – Glen
He has gone out for pizza, a milkshake, and ten pin bowling with his girlfriend Dorothy Smith from the Toorak Young Liberals.
This one’s really nasty. Eight Pakistani police and soldiers were killed by a bomb blast today. They were tipped off about a murdered body in a car. When they were to extricate the body, the car was booby-trapped and blew up.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7929812.stm
and cue Joan Armatrading
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBRNfWGxBp8
hahahahahaha – perfect
Earlier in the thread Bludgers were talking about whether Beazley would have won in 07 had Rudd not taken over? No way!
Beazley was damaged goods after Latham beat him in the party room. Beazley performed extremely well in his time as opposition leader. Rudd would not have won in 98 or 01. Like Rudd, Beazley was a professional not like those lightweights Nelson and Turnbull or a thug like Latham. Beazley’s real weakness was that he had no KILLER.
Another thing, we all know how weak Costello really is. In my opinion Cossie did not challenge Howard because he knew that he was less popular with the people and his best chance of becoming PM was for Howard to win the election for him. Of course Howard was never ever going to handover to Costello, never!
Howard never invited Cossie to Kirribilli……….as if he was ever going to let him live there!
From London ….
Fatboy has upped the Ante
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/07/2510234.htm?section=justin
The attack on the PM’s wife will go down like a lead balloon out there voterland.
I thought Liberals were the party of business, I guess just not businesses run by the family’s of Labor politicians.
Same deal when they attacked Keating for owning a farm.
Turnbull is grasping at straws here and to have the hide to accuse Rudd of using extravagant language in scarring people as to the severity of the GFC when he says things like this. Well!!! He offers no proof to support the statement on the car industry. WTF.
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2008/s2507771.htm
WTF? It’s the Government’s fault people aren’t buying cars!?
Let me guess, Turnbull’s policy is to ban public transport? Oh, my bad, he doesn’t have any policies.
“Rudd blames the global financial crisis on the policies of free market fundamentalism”
Well derrr! What does Hockey blame it on? I think a kebab has gotten into his brain. Someone should prick Hockey like a balloon so he could fly around the room letting out all his hot air.
After Turnbull and Hockey’s disgusting attack on Therese Rein (and probably more to come from the likes of Abbott et al), they are opening up a Pandora’s box and will have no comeback if Labor turns around and starts to attack Coalition spouses and family members.
I’m sure there would be plenty of ammunition there. I thought these sort of attacks were off limits. Not to the grubby Libs though. They probably think the best way to get at Rudd i8s through his family. Disgusting.
How can the Liberals be allowed to say that Rudd is talking the economy down and then say exactly the same thing in the same sentence without question? WTF! Are the people who work in the MSM that seriously stupid?
The Liberals are olympic gold medal class hypocrites. Absolutely no shame, none!
Yet WA Liberal cried foul when the State ALP had “The Truth About Troy” website during the WA Election Campaign.
Pots & Kettles.
I reckon Bolt will be on Insiders tomorrow. He’ll be gloating his mug off after the GDP figures.
‘Insiders’ will be a waste of time I reckon.
I can’t see how personal attacks on Kevin Rudd, as well as not calling him by the more formal names such as “Mr. Rudd” or “The Prime Minister” in Turnbull’s article are going to work. Turnbull’s hatred for Rudd is pretty thinly disguised. People switch off to it.
Likewise, attacks on Therese Rein are definitely a turn-off. The way her company made money – by doing productive and profitable business under the umbrella of the workplace laws of the time – are a million miles from the greedy scams that Rudd was criticising. Turnbull, however, use tReins business as a very thin-ended wedge to claim (as he does) that any money-making business is off-limits to the Rudds because Rudd dared to criticise the greedy financial ba$tards who ruined the world economy with their Ponzi schemes and round-robin worthless loans. Therese Rein’s business and the scams of Wall St. are completely different. Rudd sought to differentiate between them in his essay. I see no contradiction or hypocrisy in Rudd’s essay on those terms at all. Bringing his wife into it is plain grubby.
This is the old “Rud as hypocrite” line that Pies Akerman has been running for years now as his particular specialty. It has never worked. Why then do they think it will work this time? I just can’t see it. This of course doesn’t stop me from feeling angry that they’re trying it again.
Turnbull’s essay is itself full of contradictions and holes, too many to list, but most of them along the lines of his flawed defence of banks and bankers as almost innocent parties in the world financial meltdown. If only it wasn’t for those nasty people like “Rudd’s favourite country”, China, hoarding dollars, or those devious American dirt farmers and negros who took up sub-prime loans when they shouldn’t have. Turnbull’s points don’t make sense. I don’t think they’re supposed to… to any ordinary reader.
What the essay is is a sermon preached to the converted. Printed in The Australian, it has all the hallmarks of one of their boiler room efforts to give a story legs by self-reference. First they publish it. Then the ABC dutifully picks it up. Then The Australian’s own journalists feed of that. Then in chimes The Sunday Telegraph, completely omitting to mention that Turnbull’s essay was printed in a sister newspaper. Next cab off the rank will be the Courier Mail and the other Murdoch stable mates. If Rudd takes the bait and comments in depth then they’ll use this to take this non-story to the next level. The scenario goes that Fairfax give the controversy a run and next thing you have a completely, artificially manufactured talking point run entirely out of News Ltd, with mugs and suckers joining in the frenzy like pervs at a traffic accident.
As much as I’d like Rudd to snark back, I think it’d be wrong for him to give the story credibility. A hurt and saddened reference to bring his family into politics would be enough to shame Turnbull and Joe Hockey, Rudd’s erstwhile mate.
By the way, I don’t think the public really like someone like Joe Hockey who rats on their mate. The man – lauded as a threat to Labor – has “LOSER” written all over his face. Every portfolio he has ever had has been a failure for him. Sure, he’s affable, even “avuncular”, but if the Libs think Uncle Joe is going to be their saviour, they’re egregiously mistaken.
I think it’s safe to say that the WA Libs and the Federal Libs are quite different.
Are you sure about about that ? Julie Bishop and Wilson Tuckey are both products of the WA Libs
From Post 384. Did Kevin Rudd lauch a vicious, personal attack on Turnbull in his essay or was he just referring to, as I thought, neo-cons in general?
Surely the ABC wouldn’t work in tandem with the Liberal party and OO in a bootstrapping campaign. We have been assured the ABC is fair an unbiased. And the past few years have been simply imagination.
These are examples of extremely poor journalism. There was a time when politicians would have been much more careful with what they said because they knew the journalist/reporter would pull them up on or ask them to explain.
Now it seems they can say anything at anytime and with black and white back and forth at will without being called to account and no matter if it be without slightest foundation what they are saying. Reminiscent of the Republicans now blaming Obama for the Wall street crash.
They dare attack Therese? The sisterhood will have their guts for garters!
http://www.global-sisterhood-network.org/content/view/1977/76/
I hadn’t actually seen this link before tonight – but have long thought that ‘the shimmy’ was a defining moment in Australian political history.
No criticism of Therese will be tolerated! Long may she shimmy.
It looks like the P.M. is on channel 7 at 6.30 tomorrow night – talking about the economy apparently.
Turnbull’s hyper arrogance makes him a very poor leader and no prospect at all for PM, as his arrogance controls him. Anyone who is not in control of themselves shouldn’t be a leader. The way he talks about Rudd makes it plain that he has no respect for him or his position and his personal dislike (if it be there or not) comes through. But it also sometimes comes over as arrogance toward the Australian people.
This may be the sort of thing that goes on in the merchant banking world where it might be a competition between arrogances and continual hyperbole and talking down to everyone, as the way to make yourself important…but in front of the gerneral public it tends to generate disgust.
It certainly creates a strong contrast to Kevin Rudd who has all the appearance of being concerned for the people and strenuously trying to help the people. Nerdiness is not seen as a character flaw, arrogance is.
His ‘criticising’ Rudd for having a successful business woman wife will be seen as a bit personal and remind people that Turnbull is also rich, by less tasteful and ‘acceptable’ means (merchant banker – the wreckers of the world economy in popular imagination).
But I love that Turnbull perpetuated the phrase neo liberal. Defending against a strawman gives it some bones.
I wouldn’t exactly be expecting humility from Costello.
Costello’s arrogance is different, it is more smugness. Turnbull’s arrogance comes as a personal insult, to whoever. A lot of leaders are arrogant, a strong self respect and opinion of self is requisite I guess for these types of positions. But there is arrogance and arrogance. And as far as I can tell Turnbull is ultimately controlled by his arrogance…he cant help but talk down to everybody and with insulting inflection.
Be interesting to know how the people see Turnbull’s personal traits.
Not that I really care but what has happened to the Poisoned Dwarf? Is he still spreading the poison around?
He still writes for News Ltd tabloids on Sundays, and The Australian on Mondays.
Thanks ShowsOn – It has been ages since I’ve read any of his work (for want of a better word). It will be a lot longer too.
the difference between Rudd and Turnbull is that Turnbull is a mobile ego and Rudd is not, both Nelson and Turnbull tried to imitate Rudd’s caring nature and failed, Nelson over egged the pudding until it became comical, ie the Terrago with five kids and a wheelchair in the back, Turnbull tried to con voters by giving his xmas message from a homeless kitchen, it went flat as a pancake, nobody could visualise him spending his spare time helping the homeless, Rudd has done it for years with no publicity or fanfare, on the other hand it’s easy to viualise Turnbulls charitable instincts being filled by rubbing shoulders with all the right people at the latest charity ball, of course any money raised at these events helps whatever it’s aimed at, but thy oh why try to pretend to be something you are not? the public are a bit more wake up nowadays and can smell a phony a mile away.
Laurie Oakes’ articles in the News Ltd. Saturday papers are worth a read I think.
Kallis spitting blood after being hit in the visor. Earlier Johnson broke Graeme Smith’s right hand (he broke the left hand in Sydney). Most likely Smith won’t play again in the series.
Mitcho 2 Vs SA 0 (In hospital)
No way, Kallis has retired hurt as well.
“It looks like the P.M. is on channel 7 at 6.30 tomorrow night”
Not surprised. Channel 7 has always been a mouth piece for Labor. Remember Kochie and Mel at the election coverage in 07. Every time the Liberals lost a seat they both cheered and rubbed it in to Hockey (who appeared live). Channel 7 makes me sick.
As I’ve said before, The Libs are still in complete denial about why Rudd won in 2007. They still think he is a complete phoney, and they can’t understand why the voters don’t see that. So they increasingly detest Rudd personally – and in truth he has none of the easy likeability that Hawke and Beazley both had. Rudd is a polariser like Keating or even L*tham. Given Turnbull’s monstrous vanity and arrogance, this is a very toxic combination, one of the great grudge matches of recent times. The difference between them is that Rudd’s icy contempt for Turnbull doesn’t cloud his judgement, whereas Turnbull’s blazing hatred of Rudd certainly does cloud his. His tactical judgement is absolutely hopeless.
I’d have thought politics in general would make you sick. You’re not going to get any better soon I’m afraid.
Fancy saying that 7 has always been a mouthpiece for Labor. You haven’t got a clue.
At least on Channel 9 they have more balanced news coverage unlike the BS from channel 7.
412 – I’m sure you say these things in jest. LOL
Mark Riley is a disgrace on 7. & give the Libs constant free kicks. I agree though that 9 is more balanced.
Why doesn’t Turnbull write about WorkChoices?
UK government to nationalise Lloyds.
I read an interesting article by David Marr in the dead-trees version of the Sydney Morning Herald about how there havebeen no civil actions carried out re. the AWB Bribes affair. No criminal action seems likely at all, because it’s so plain that the Howard Government sanctioned the rorts that the defendants can claim their action in offering bribes was legal (or rather legalized). At least this is what they would argue and the prosecutors think they have an excellent chance of getting that one up.
Furthermore the Federal Police and ASIC have been forced to separate their enquiries by AWB legal action over some obscure point which I need not go into. Anyway, the Feds and ASIC are hardly talking. The state police dropped out years ago. Most of the potential charges and actions have lapsed due to the statute of limitations.
In other words it looks virtually certain that all of them – all of them – from corrupt executives right up to ministerial offices will get away with it, completely, utterly, bafflingly, scot free.
The new government had the last laugh. Wheat trading has been deregulated, which means AWB will eventually go bankrupt. Their shares are now worth about 70 cents, five years ago they were worth $5.
However, ShowsON, a Royal Commission into the two Cole Royal Commissions would still please me immensely.
I think the Heiner Affair should be re-opened. How can Rudd get away with shredding important documents about abuse of Aboriginal children in North Queensland? I hope Premier Lawrence Springborg will open a new inquiry into this and bring Rudd to justice.
I thought the OO reported that the documents were found and not shredded?
Good to see you knew exactly what I was on about, my gooey friend.
‘Shredded’ Heiner evidence found
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22572159-601,00.html
No wonder the toxic cane toad has had to change subjects.
Also, I hope Premier Colin Barnett investigates Rudd for his dealings with Brian Burke in November 2005.
Is it possible to make soft cheese out of cane toads?
Rudd won’t be able to get away from the Heiner Affair when Springborg becomes Premier and teaches him a lesson.
Thomas Payne, why does clicking on to your name on your post take me to the crikey blog Home?
Sorry, Payne = Paine.
The news cannot be good from Rudd tomorrow evening.
According to Piers and Bree, he is probably going to resign over the Hiener.
It is an easy way for me to go back to the start page.
He didn’t shred anything. Stop making shit up, it’s boring.
I think it will be positive. He is going to flip the switch the being optimistic to blunt Turnbull’s attack that he is talking down the economy.
I’m almost tempted to put the so-called “Heiner affair” alongside 9/11 conspiracy theories on my list of things that are too stupid to be discussed here. Almost.
Glen Milne is on the Therese Rein case.
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,25153645-5005941,00.html
Bree!! you believe Channel 9 are balanced, I would call them lazy for they seem to only ever tell half a page also both Channel 7 and 9 follow a script which is mostly the same for both network.
In my view the best news service is the ABC! the fact that both sides call it bias is a good thing for we are all bias.
Goodness me. What’s happened to tyhe “real” Glenn Milne.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25153332-5000117,00.html
Attacking Therese Rein didn’t go down well before the election and won’t go down well after. People really like her. If Turnbull persists in targeting her then I imagine it would be one of those issues that harden soft labor voters and weaken Liberal voters just hanging on.
I imagine that Australians put the family of politicians in a ‘no go’ zone.
Go for it Turnbull, maybe he is hoping to provoke an angry response from Rudd by targeting his wife. We know that he cannot control his arrogance and hatred so his vision will again be clouded.
All Rudd has to do to win this one is say..’I am proud of my wife, what she has made she has made from scratch and great personal effort and the contribution she has made to the family and the sacrifices she has made so that I could achieve my goals….blah blah…’ Too easy, too reasonable. And it wins Rudd further support.
snap
this is the sort of statement crappy journalists make when they want to present partisan crap as though it is fact.
They can’t help themselves now. It’s ingrained from years and years of propping up the previous administration by casting doubt on anything the other side put up.
Here’s a classic example in a comment from that Milne article by a poster who apparently spends a lot of time reading the offerings by Milne, Pies and Bolter.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25153332-5000117,00.html
It is fascinating how the situation in the US and Australia seem to be the same.
The Republicans and there vicious media supporters (what is it about conservative media that they always have to take the low road to anywhere?) are in total denial of their abject failures and, despite the precarious position of there electoral reputation, they still seek to smear, frame, fit up and basically take the low road with Obama.
The Republicans seem to be on the verge of becoming a national joke, leaderless, no platform, no one knows quite what the stand for except tax cuts and anti Democrat. They simply lash out and are left letting their toxic media mates carry the party leadership for them. AKA the murdoch media, Nelson/Turnbull/Liberals.
The conservative media is hell bent on blaming wall street on Obama and undermining anything that looks like it might help the economy. ditto Australia.
This article by Laurie Oakes giving mild praise to Kevin Rudd for keeping his feet firmly on the ground and not letting the office drift him away from the reality facing everyday Australians, really got the rusted-ons wound up.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/comments/0,22023,25148863-5000117,00.html
The first comment though really caught my attention. In just a few words, it spelt out the difference between Rudd and his opponents from Howard on and why he gets over 69% PPM levels. People can relate to him and see him as a genuine, caring person.
This probably goes some way to explaining the Opposition strategy trying to discredit him right from the early days.
60%!
It is about time the media started holding Turnbull and Hokey to their statements and positions and not let them get away with swapping positions day to day and, even in the same sentence.
You can just imagine just how much Turnbull must be incensed when he see himself so great and important in his own mind yet is miles behind in the polls and especially as PPM and personal support ratings. And there is Rudd and his government, super popular and steeling away the Liberals economic poll ratings.
If Turnbull is a vain and arrogant man with a spiteful stripe then this situation must be driving him insane. And to make matters worse Costello only needs to pop his head up and people think of dropping Turnbull. It would be quite painful being Narcissus in that sort of situation.
The media are doing the country or the Liberal party no favours when they hold Turnbull and Co to low or no standards of competence and honesty.
Hokey was a typo, however, Hokey = 2. Noticeably contrived; artificial.
I better get to bed.
I’ve got this heading straight for me at the moment and at category 5 now with wind speeds up to 280 klms per hour.
http://mirror.bom.gov.au/products/IDR221.loop.shtml#skip
More here.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/08/2510261.htm?section=justin
Maybe my mistyping Hockey’s name as Hokey (noticeably contrived; artificial.) before was prophetic.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/07/2510234.htm
Not only is Hockey now saying family members are open targets he ties it to ‘blame for the global financial crisis’. Now Hockey should know (like every individual in Australia does) that GFC was not caused by anyone in Australia unless he is a total fool.
Now a journalist should take him up on that immediately, that he thinks Rudd and his wife caused the GFC or had something to do with. Just ask him if he thinks that proposition is foolish and dishonest.
Journalist should also ask Hockey to back up his claims that Rudd has launched a vicious attack on Turnbull…which is a particularly dishonest statement.
Again there are some very easy made points in this for Rudd by simply saying he supports his wife and all that she has done and that she should not be dragged in by the Opposition in a desperate effort to ………
Again the L&NP detract the electorate from the economic question and venture down a path that could hurt them.
Increasingly Turnbull and Hockey are just inventing things, making things up that have no factual support and no argument at all that could make them true. They say the first negative thing that comes into their mind, and the first blame that comes into their mind.
Hockey is close to raving mindlessly and chaotically. Their is no discipline of thought or strategy. No coherence in positions.
Old jovial Joe is fast becoming grumpy spiteful Joe that just raves a bit like the village idiot. I’m thinking of the Gumbys.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuH0o3Et8wA&feature=related
Category 5 cyclone…very nasty indeed!
I don’t think it is possible for Conservatives to change from their culture of spite and malice.
It does not appear that even one Republican or their media are interested in the plight of the country and its people. If they are they scarcely talk about it. For Conservatives this is just a political challenge, and political crisis. Citizens? what citizens?
And we see it with Turnbull and Bishop/Hockey. I don’t think they have sat down and thought about how to help Australia get through this time. All they have done is sat and and tried to think of ways to wedge the government on something. For Turnbull this is not an economic crisis facing the country, this is a political crisis facing his ego.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/07/opinion/07herbert.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
Told ya. It’ll spread. It’s a bootstrapping campaign.
Even heard Macca on ABC radio this morning on Therese. Thankfully, he was saying what a down-to-earth, level-headed, really impressive person she is: a genuine achiever etc.etc. But it’s grist to the mill at News Ltd.
Expect:
to pop up before too long.
If you haven’t seen the Laurie Oakes interview with Turnbull you should move heaven and earth to do so. As the saying goes Laurie tore him a new one on issues such as Costello, Terese and his inconsistencies on topics such as the first stimulus passage. Talk about a rabbit in the spotlight.
Oakes bailed up Turnbull this morning on ch9 over attacking Therese, he’s waffling on about the Rudd fortune, Oakes has mentioned Turnbull’s $160mill. fortune, now Turnbull says Rudd has attacked him viciuosly and spitefully over time when all he has done with his money is create thousands of jobs, god the man is delusional.
touche GB, it’s brilliant i hope it gets well noted, a true gem of an interview, Turnbull is just getting more and more angry.
Abbott in a drunken sleep on the job, tsk, tsk, if it bwas a labor minister it’d be massive headlines.
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,25153676-5001021,00.html
I would like to see a detailed article on the links various so called jurnos have to ALL the political parties and their associated entities and that of their spouses.
Such links – of any sort should also be appended to their political articles as a declaration of possible (Probable ?) conflict of interests
Another simple answer to a simple question.
on Insiders Bolt has claimed Turnbull’s attack on Therese is legitimate and that Rudd call’s Turnbull nasty names in parliament, the hypocrasy of Bolt as amazing, Bolt can waffle on as much as he likes but it’s not going to go down well with the general public and those of us tragics who watch question time know dammed well that parliament today is a gentlemens club compared to the abusive bear pit it was in Howard’s time.
GB
For those who missed it, is there anywhere where those (Oakes) interviews are downloadable?
Turnbull attacking Rudds wife is what Malcolm and the libs see as payback.
The story over the logging company that carried out widespread clearing in was embarrassing just when Turnbull was trying to promote his green credentials.
Turnbulls statement about Rudd being the richest PM in Australia’s history also shows his ingrained old school values. Therese Rein is the one who made the money and owns the company, a husbands automatic entitlement to his wife’s property went off the law books long ago.
Good question Socrates. The first place I would look is the channel 9 site although I doubt it would be there now if it is to be there at all.
meet the press was hilarious this week, Ron Boswell was interviewed and had no idea of what he was talking about and what he wanted to say, it would have to be up there in one of the funniest interviews i’ve ever seen.
Socrates i would email ch9 and ask how to get access, it’s not to be missed believe me.
Socrates – google THE OAKES INTERVIEW. It will provide a list of interviews. Not Turnbull’s disaster as yet though. I dare say it will be there in the next couple of days.
Ive noticed that the libs and their cheer squads are all getting decidedly tetchy theses days.
I think what is being exposed is the libs deepest fears, beiing realised in all their glory
To wit:
1.An extremely popular,responsible PM who is truly ” a man of the people”.
2.An Extremely popular and independently wealthy PM”s wife who has the common touch in spades.
3.A displined and responsible Gvt and backbench.
4.THE POLLS
5.A literate and critical “new media”
All up a nightmare for this mysognistic,selfish,jealous,ignoble,craven and divided rump of a once “valid” excuse for a political party.
What really gets up the libs noses is that the money Therese made was due to the outsourcing of government services.
Keating once said that the libs could not handle a labor identity making good in the world of business, I think Howard called two seperate enquiries and a threatened a royal commission over Keatings piggery business. Same with the labor party’s leasing deals, 2 inquiries and a Royal Commission, all turned up nothing.
The outsourcing was meant for the Howard supporters, I mean only libs are supposed to get into business. Look at Woolridge, the former Howard minister for health, who was going to take up the consultancy with some doctors organisation, or Reith, former Howard defence minister, who scored a consutltancy with a defence contractor.
To have the wife of a prominent labor mp at the time benefit from the outsourcing still grates with them.
Should read – Not that you’ll find Turnbull’s disaster there though as yet.
Thats true
The libs think its THEIR MONEY
Yes, no Labor person has any credibility at all unless they wear boiler suit, drop their “h’s” and fart in front of the Queen.
Naturally, Liberals know intuitively how to behave in all social circumstances and are clearly better with money than any Labor politician could ever be.
To be fair Judith Abbott denies he was drunk, though he does say he cannot remember how many bottles of wine were drunk, which is fair enough.
When you drink late at night it is easy to forgot how much you have had to drink, especially if the bottles are taken away from the table and you don’t have to worry about driving home.
If the empty bottles stay on the table you can see how much you have drunk and probably slow down or stop.
Probably what was at the back of Abbotts mind also was Howards admission that he had addressed parliament whilst drunk after downing a few reds, and also that embarrassing scene in the MSW upper house where the lib speaker was totally drunk and had to resign.
I think it was wise to give the house of reps a miss on this occassion, anyway its not as if they were voting on something that Abbott had an understanding of or could offer any input into.
476
That’s the weakest excuse for slackness I’ve read in ages.
Don’t hold back, Gus!
PS: I agree, and could add more adjectives.
Too True.
as with the other 823 odd smears launched against rudd it’ll die in the proverbial.
A sad bunch of gits to resort to theses tactics.
A page of interesting newspaper clippings with regards politicians and booze.
http://www.australianbeers.com/culture/politics.htm
on Insiders Bolt finished up with predicting that Rudd’s government is a one term government and Costello will take over about one year out from the election and obviously he thinks Cossie will win.
Castle 476
Abbott didn’t deny he was drunk – he just said it was an impertinent question, which he effectively avoided answering
GB
Thanks, that worked. The don’t have the latest interview up but you get hits for all Laurie’s previous interviews eg the following:
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/newsroom/oakes/736469/the-oakes-interview-wayne-swan
While many here are rightly skeptical of the MSM, notably the Australian, IMO it is fair to say that journos like Oakes, Grattan, Bongiorno and many on the ABC are still good. Its just that a lot of the rest, especially those in Newscorp, are not. But we shouldn’t lump them all together.
Let’s get this straight. The financial mess around the world has got NOTHING to do with Rudd’s wife. The GFC is the fault of extreme free market fundamentalism. Even Greenspan has admitted that it was a mistake to let the market rip. How desperate are Turnbull and Bolt to make an association of hypocrisy between the two? Turnbull has crossed the line, he is finished.
Bolt reckons Rudd is looking more like a one-termer. He is getting so excited about Cossie taking over. Andrew I have got news for you pal. You will be old and grey before Liberal are in government again. Very old and grey LOL!
If someone spots the interview, please post it up.
What are these personal attacks Rudd has made on Turnbull? I can’t think of any off the top of my head.
I think it was gary B who got a reply from some “journo’ who said he was in fact a “commentator” and was expressing his opinion.
I believe the distinction should be Commentator v Journalist,
Unfortunately that distinction is rarely expressed in the MSM
eg bolt,milne, shanas whilst pretending to be journalists, are just commentators in substance.
Oakes, Grattan, Bongiorno are journalists and rarely commentate.
I don’t think Kerry-Anne Walsh likes Bolt too much and his hatred of the Greens showed again today.
If he doesn’t blame everything on Kev he always finds a way to blame the Greens. We know that Kev spoilt his lovely avenue to Govt. stories but what has Bob Brown done to him.
When you watch the interview, Socrates, note the sweat on Malcolm’s forehead, the seaty palms when he raises his hands and the tapping feet. A dead giveaway for those who know something about body language. And the lawyer speak was positively awful.
Whoops, meant to write ’sweaty’ not ’seaty’ at 487
Has anybody been game enough to read Turnbull’s OO article and are there any comments. I’m loathe to visit the site.
Judith, Bolt is so hard to watch, not because of his opinions (he is the token right wing nut of course) but because completely misses the disconnect between his views and that of the voters. Has someone pointed out the poll numbers: 58/42 (Newspoll) and this Morgan??
Exactly Centre, the company Therese ran is a job placemnt service, not a wealth generating speculative company of the type that caused the GFC.
And a lot of the slack financial speculation driven policies can be identified in the Howard manifesto and creed.
The housing policy that allowed depreciation on houses and halved the capital gains tax created a massive artificial spike in housing prices, this coupled with a relaxtion in lending rules saw people borrow against his artificial wealth increase to buy more housing, consumer goods, renovate or invest in the stock market.
Howards and Costello’s one tax free million super bonaza saw $15 billion ploughed into the sharemarket in such a short space of time driving stocks artificially higher.
There was little genuine wealth creation, it was mainly speculation driven by artificially created increases.
Australia saw its private debt driven to massive levels by this speculation, there was not clever or managed about it.
The only thing I can recall is Rudd calling Turnbull the “Member for Goldman Sachs”. Even that is not a “personal attack”, more a piece of throwaway wit as contrasted with a sustained essay.
WTF. ShowsOn explain this:
ABC News – Cyclone in Queensland has forced many resorts to close. Then cut to Lawrence Springborg with the tag “Opposition Leader” talking about the cyclone and then move on.
ltep @ 485
“Member for Goldman Sachs” and other barbs thrown in parliament, apparently.
Another of Costello’s great policy ideas – a lot of people in my area hocked their houses to put more money into super. Not such a great idea now for those losing investment income and for those if their jobs are lost.
Costello says he didn’t encourage anyone to do it. Why were financial advisers suggesting it?
Insiders didn’t seem to make too much of Turnbull’s ‘go’ at Therese Rein. Surely they don’t think she is fair game.
Turnbull is useless. The MSM can continue to give him rope. He now has it around his neck (after involving the PM’s wife) and is only a matter of time before he jumps off the chair.
Hockey’s political career is also approaching its end. Keep hating Joe. Like his mate Smirk, he will be unelectable with his attitude given he was former best mates with Rudd.
No I was wrnnng (not right)
Bolt may never see a Liberal government again at this rate
That was Terry McCrann but he wanted it all ways. He wanted to claim commentator status while saying he gave opinions amongst the facts. This is a so called economics expert we are talking about. It just so happened his “opinion” was not supported by any current polling. Would he admit his error? No not him. Tony Wright did though. Now there is a very honest journo.
Oz, i think that’s the personal attack referred to, they can call Rudd from everything, a drunken voyeur at a strip club, to a criminal’s sycophant re Burke, to a man who lives off his wife’s business efforts, BUT heaven forbid that Rudd makes a passing reference to Turnbull’s past life as a head honcho of Goldman Sachs, Rudd didnt even bring up the very smelly subject of FAI and HIH where all those mum and dad investors lost the farm and an immense profit was pocketed by those aformentioned honcho’s scavenging over the bones, hypocrits is too mild a word to describe them.
I agree Centre. Every time I see Hockey spewing his hatred I think its so much worse as they were supposed to be pals. Wonder what the Sunrise viewers think of all this??
Yes Andrew, it’s a bad look. Rudd supporters should not mind one bit about his behaviour.
Saturday morning. Journalist Tony Wright is relaxing at home with his 13-year-old daughter when the phone rings. Prime Minister Keating is on the line. “You’re a c*** who’s gone and tittle-tattled on a private conversation,” Keating shouts. Wright had been abused once too often by Keating. He snaps. “Listen, mate,” says Wright. “You’re the f***ing c***! If I was going to leak your private conversation, I would have written it myself, not given it to another journalist.” Keating’s tone changes. He becomes more conciliatory. When the conversation ends, Wright’s daughter is hiding beneath her father’s desk. “Dad, are we in trouble?” she asks “Why would we be in trouble?” “Because you just called the prime minister a fucking c***.”
Dog days, The Bulletin, 24 August 2005
Turnbull thinks it’s time we moved on from the Costello thing because the public are just not interested {he wishes} everytime i see that pic of Costello now i break into fits of laughter after it was noted here just what he’s measuring
http://abc.com.au/news/stories/2009/03/08/2510338.htm
On Sunrise Hockey always has the big smile for his fans so they will keep on loving him. At the moment they must love Kev more because he’s got the poll numbers.
The image of Joe standing behind Turnbull the other day reminded me of the security bloke at our local shopping centre. The mouth drooping to one side in a grimace about that awful Rudd was so funny.
I don’t think Joe realises that his inner, and perhaps real, personality is showing more lately. He’s a bit like my middle kid was – if he didn’t get his own way he acted like a spoilt brat. Luckily for middle kid and us he grew up. Joe hasn’t.
Wasn’t there some talk about Joe having problems at home last year. If Turnbull has started this game about wives then the Libs had better sit on him pretty quickly. Turnbull might open more cans of worms they he wants.
Has Bolt got a wife?
Remember the argument being out forward when Howard was somewhat popular? It was said the more Labor attacked Howard, the worse off it became for Labor and I think that argument had legs. Labor gave up attacking Howard personally. Amazingly the Libs have forgotten that lesson.
As Rudd would say, must zip.
Albert Ross, well he wears a wedding ring, though i find it hard to believe any self respecting woman puts up with his autocratic supercilious smug persona.
Other half told me he left comment on Turnbull’s article in OO yesterday so I took the plunge and had a look. No comments have been posted.
Does that mean they received heaps of unfavourable comments. They posted comments under Kev’s bit last week and a lot were not favourable to him. The Libs were out in force that day.
Judith – perhaps Bolt’s wife wears the pants in that household, hence his ‘autocratic. supercilious smug persona’. An absolutely apt description of him. Congratulations.
Hockey sold his soul to the devil when he was told to stop appearing on Sunrise with Rudd. Howard wanted to mount an endless series of personal attacks on Rudd and didn’t want the public to see that he is a likable bloke. Hockey’s naked ambition was far greater than his sense of decency and mateship so he carried out his master’s order. The Rudd’s must wonder about the bitterness now overwhelming good ol’ Joe.
Don’t forget that Hockey and wife were invited to the wedding of Rudd’s daughter soon after the election but Hockey declined.
Deep down Hockey must feel like a grub but I’m sure he would never allows himself to spend time in that zone.
Pity, isn’t it. Surely Joe can just comment on Kev’s policies but not stoop to deningrate the person. I have never heard Kev deningrating Joe. In fact, when he refers to Joe in QT it seems to bein a voice a tad softer than that for the rest of the mob.
Fred Daley and Jim Killen were great mates even tho they were on opposite sides.
Steve K at least Rudd has still treated Hockey in a gentlemanly fashion, by his actions no-one would ever believe they were still anything but good mates, there has been some odd friendships across the political lines that have been steadfast after the jousting in parliament but i cant see this one prospering, Joe has lost his avuncular friendly persona with his spite while Rudd has kept his polite ability to laugh at himself through all of the rough, tumble and sparring of the political divide.
Another shallow position from the Opposition:
Bishop is an absolute lightweight. Is there any shadow ministry at all where she can be hidden from sight? To think she is the 2IC of the opposition. What a laugh.
I agree with the opposition on this issue. The UN conference on racism has repeatedly been hijacked by Islamic states who try to pass motions that would make criticism of Islam an international crime. For example, they try to pass motions condemning the Danish newspaper for publishing cartoons of Muhammad.
Criticism of religion is a fundamental aspect of freedom of speech. If the Islamic states continue to hijack this forum, then it will remain completely pointless.
This gives us an insight into how things work in their countries, they don’t accept the right for people to criticise the government either, because they often see government and religion as one and the same thing.
So do I. The whole thing is just an anti-western festival of hypocrisy.
I say we should turn up and try and make a difference. If it becomes a hate fest then pack up and leave. To not turn up at all is a protest that won’t be heard.
I agree with Steve on this. Turn up and try to make a difference or, if we are not going to turn up, make sure the reason is simply explained and well heard.
What’s the difference between the right-wing Liberal Party and right wing Islamo-states?
A: – Only a matter of degree.
We have tried previously, but Islamic states refuse to accept that PEOPLE have rights, not religions. People may choose whether or not they wish to practice a religion, but religion as an institution requires NO official recognition by Government or international forums. Moreover, they constantly confuse race with religion, because in Islamic states they think these things are inherently the same thing. The misunderstanding of what human rights are on the part of Islamic states is intractable.
But we shouldn’t be so surprised considering that the Sharia sentence for someone leaving Islam is the death penalty. It seems they just want that to be a world-wide standard.
Agree Steve K. Any criticism of the UN conference which Australia would make would be more effective being made in the conference and reiterated subsequently outside. It shows the courage of our convictions.
Albert @ 503
Bolt is married to Sally Morrell, also a journo with the Herald Sun who writes very twee, saccharine opinion pieces full of motherhood statements and “family values”.
As Homer Simpson would say “If at first you don’t succeed find something else to do.”
Not good enough IMO
Thanks Winston – that explains it all. He is the standover man everywhere. She is the 1950s perfect wife for him, I guess.
Stephen Smith has told Mr Grubby to pull his mangey head in and shut his mealy mouth (well not in those words but..
)
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/turnbull-overstepped-mark-on-pms-wife-20090308-8s3v.html
Have a listen to some of the speeches at these conferences! If someone stands up and demonstrates the connection between specific terrorist attacks and fundamentalist versions of Islam – like say the case of some aircraft being flown into some buildings in a town called New York City and Al Qaeda’s Islamic ideology used to justify it – members of the Islamic state make constant points of order to shut the speaker up.
If someone argues in favour of free speech, by saying that people should have the right to criticise religion, but not particular people simply because of their religion, Islamic representatives take in turns taking points of order to shut the person up so they can’t finish their speech before the time expires.
It is a complete and utter circus.
Might have been a circus last time but I say try again. We have absolutely nothing to lose.
Stephen Smith – a pretty classy act now and seems to be at ease.
ShowsOn, if that is the case then Kev & Co should spell out very clearly, in plain language, why they are going or not going. Bishop & Co should not be given the chance to become so shrill about the UN.
I hope the G20 becomes more important – not so many hotheads involved.
The principal agenda of both Durban I and Durban II is to bash the US and Israel. It is a waste of airfares to go and lecture Libya and Cuba etc. The US and Canada have already announced they are not going, so should we.
Since the last conference there’s been a massive political change in the US. Obama tells us that he wishes to engage certain states that were completely off bounds under Bush. Surely we should at least make an effort to have another crack.
All of yesterday the ABC had the Therese slur as their Featured Video but now it has completely disappeared from their site? Usually it would just move down their list of the last 50 featured videos, one place, maybe they realised it wasn’t having the effect they hoped for? In other words was doing Turnbull more harm than good lol.
Just like the Olympics (Australia has been to every one), we should attend the UN conference in Durban and show our independence.
Come on Adam – you can do better than that.
Nobody expects there to be an earth shattering breakthrough at the conference and that peace, love and understanding will suddenly spread across the globe but if we aren’t there to argue the cause AND if we aren’t there to make a protest if it becomes a circus then the other mob have won. Pure and simple.
What’s there to talk about? Proposals for the draft resolution says that the existence of Israel is racist, that it is an apartheid state, and that the veracity of the holocaust is questionable.
It also proposes to create an international crime “defamation of religion”. So that religions can be guarded from criticism, ridicule, and mockery, i.e. so they are exempt from people exercising the right of free speech.
So let’s go and argue why that’s unacceptable.
I completely agree. The P.M. should stand up in the House of Representatives and say that Australia will not be participating in a forum based on racism against Jewish people, and the misguided belief that religions somehow have a right to veto free speech.
Obama made the decision not to send U.S. delegates there. He is a smart bloke, he knows that a forum run by racist lunatics is useless to world peace and security.
It will be the same as 2001 where Islamic states simply attacked Israel, and said the only problem of racism in the world was people attacking Islam (no, not PEOPLE who happen to be Muslims, but people attacking Islam itself).
The sad irony being that the 2001 conference ended 3 days before September 11th.
We will be hounded by spurious points of order stopping us from making the point that religions don’t have rights, people do.
Couldn’t agree more if we and others refuse to attend.
Didn’t Victoria make that a crime? Seems we belong there.
As envisaged Turnbull’s dragging of Therese Reine into the political arena because of her success will have no positive effect and is a distraction from the burning issue of the day. Well done Malcolm, again you personal feelings cloud judgement and led you down a wrong path.
Bolt’s assertion that Rudd could be a one term government is political trailer park talk. Any government can be voted out at an election if they do bad things for bad reasons. But Bolt seems to have only a tenuous grip on reality and ignores the governments and Rudd’s stellar acceptance with the public. Even if the polls do come back to earth, which they shall, the people won’t ditch the Rudd government unless they are seen to have done things for the ‘wrong’ reason. Rudd won’t be punished for trying hard, for having people as his object.
On the other hand none can make the argument that Turnbull or Costello have the people’s well being as the target of their efforts or concerns.
We attended that year! Did he help?
I doubt that law makes criticism of religion unlawful, most likely it makes criticism of a particular person for ascribing to a particular religion unlawful.
Looks like we’re back to Homer Simpson.
Blasphemy is also illegal in NSW.
Have a look at this as well:
http://www.becketfund.org/index.php/case/101.html
You’re Homer Simpson, considering you think the Islamic states are just putting up a draft calling Israel a racist state for fun, but don’t think they’ll vote for it.
The draft only mentions ONE country, and it just happens to be Israel!
The draft only tries to abolish one right, which happens to be freedom of speech! How exactly do you propose that liberal democracies defeat such a heinous document?
Nalliah won that case on appeal.
Call me thick, but it just occurred to me quite forcefully how absolutely wrong Bolt is about this government being a oncer.
62% of the voters right now think what Rudd is doing is a good thing. Every poll says so (plus or minus a couple of points).
The Opposition has no policy except to carp and nag about how bad things are. This is made worse because they actually voted for several of these now damned measures themselves in the Parliament.
They have no positive suggestions to make other than to bring back Work Choices, deny Global Warming, do less to help out people who need financial help.
Given that the Rudd government is actually doing something, and being rewarded by the voters for it, why would anyone change their preference from Labor to Liberal on the strength of what has been said by Turnbull and his cohorts so far: a completely confusing, contradictory cacophony of ideas, off-the-cuff counter-ideas and wild pronouncements?
Rudd would have to be caught with a choir boy and his pants down around his ankles to lose this one.
ShowsOn, You need to cool down. I was referring to the quote earlier that “If at first you don’t succeed find something else to do.” I wasn’t suggesting you are HS. Now, I’ve had my final say on the subject so if you want to have the last word then go ahead.
This is the key point, Rudd has more support now than on election day in 2007.
Wasn’t Howard caught in that position several times yet he won several elections.
WorkChoices = easier for business to abuse workers and dismiss workers. You need policemen most in the tough times, to keep everyone honest.
Bolt offers no evidence to support this assertion, only personal wishful thinking. Why would anyone take any notice of him?
Yep. I bet he doesn’t even believe what he says. He knows that Rudd is traveling OK. Bolt, Milne, Shamahan and Co are full of hate for anything non-Liberal and it shows through time after time. They’re not fooling anyone except dimwits. I’d love to be a fly on the wall when these bitter men meet and their real opinions are expressed.
Well it’s good to see the NZ Nats have their priorities right. I guess a Kiwi Republic is out of the question then?
NZ to restore knighthoods
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/nz-to-restore-knighthoods-20090308-8s8c.html
And the dimwits who go along with this already vote conservative so it makes no difference to the overall scheme of things – in fact it’s counter productive.
I think I am more Eric Cartmann. Hmm, time for more Cheesy Poofs…
You have to spend a lot of time working with smoke and mirrors when your economy has been in recession for 6 quarters.
Bolt thinks Costello is going to challenge in 12 months time. So that would be a lot of destabilisation and anarchy in the mean time which will do the L&NP no end of good.
One might remember that to win government Rudd had to make himself appear a safe and viable alternative, and positive. He had to have policies and push them. Simply attacking Howard and the Howard government wasn’t going to do the job. Nobody expects governments to be perfect and accept they will sometimes do selfish things but they wont vote them out because of it.
Rudd was popular from the begining and overall really hasn’t disappointed the electorate. He got bad partisan publicity on a few OO ABC boot strapping exercises that tarnished him a little, but he recovered as people started looking at the over all picture.
I reckon Howard managed to scrape back in a few times because he made the election about one particular emotive issue rather than the quality of his government.
Unaccostomed as I am to gloating, I feel the need to get a bit of revenge on people who doubted me about the Marj, now renamed the RAH-lite.
I said it was a cost-cutting exercise to provide less services and beds. And I’ve been proven right.
I should add that I stand to make a lot of money if this happens, as skin cancer is one thing they want to jettison out of the RAH and make patients go private for. And I’m still vehemently opposed to it. It will cost public patients a lot of money, reduce training of doctors and lose skills from the RAH.
Clinics facing axe at new ‘RAH-lite’
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25152989-2682,00.html
Sometimes, the West, USA and Israel can do with a bit of bashing, they do not have the mortgage on righteousness
When the bashing is coming from Libya, Iran, Syria, Cuba, etc, they can afford to ignore it, and so should we.
When criticism comes from countries that don’t allow women to drive cars, or leave their houses unaccompanied, it has no moral force whatsoever. Hence it shouldn’t have any legal force either.
Greens in NSW calling for abortion to removed from the Crimes Act.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/08/2510386.htm
When criticism comes from countries that invade other countries illegally killing leaving hundreds of thousands dead based on false intelligence, and allows torture and rendition and indefinite imprisonment without trial, it has no moral force whatsoever. Hence it shouldn’t have any legal force either.
Diog, you are not wRONg.
Not to mention the secret and illegal bombing of Cambodia that killed 350,000 innocent civilians and eventually led to the Killing Fields. Tell me again, how many died at 911.
Vera 550 it’s a crying shame Australia still dosent have Imperial honours, hell that’s what perks you get for having Elizabeth II as our head of state. I’d far rather get a knighthood than an AC, AO, AM after my name.
Good on ya Mr Key! At least NZ has some sense, it’s all Hawke and Keatings fault we have a poor honours system.
Glen
That would be Sir Robert and Sir Paul, thank you very much. An AC is the equivalent of a KBE and all PMs get an AC (although Keating declined his saying he was just doing his job).
Finns
I expect that if you added up the number of violent and unnecessary deaths attributable to Western countries and compared it the number killed by Eastern countries that it would be pretty similar. I’m leaving Russia out as I can’t classify them either way. They would tip the balance depending on where you included them.
Diog, that is why the Pot should never call the Kettle and perch on the high horse that our old friend from the G island that used to saddle.
Finns
Obama is visiting Turkey when he goes to the G20 meeting. Hillary has said US and Syrian diplomats have been meeting this weekend and the talks have been “very productive”.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22425001/vp/29567076#29567076
Diogenes and Finns, of course the US, Israel, Australia and all other western countries merit criticism for the things you mention and many others. But that criticism only carries weight when it comes from sources which have some moral standing and credibility. It carries no weight when it comes from Cuba, Iran, Syria, North Korea etc etc. Surely you can see that? There are plenty of legitimate forums for criticising western governments, notably their own media and political systems. Durban II, which is structured to permit endless hypocritcal attacks on the west and to prevent any criticism of Islamic and other authoritarian regimes, is not one such. How much good will Durban II do the people of Darfur, Zimbabwe, Tibet, Burma? None, because it’s structured to protect those regimes from criticism.
Glen 563
Thanks for bringing a little humour into the discussion – seriously.
It’s fascinating observing the conflicting opinions on pollbludger. There are some issues that I totally agree with some on, yet there are other issues that I’m totally in disagreement, with the same people.
Steve K, Oz, Finns and Diogs, I am with you guys on this one. When it comes to foreign policy, that West has got a long way to go to get it’s own house in order first.
Diog, horror, horror, horror.
Hillary wants to talk to the Axis of Evil:
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2009/03/113_40860.html
She wants to invite Iran for a chat. She pacified Russia. She is talking to Syria.
We got no enemies left to hate.
Adam
I totally agree. I think Durban II will be a waste of time.
Obama and Hillary engaging Syria is a much more important event in terms of outcomes than anything that could happen at Durban II. When you listen to the agenda on that clip in 567, the possibilities are quite exciting. Hillary is doing a good job as SOS, better than she would have done as POTUS IMHO.
Adam, this is simply a value judgement. We might not like these countries very much and would never want to live there, except maybe the old charmer Havana with its music.
But they have people there that are just like you and I. They have their rights to exist and to criticize.
Oh grow up Finns, even you can’t be that stupid.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25155768-12377,00.html
I really don’t think anyone cares.
Finns only they are dictatorships who oppress their people…..
If this were any type of humanitarian world those regimes would have been overthrown by now.
It actually isn’t, liberal democracy is the only political system compatible with universal human rights. We have a far superior political system to any theocracy, therefore their criticisms can not be valid.
So why don’t their own governments respect the human rights of their populations?
Yet you talk about others trying to take our human rights “away”, ignoring the fact that they enshrined or protected and we’ve taken them away ourselves in the very recent past.
By who? The same people who regularly install dictatorships bent on crushing human rights?
Turnbull may have opened up Pandora’s can of worms ;-} with his comments.
I wonder how the Govt will handle the issue in Q time. Leave it alone or allow Rudd to attack through a D Dixer? Is Turnbull stupid enough to ask a question on the subject? Nothing would surprise me.
The abortion thing in NSW could possibly pick up some steam.
The Premier hasn’t rejected any changes and O’Farrell said he would allow a conscience vote.
From the online SMH
The man is a disaster. Who’s next? Abbott has lost the plot; Cossie hasn’t got the proverbials and Fat Boy is a time bomb that could explode anytime. Let’s see, that leaves the plagiariser. What a sad state of affairs. Maybe Labor could hire out Julia to them for 6 months to help them get their party in order.
I wonder if Lucy Turnbull’s escutcheon is entirely blot free. It had better be.
I’d be incredibly disappointed if Labor were to play the same games. The smart thing for Labor to do is hold the moral high ground and condemn Turnbull. The right thing to do is let it pass. I don’t care either way so long as they don’t attack the partner.
Don’t forget folks – 6.30 tonight on channel 7:
Islamic countries don’t protect or defend universal human rights. In fact, the Organisation of the Islamic Conference says that universal human rights are incompatible with Sharia (Islamic) law. They only accept rights to the extent that people have “freedom and right to a dignified life in accordance with the Islamic Shari’ah”.
Yes that’s right, you are ‘FREE’ to follow Islamic law! This statement was made at a conference of “Human Rights in Islam” http://www.religlaw.org/interdocs/docs/cairohrislam1990.htm
Which is of course a complete contradiction in terms! As if human rights are determined by religious affiliation! People have human rights simply because they are humans, not because of what they happen to think.
I also wonder, what universal Human Rights Saddam Hussein defended? Iraq is now a flawed yet fledgling democracy instead of a totalitarian state let by a leader who was found guilty of genocide.
I completely reject the proposition that totalitarian governments care more about human rights than liberal democracies, they simply can’t because Article 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states:
Totalitarian states by definition reject this basic principle of representative democracy, and those an essential tenet of universal human rights.
I also reject the notion that all uses of military force are illegitimate. What about when the Allies defended the world from the axis powers? What about the NATO bombing of Bosnia and Herzogvina after the shelling of Sarajevo? The idea that liberal democracies can never use military force to stop human rights violations is absurd.
We should’ve already done so to get rid of Mugabe from Zimbabwe. We have given the African Union years to do something about that thug, but they continue to do nothing while Zimbabweans suffer a crippled economy, disease, starvation, government violence campaigns and government sanction stealing of property.
Actually that segment was pre-recorded yesterday
Incorrect. To start off with, most of those countries aren’t theocracies. Cuba, Syria and North Korea aren’t. Iran isn’t really. The only theocracy in the world is the Vatican City and I don’t see anyone refusing to meet with them. And even if those countries were, they can still have legitimate criticisms of Western countries.
Frank, Well that’s straight off the 7 program guide a few minutes ago.
Any idea how it went?
Steve K, Rudd and Co have attacked the Turnbull family long before Malcolm pointed out Rudd’s hypocrisy by attacking neo-liberalism while on the other reaping its benefits thanks to the Keating/Howard years…his family has made all of their millions from those policies which he now says are sooo terrible, how could Rudd be anymore of a hypocrite.
Dont talk to me about personal attacks, you had Gillard insinuating that Pyne was a homosexual with her poodle comment and you had Rudd up there day after day calling Turnbull the Member for Goldman Sacks…
Turnbull didnt attack Rudd’s wife he merely pointed out Rudd’s hypocrisy which he is entitled to do.
Youn know the other side has lost the arguement when they resort to calling you “stupid”., “grow-up” etc.
Hmmm, deja vu.
Oh, so that’s what she meant.
And what did Julia say about Mrs. Pyne?
Or maybe:
Glen & The Libs – take note of this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auxhTFf24BQ
Hi Glen, if we had those Queens honours there might be a Sir John now, no more of your Unc’ie Howie then young man!
Other countries which get close, one way or another, to being theocracies are;
Israel (There is a significant amount of intertwining of Jewish law (Halakha) and civil law)
Norway (The 12th article of the Constitution of Norway requires more than half of the members of the Norwegian Council of State to be members of the state church)
UK (England has a minor theocratic aspect because the monarch is “Supreme Governor” of the Church of England and “defender of the faith”, and is prohibited from being a Catholic. )
Saudi Arabia (Sharia law, same as Iran)
Forgot the link for above
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theocracy
Malcolm Turnbull has poorly judged this one.
The “neo liberal” attack from Rudd is aimed squarely at reassuring the left in the party and in the electorate that he is not a rabid capitalist. Who else would read the article? Who else would care?
As for the rest of the electorate, they couldn’t give rats about the nuances of the “neo liberal” argument, but they will give a rats about involving his wife. It will be reported as an attack from Turnbull on the PM’s wife and it will not go down well.
Very foolish.
P.S. Thanks to Steve K, I did forget about Rudd on Seven tonight.
Finns and it isn’t just Hillary mending fences, have a look at this headline
What will the raving loony Repubs make of that?
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/obama-considers-reaching-out-to-taliban-20090308-8s2u.html
Another indepenent report saying Alchopops tax has worked
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/alcopops-tax-a-success-research-20090308-8sa7.html
Iran “isn’t really” a theocracy, but Norway “gets close”? Jesus.
Amigo Vera, if OBI can save this world from the Axis of Evil and GFC. It will be by his honesty.
It must that Indonesian Soto soup that he loved when he was there at seven. Give a child at Seven, i give you the man.
On that argument Australia is also a theocracy, since our head of state must be a member of the Church of England.
C’mon Glen, there is no hypocrisy. Rudd’s wife or anyone else who has been smart or lucky enough to have made money has got nothing to do with this financial debacle. The GFC is purely the fault of extreme free market capitalism. Even Alan Greenspan admitted such a fact. Turnbull R.I.P.
I hope your next leader can last a little longer LOL!
ShowsOn at 585, I don’t need a lecture about theological states.
My post was about US, who don’t even have the “rights” you’re scared of “them” taking away.
Apparently Rudd used coarse language for tonight’s program.
Glen, Show me a comment where Rudd has attacked Turnbull’s family. In fact show me a comment where he’s attacked any politician’s family. Bet you can’t.
Labor had a terrific opportunity to take a free kick at Mrs Bucket and her ordering of an extension to the lodge dining room and the silk lining of the PM’s aircraft but he resisted even though those issues were brought up in senate estimates and therefore fair game.
It’s hard to recollect other instances where a free kick was there to be had and the reason for that is simple: the private lives of parliamentarians is off limits.
Turnbull has indeed crossed the line and should apologise.
Vera John Howard should be knighted.
William
The definition of a theocracy “is a form of government in which a god or deity is recognized as the state’s supreme civil ruler, or in a broader sense, a form of government in which a state is governed by immediate divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided.”
Dinner Jacket is sort of the leader of Iran and doesn’t fit either description. The Iranian Government need not be religious. However, in Norway half of their Government must be members of the state religion. It’s a little pedantic but technically I’m right.
SACRE BLEU Glen
How dare you reveal Howie’s “secret name”
All is truly lost now, no more will you be able to a dress,nudge nudge, the liberal party
You benedict arnold you
The Ayotallah pretty much rules Iran and is a religious leader.
605
What did he say? Don’t tell me he said “Double gosh.”
If he has dropped the old $hit word then that in the right context might come across really well.
What’s the right context? Something along the lines of “There are some in politics who would have me drop ordinary Australians in the $hit – ordinary Australians who have worked hard to make these businesses hugely profitable. I am not going to let that happen.”
Give me Therese Rein anytime. She has developed, built and run a grass root business out of nothing. She took the risks and succeeded. She owns the business and deserves every penny she got.
Turnbull has never built any grass root business. Turnbull’s career always been with OPM (Other people’s money). Either as a consultant (golden tooth rodent), a consultant never took any risks themselves. Or later on, as deal maker in the form of investment banking or investment banker.
Culminating in his role in Goldman Sachs. say no more.
Adam
Absolutely true. Yet another reason for us becoming a democracy.
My dad, who as I’ve mentioned is a Howard-hugger, is also a rabid Catholic and detests the Queen. He is therefore an ardent Republican. Of course, the only time “the Queen” intervened in Oz politics some time around 1975 he was cheering “her” on.
Oz
Dinner Jacket runs things a lot more than the Ayatollah on a day-to-day basis. The Ayatollah is a bit like the Queen.
Dunno Steve K, but Channel 7 is plugging it as a reason to watch.
Adam
Does our Governor-General have to be Church of England?
Scratch the question in 615. The answer is No. William Deane is Catholic.
No, he isn’t. He has a far more hands on role in what goes on in Iran than the Queen does in England.
What the “Supreme Leader” does:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/868244.stm
Within the government structure in Iran there is the “Council of Guardians”, a bunch of lawyers, half of whom have to be experts in Islamic law. The Supreme Leader gets to appoint these. They get to approve/disapprove candidates and veto legislation.
And Isaacs and Cowen were Jews.
The “Supreme Ruler” of Iran is the Ayatollah, who is superior to the President, and the is chosen by the Council of Guardians, who get to say who can run for President and for Parliament. The Council of Giardians is chosen by an assembly of all the mullahs. So Iran is LITERALLY a theocracy, that is, a country governed by clergy.
The Norwegian Constitution also says that “Husband and wife, parent and child or two siblings may never sit at the same time in the Council of State.”
Quiz question: Has there ever been an Australian Cabinet, state or federal, in which husband and wife, parent and child or two siblings have sat at the same time? There are two Fergusons in the current ministry but Lawrie is not in the Cabinet. I don’t think David and Rod Kemp were in the Cabinet at the same time.
Oz
I knew that, well most of it. I was just stirring the pot. Hence the
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/new-zealand-to-restore-knights-and-dames-20090308-8sbm.html
Glen, is Howie going to migrate? Sir John Winston Howard sounds very good. Can we help by contributing to the one way ticket for Howie & Hyacinth ?
Grow up Finns
Plus her name is Janette Howard just so you know…
Gareth Evans and Cheryl Kernot got close.
Another blinding revelation to myself just now.
Turnbull’s article was a thinly disguised dog-whistle attempt to bring out all the old Therese Rein-Kevin Rudd smears, so beloved of the likes of Pies Akerman: too far above their station, crass, nouveau riche types, socialist hypocrites feeding off the unemployed and benefiting from Howard’s enlightened administration while criticising it at the same time, greedy capitalists taking millions of dollars in bonuses while smearing innocent CEOs of Pacific Brands for doing the same thing… the old “They Don’t Know Their Place” attack.
Forget that the company Rein took money from was her own company, one that she was forced to sell off (in large part) due to the carping of the Akermans of this world abour conflicts of interest… it was already her money (to his credit, Barry Cassidy pointed this out to Bolt this morning on Insiders). Forget that Rudd is not criticising getting into business and making a buck, maybe a lot of bucks. That’s the only way our country can get ahead, through entrepeneurs like his wife (and to some extent himself) creating the opportunities and the jobs. Forget about the precise details of the to’s and fro’s of the argument… that’s all legitimate to discuss. But Turnbull didn’t want it discussed. He wanted to slur and use the text only as a fallback to get himself off the charge of ad hominem attacks on a technicality.
What Turnbull was trying to do was plant an emotional backlash against Rein: fat, frumpy, gauche, millionairess who practices not what she preaches. If anyone called him on it he could refer to the text and reply (in that condescending manner of his), “Show me where I’ve made a personal attack on Rein. I may have attacked things she has said or done, but I’ve not attacked her person.” And, to at least some observers, the text would bear him out. I know, I know, it’s a fine line, but at least he had this lawyer’s weasel way out of any criticisms that he’d crossed the line. You could say there might be a benefit of the doubt (which would be dutifully written up and amplified by Milne and Shanahan as night follows day). The plan was to attack between the lines but defend with a legalistic parsing, down to the last comma if necessary, of the lines. It’s your smartarsed lawyer’s way of getting away with murder, “nudge-nudge, wink-wink, M’Lud.”
Only thing is… people have never been ready to accept personal attacks on Therese Rein. When they tried to get her before the election, on the underpayment scam, or the “hypocrite” slur, Rudd’s popularity soared. The public would have none of it. I don’t believe that has changed.
What’s happened now is that Parts A and B of Turnbull’s plan have (bad luck for him, as it turns out) succeeded…
Part A: the sub-text of his essay was read loud and clear as a nasty, Akerman-like attack on Rein.
Part B: He’s using the exact wording of his essay to attempt to rebut those charges. But this is where it all falls apart, because there’s a Part C. that he should have realised, if he had even an ounce of political common sense…
Part C.: the public like Therese Rein and Kevin Rudd, aw, about three-hundred per cent more than they like Malcolm Turnbull. They’ve seen the Turnbull nastiness, and (like he’d hoped) they don’t care about the explanation, or the weasel words. But they don’t care about the explanation for all the wrong reasons (as far as Turnbull is concerned).
Turnbull’s problem is, though, that the reaction to his story is negative, not positive as he’d hoped. He hasn’t started a bandwagon. He’s been run over by it. The public don’t want to see his smarmy explanation, not (as he hoped) because they hate Rein and would easily swallow his dog-whistling, but because they made up their minds about the relative merits of Malcolm Turnbull and the Rudds a long, long time ago, and the balance of the equation is not in Turnbull’s favour.
Hate to use a cliche here but Turnbulls 2,300 words in yesterday’s Australian may yet turn out to be Australian politics’ longest ever suicide note.
We always knew he was too clever by half, our Rainmaker, and now he’s gone and proved it.
And the Poison dwarf is in full swing.and it’s the MAIN Story on Perth Now.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/comments/0,21590,25155940-948,00.html
Note the comments.
True story. Apparently Obama’s plan is to get the the State department to ignore Ahmadinejad, and instead start discussions directly with the Ayatollah.
It’s her money she’s taking, not the shareholders’, or the employees’.
AIC quizz Q
Laurie Brereton & Deirdre Grusovin brother/sister NSW 1980s?
BB she made her money of the deregulations and outsourcing that comes with neo-liberalism. The Rudds made their money of Keating and Howard and through the neo-liberal system and yet here Rudd is saying how bad it is = hypocrite!
615, cricket getting first go on the TV in this sports mad house
…. will have to follow Rudd through you all so keep those posts coming shortly as it won’t be much longer on the east coast 
625, Frank, with this being the top story of interest on the political front, better be settled in front of the computer or TV at 12 noon when QT kicks in
……
Is it still the case that Milne’s wife is employed by the Libs favourite business Crosby Texter? If so he needs to tread carefully. Some might think it’s about time that the connection between the Liberal party and his good self is broadcast across the country. A simple dixer in question time would do the trick.
Glen,
Your argument will never stick. She made her money in the business climate of the day, fair and square. She is not presiding over a bankrupt finance corporation and still collecting her millions. She is the owner of the company. The money is already hers.
Rudd is criticising the former, not the latter. He is criticising the business atmosphere that enables greedy CEOs and traders to milk people of their savings and fritter it away, and then to demand bailouts from the very governments they claim to be “The Problem, Not The Solution.”
Rudd is clearly not against capitalism, nor against making money from a successful business. But he is against ripping money off from the public and then fleeing the scene, leaving the people, the taxpayers to clean up the mess afterwards. This was one of the most egregious fallacies of Turnbull’s thesis: that Rudd is anti-business.
He is simply anti-crooks.
This is not completely true. Rudd earned a lot of money working as an advisor on China for KPMG.
He got a uni a couple of uni degrees from ANU to give him the expertise, does that mean we should blame part of his wealth on Whitlamesque SOCIALISM?
629I still haven’t seen a post from you showing where Rudd has attacked Turnbull’s family. Can you back up the accusation?
You also need to realise that Rudd wasn’t critisising capitalism. H was attacking the ‘let ‘er rip’ mentality of Howard/Costello/Turnbull and the like.
Now we have the situation where it’s privatise the profits and socialise the losses. That’s what Rudd has a problem with.
So do I.
I read somewhere about how the Rudds had gone to the bank and begged for a $10,000 loan all those years ago for Therese to start her business.
I’m confused about this Glenn Milne thing. How does what he’s written there @ #625 (an various other places) match up with this
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,25152783-5001030,00.html
Basically Milne is saying Turnbull is stuffing up the Libs’ chances of making the Rudd government a oncer by wasting precious time criticising Rein.
Milne wants Rudd to fail. He just doen’t think criticising Rudd’s wife is the technically best way to do that. He is writing out of disappointment at a failed tactic, not the morality of the tactic itself.
Among whom are these “doubts” emerging?
Yes, Brereton and Grusovin were in the NSW Ministry together 1986-88. No wonder Unsworth lost the 1988 election.
“on Insiders Bolt finished up with predicting that Rudd’s government is a one term government and Costello will take over about one year out from the election and obviously he thinks Cossie will win.”
Thats too good to be true. If Costello is to win an election and become PM, it will be at 2013. Rudd is unbeatable in 2010.
Bree,
Ahhhh …… we need to continue working on you. You’ve made the first small step in “seeing the light”
……
juliem, Costello will smash Rudd in 2013.
LOL! Sunday Night uses “For Love of Money” by The O’Jays, one of the best soul songs ever.
Kochie is doing a great job of promoting his friend Kevin Rudd.
and here it is in full
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROZMlfELtII
Linday Fox did more promoting of Rudd than Kochie
said something like the PM is doing everything and more and for a PM that has only been in the job a bit over a year and being hit with the worst conditions since the 30s depression, all but said Rudd is the greatest
Spam Box, Glen Milne has the all the acumen of any other of his ilk currently purporting to be journalists. It’s been clear to me for some time that neither they, or most of the Liberal Party, seem not to know what’s going on. It seems possible to me that Malcolm Turnbull really doesn’t understand what Kevin Rudd was talking about in his essay, or does, but thought an attack on Rudd a necessary deflection from the focus on Costello’s outings this week. All in all, reveals Turnbull’s lack of political nous. Any reference to Therese Rein was a serious mistake. Bad, bad move.
Oh, and also the seriously fractured functioning, can I call it dysfunctional yet, of said party? If technically you need 2 quarters of negative growth to declare recession, can we declare 3 Leaders of the Opposition in 3 years, formal political dysfunction?
I think Turnbull is playing a very dangerous game by getting pesonal, and it shows how desperate he is. Those who have followed politics for a while would know of a number of cases where embarassing personal details were known about political leaders but not aired in public. I can think of several in both Hawke and Howard’s cabinet. That is one of the few of the better westminister traditions that we have followed. If we stopped doing so I dare say that Turnbull and his peers have at least as much to lose as to gain were they and their partners to be questioned closely.
Socrates, I agree. Don’t think it will happen, i.e., they’ll get questioned, but Turnbull has done himself no favours with his essay.
glen, just did. after an excellent chilly crab dinner with the family. The chiily crab was firmed and sweet, it tasted even better after South Africa was bowled out within 3 balls.
You gotta love this country.
no wonder Hockey went to bat for Turnbull, Mrs Hockey is a merchant banker.
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/political/turnbull-dig-at-rich-rudd-ok-hockey/1453215.aspx
That new show on 7 is a shocker.
Steve K, I don’t think that’s its usual format. But it’s terrible nonetheless – just another Today Tonight.
It is hilarious, but sad, that none of the commercial networks can do a 4 Corners like show.
Of course watching a show detailing how Pakistan is in a civil war, or how the United States arrested a major arms smuggler, or what happened on Black Saturday is informative, but not very entertaining.
Quiz: Which members of the Liberal front bench are neither bankers nor lawyers nor party officials?
i dont think i’ll be watching it again, the whole format was higgly, they had good information speakers like Rudd and Fox on but didnt utilise them properly, they digressed far too much so it was like a patchwork quilt, no one square matching the other, it’s a pity.
Peter Dutton was a cop.
1) Too many adverts.
2) Too much Kochie.
Adam, Michael Keenan was in real estate.
Have you guys read this? This guy is a Dick. There is little analysis in anything he writes.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/drones-to-the-left-of-us-and-jokers-to-the-right-20090307-8rv2.html?page=2
This government was in the possition to destroy the opposition on February 13th but chose to help the australian people…what a banker
60 minutes doing a rewind on their first story on Pauline Hanson.
Dutton, Keenan – is that all? MacFarlane was a farmer. All the other senior frontbenchers are bankers, lawyers or party officials. (Turnbull, Bishop, Hockey, Robb, Minchin, Abbott, Hunt, Coonan, Abetz, Ronaldson, Brandis…) To think it was only a few years ago that people used to criticise Labor for the occupational background of the front bench.
I was hoping for something a bit more colourful than this from the Ruddster. Still, it’s a start.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25157062-5005962,00.html
Rudd on channel 7 tonight proved what Tony Abbott was saying all along, he’s a toxic bore and he runs to a script when he’s on TV, he sounds like a public servant and he doesnt sound genuine.
He should’ve more strongly made the point that anyone who argues against government debt is arguing in favour of higher unemployment.
Another strange thing for me is that the whole Rudd Christmas thesis thing had never really taken off, politically speaking. It will now after the whole “don’t go the family” thing has worn itself out. The next episode will be the battle of the morality of the rich earning their money in this way or that. Sweet Jesus how could MT possibly win that contest against TR?
Jeez, if you didn’t know better you could be forgiven for thinking Kev planned the whole thing
What’s “the whole Rudd Christmas thesis thing”? Did Rudd write a doctoral thesis over Christmas?
With an approval rating in the high 60’s and his govt polling in the low 60’s.
Jeez no wonder Tony is hitting the p*ss so hard and can’t turn up in parliament to vote on and debate a crucial economic rescue package for Australia.
Glen, he sounds like somebody who’s telling the truth and playing a straight bat on the good and the bad, simple as that.
Isn’t fatty a former food taster for some kebab chain?
From the link provided by centaur009 @661
ROFLMAO. Hockey as the benchmark for empathy and compassion! Struth!
Rudd explained how it was necessary for the government to spend to stimulate the economy. He then warned of the usual sh!t storm (the audience laughed)expected from the opposition for cheap political points. Every expert on the show agreed with the PM. The audience believes the PM. Abbott, Turnbull, Hockey and co would have been dying watching it.
668 – You know exactly what I was talking about and so did 99% of people reading my comment. I was lax with the language on purpose
Grow up
Couple of things on the Therese money story.
Her company is not one of those toxic wealth generating type ones that encouraged gearing your house to buy more houses or shares, it is one offering a service that was outsourced by the govt.
And from what I read she did not get paid a $1 million bonus, it was a book entry to reflect the increased value of her shares.
But it all comes down to that the libs are really really really severly p*ssed that it was Therese, Rudds wife, that showed the nouse to make a go of the govt outsourcing and not some liberal party identity.
Can you all stop calling Hockey fatty or fat man or any other demeaning thing to do with his weight, you dont find me referring to the PM as ear wax eater everytime i make a post about him. Grow up and get serious!
I do agree Glen. But it is a blog and not Q.T. in parliament when I heard with my own ears that when Beazley stood to make a point of order once, Costello called out “sit down fat man”. Now that was in poor taste.
Bushfire Bill. Love your stuff. Thank you.
We are trying to emulate Peter Costello’s attacks on Kim Beazley.
Did this get a mention?
Tony Abbott didn’t actually vote against the stimulus package, because he fell asleep in his office and missed 5 divisions:
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,27574,25153676-5006009,00.html
So you’re lowering yourself to Costello’s level, then?
No, just demonstrating that Costello’s level is a lot lower than most people think.
Well,there’s vespers,chants, flagellation and such to finish first,but please
Leave TONY alone (well as far away from anyone as possible)
What’s with the “Grow up” meme? It’s been used four times in 100 posts. Can’t we try a more original come back? It’s not going to win “Witticism of the Month”. Paul Keating would be shaking his head.
How about contract down
How about Calorie Challenged
Yep, just ask Jermaine Jackson
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2zGqOcmgmw
I don’t know about you lot but if I was too hungover to perform my job and went off for a sleep instead, I’d be in quite a lot of trouble. The Medical Board doesn’t take too kindly to substance abuse that affects your job.
Glen,
If I recall correctly, you dined out on Rudd’s earwax for some considerable time.
Yes but that was 2 years ago! I’m not making it an issue now. I’ll bet since Hockey will be shadow treasurer for a bit you’ll all be calling him fatty everytime you mention him in your posts for years!
GG
I hope you didn’t mean that literally.
Shouldn’t that be calorie enhanced? Or dimensionally enriched? Or adipose attractor?
Yeah everyone get over it, Hockey has been fat for his entire political career.
You don’t attack another mans wife, that is just the way it is. Turnbull’s an idiot.
fredn he never attacked her, he complemented her on her business skills and the wealth she generated, who he did attack was Rudd for being a hypocrite by saying neo-liberalism was bad and yet his wife benefited from neo-liberal reforms…
#692, of course you dont. It’s better if you just “love” her. Much nicer and enjoyable.
You mean like Malcolm Turnbull has a couple of free university degrees, so he benefited from Whitlam’s social democratic reforms of tertiary education? So that makes him a hypocrite for condemning social democracy by calling it socialism?
Glen,
That argument ain’t gonna fly.
By not responding directly, Rudd shows Turnbull up for the toerag he is.
Ain’t heard this word in ages.
… unless you’re a Liberal.
Glen
You don’t attack another man’s wife and then makes excuses, that is just the way it is. I have read the assay, he didn’t even get basic facts right, but that will not drown him. Attacking Rudd’s wife will.
Unless she’s Julie Bishop.
You are all forgetting Rudd’s wife wasnt being attacked, she was being complemented.
The only person Turnbull attacked in his essay was Rudd for being a hypocrite, which he is!
Stop polishing faecel matter Glen, it WAS an attackj !
“One of those public goods is the provision of job placement services for the unemployed. In 1998, the Howard government closed the Commonwealth Employment Service and outsourced its functions to the private sector, and one of the private firms that benefited conspicuously from this deregulation was the Rudd family business.
I congratulate the Rudds, especially Therese Rein, on their success. Their business grew into a very substantial one in Australia and as other countries followed the Australian approach, grew there as well exporting the expertise developed by them when they seized the opportunity created by Howard’s decision in 1998.
But what are we to think of the wealthiest Prime Minister Australia has ever had, a man greatly enriched by the privatisation and outsourcing of government services, standing up again and again to denounce the very policies from which he and his family have profited so extensively.
It is more than a bit rich. It is as hypocritical, as chutzpadik, as his essay is absurd.”
Glen, I agree. This is the (so-called) offending passage from Turnbull’a article. It’s not an attack on Therese Rein.
You can see why all the Labor Ministers are queuing up to say that it is such an attack, though. The last thing they’d want people to be thinking about is Rudd’s patent hypocrisy.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25148674-7583,00.html
“I congratulate the Rudds, especially Therese Rein, on their success. Their business grew into a very substantial one in Australia and as other countries followed the Australian approach, grew there as well exporting the expertise developed by them when they seized the opportunity created by Howard’s decision in 1998.
But what are we to think of the wealthiest Prime Minister Australia has ever had, a man greatly enriched by the privatisation and outsourcing of government services, standing up again and again to denounce the very policies from which he and his family have profited so extensively.
It is more than a bit rich. It is as hypocritical, as chutzpadik, as his essay is absurd. ”
Explain how this ‘attacks’ Rudd’s wife??
It complements her!
Actually it compliments her. Apart from that I agree with you 100%, Glen!
Rudd is not wealthier than Stanley Bruce, who drove a Rolls Royce (or rather had a chauffeur drive one for him), and built a giant house outside Frankston. Bruce was one of the wealthiest men in Australia in his day.
Dyno this has been a media beat up purely because Malcolm mentioned the Rudd family and Therese Rein by name. What they are forgetting is that Turnbull is exposing Rudd’s hypocrisy and is in no way attacking her personally…
I don’t think Rudd will adopt Bruce’s habit of wearing spats though.
“But let us compare the US housing finance market with that of Australia. Unlike our American cousins, Australian governments had not sought to manipulate or influence the lending practices of banks. There is no Australian equivalent of Fannie or Freddie. Mortgages are with recourse to the borrower. Banks are expected to make their own credit assessments and lend on commercial terms. Overall, the financial and prudential regulation of our banks and other financial institutions was restructured by the Howard government with the establishment of the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission and the granting of independence to the Reserve Bank of Australia, among many other reforms.
We have had no sub-prime crisis in Australia. In fact, sub-prime loans in Australia represent less than 1 per cent of the total mortgage book. Despite the buffeting from the global financial crisis, our banks are acknowledged as among the most secure and well capitalised in the world.
So there are the facts that demonstrate the delusional nonsense at the core of Rudd’s thesis. In the US a mortgage market in which government played a central and directing role blows up. In Australia, where government’s role is simply to provide an efficient financial and prudential regulatory framework, the mortgage market remains sound.
And to underline how Rudd’s essay is at odds with reality, in the same week that his 7700 words hit the newsstands, Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard was in Davos boasting of how Australia’s system of financial regulation was “better than world class”. She did not mention that it had all been put in place by the “neo-liberal free market extremists” in the Liberal Party.”
More salient points from Turnbull.
I should hasten to add that I am not an advocate of “unlimited free-market capitalism” (or whatever you want to call it). And my views on excessive executive greed are well-known (its exercise ought to be stamped out, by law).
Nevertheless the long-run answer to this crisis is not necessarily heaps more regulation. It is specific changes to regulation, targeted at the things that are actually wrong.
According to Julia Gillard (and on this I agree with her), in the Australain financial system there are not all that many things that are wrong.
Glen, Dyno,
Turnbull is exposing his glass jaw. Don’t always agree with Glenn Milne but he got this right,
“Thoughtful Liberals have always wondered privately whether Malcolm’s propensity for being thin skinned would bring him undone. Well, now they know”.
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,25152783-5001030,00.html
GG,
So youi agree it wasn’t an attack? You just think it was politically silly?
Or am I misunderstanding you?
GG Glen Milne has been waiting to write his story on COSTELLO ASSUMES LIBERAL LEADERSHIP for years and he’s never been a fan of Malcolm, so it is no wonder he’d write up such a story!
Milne’s agenda is a pro-Costello one. Everyone knows that. Milne is presumably doing this because he thinks Costello can be PM.
I am with the realists on with this one, though. Costello isn’t electable. The Laborites know that, too – hence the attack on Turnbull.
Glen,
It will be interesting to see if anyone can come up with the specific words in Turnbull’s essay that they think were an attack on Ms Rein.
He won’t write that story, he will retire and start work as Costello’s press secretary before he has a chance.
If Rudd’s being hypocritical then isn’t Turnbull being critical calling for payouts to be curbed when he himself was a recipient of them as a financial executive?
Costello only wants the leadership if he can be PM, so i doubt he’d try to take over with us 60/40 behind a year and a bit out from the 2010 election me thinks if his plans were to take it over he’d pick 2012 and he’d be only 55 years old then…
Perhaps the article is an attack on Therese because it calls her husband a hypocrite? I don’t know, just trying to help …
703, nice job getting around William’s censor
Turnbull was attacking Rudd and used his wife as a means to do that, regardless of what he said about his wife. They tried to do this during the election campaign (in fact ‘they’ undertook an investigation of his wife’s business regarding IR) again, trying to smear Rudd by using his wife.
Turnbull obviously doesn’t see Therese Reine as a separate individual, as a free agent but assumes Rudd must have control over her no doubt because he is the husband and thus can automatically claim as his whatever her success is and, can order her how and how not to go about life. That she participated in capitalism makes Rudd an accomplice, that she is wealthy makes her money his…
Turnbull’s bringing Reine into the political arena for point scoring grates on a number of levels. The biggest hypocrisy being that his own former profession were the group of careless pigs at the trough that helped bring about this GFC.
Rudd attacked an ideology, Turnbull attacked the person, proving once more that he hasn’t a clue. Joe Hockey is making the same mistake, playing the man.
Rudd’s tactic should be as always to ignore the Opposition and talk direct to the people.
Costello should go back to being a barrister, Glen. He was a good Treasurer but he runs a serious risk of going down in history as an arsehole with his current behaviour.
He will never be PM, so that means he doesn’t need the leadership, therefore he should retire.
“Overall, the financial and prudential regulation of our banks and other financial institutions was restructured by the Howard government with the establishment of the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission and the granting of independence to the Reserve Bank of Australia, among many other reforms.”
Not to mention the fact that Glen Stevens is supposedly a “lackey” of Rudd, despite his selection by Howard and his independent status as Governor of the Reserve Bank. Is this not also hypocritical?
I thought Keating did that?
So why did the govt have to gaurantee all bank deposits.
Why has the non-bank lender sector of the home market virtually dried up and disappeared. Wizard is all but gone, Rams is gone, Aussie is not much more than a broker.
Wouldn’t take make to beat the USA, UK and Swiss systems.
But Howard manipulated the pricing of housing with his depreciation allowance and capital gains tax break. Same with share market encouraging everyone to throw a spare million into a once off tax free super break.
Same result, overheated, speculative economy powered by borrowings against overpriced housing and shares.
TP, the words please. Show us the words where he attacked Therese Rein. Be specific.
Or drop this silly pretence.
Rudd was attacking EXTREME right wing let the market rip at all costs capitalism. You know, the one that has caused this global recession.
Privatisation is good capitalism. Rudd was not criticising good capitalism.
Dyno,
It was both.
Turnbull deliberately put the words about Therese in his essay. He promoted it as such and the dogwhistled media hounds have dutifully taken it up with great alacrity. Already the next phase of the plan, the comparison between between Therese and the Directors of Pacific Brands is being drawn. So we are in for a period of prolonged Rudd and Therese bashing.
The Libs have form on this because of the previous attacks on Therese when she had to sell off parts of her business simply because she was Rudd’s wife and the never ending claims of conflict of interest that would have ensued.
So yeah, the attack was calculated as a political wedge. The good news is that I have been out at a function today and Malcolm is “shite”. Women despise this sort of personal attack.
In the end it is a cunning stunt performed by a stunning………..
No he wasn’t. Cutting taxes in election years, increasing middle class welfare, increasing the size of government, while cutting billions out of health and education aren’t the signs of a good treasurer.
Did this get a mention earlier? I’ve been on the cricket for awhile, taking a bit of a break for a few minutes ….
HAHAHAH dyno they cant come up with anything out of MT’s essay that attacks TR!
GG,
I don’t dispute that MT’s shtick may well backfire on him.
Nevertheless, I don’t see it as a personal attack.
As for the whole thing about comparing Therese to the head of Pac Brands and her ilk, please don’t try to tell me that the oh-so-holy ALP hasn’t been trying to draw the same association with Malcolm Turnbull and the CEOs.
But as I said earlier, if anyone can show me (specifically) where Turnbull’s essay is an attack on Rein, I’m all ears. So far there’s only been waffle in response.
“I congratulate dyno on his success.”
Words that are rarely (if ever) uttered. But the next (?first?) time I hear them I’ll be on the alert, as I’ll know they are really meant to be an attack!
People out there in voterland are not going to read the essays: Turnbull’s or Rudd’s. All they will get from this incident are two messages:
a) From the Liberals – Turnbull called Rudd a hypocrite
b) From Labor – Turnbull attacked Rudd’s wife.
When they hear a) they will think, “Ho hum, politicians are always calling each other hypocrites.” When they hear b) they will be annoyed, and, going on previous experience when Rein was attacked by the Liberals (pre-election), the favour will benefit Rudd.
So, another fabulous move there from Mr Political Tin Ear.
Dyno,
Then why bring Therese in to the story at all? Malcolm was trying to personalise the issue by using Rudd’s wife as means to attack Rudd.
That is wrong and it is reprehensible. As for Pacific Brands, why is Therese in the story at all?
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,25153645-5005941,00.html
‘Conga line of suck holes’ .. is worth reporting. Saying excrement is not.
Bringing up Reine only gives the chance to show case how she went out and made a successful business from scratch…. and that Turnbull was a banker….merchant banker. I expect Rudd to come out and say how proud he is of her, should a report ask him the question.
God, Turnbull is a tactical idiot. There are some real important meaty issues out there and he wants to jab Rudd by bringing his wife into it.
Rudd has a reputation for blowing up and having a thin skin too I think, but during the last election campaign he learned to be cool head. And he avoided the mistake of getting personal.
GG,
So he should have attributed Rein’s success to Rudd, or something?
Que? You really are a mystery man at times.
He simply described what had happened, congratulated Rein on her success (and Rudd for his role in it) and then pointed out the obvious hypocrisy in Rudd’s current position.
No attack on Rein there.
juliem, are we enjoying ourselves watching SA being smashed into pieces?
Like Turnbull, they were so arrogant. They think after the OZ tour that they can just turn out and expect to win. Likewise with Turnbull.
Milne is trying to turn Malcolm’s argument into a Pacific brands connection which the essay made no mention of. Turnbull was very supportive of TR in his essay and said nothing ill of her. Milne is trying to give Costello a break.
Cuppa,
You may well be right that this will turn into an own goal for Turnbull.
However it should be noted that he did not attack Rudd’s wife.
Glen,
Spot on. Milne’s article is idiotic, and the connection with Turnbull’s argument is tenuous to be put it politely.
Well Dyno, you are the only one who can’t see it! Re 731.
If it wasn’t an attack on Rudd’s wife, he could have used anybody else who has been a success in business.
The whole stupidity of it is that you can’t acknowledge that there has been a problem with the GFC because people have been successful in business. Turnbull has the I Q of a pea.
Dyno,
You are the one denying the reality of the situation?
Next you’ll be saying the stimulus package isn’t working. But you couldn’t be that silly, could you?
Costello is a second rate Hamlet. When it comes to bringing out the sword… he will go hide somewhere in the castle. He wont be holding up a skull and say alas! Yorrick..it will be his balls and alas! my balls, I knew them well Tony.
If Bolt is correct and Costello plans to challenge in 12 months then more damage will be done the brand, I thinks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_9P0VDnMPM
LOL Rudd being Prime Ministerlike….
That’s because it’s not a direct attack on her, its dog whistling. The appropriate question (one which has been posed by a few already) is why mention her at all. MT could have called Rudd for hypocrisy without alluding to his wife. No need to mention the bubbly millionaire at all. As they say, this will open a Pandora ’s Box of worms for MT.
Cuppa, provide the words where Turnbull attacked Rein, or stop making it up.
Put up, or shut up.
If they can herd the Liberal cats into one line of thought it should be, forget the many, lets do policy.
forget the man
Dyno you know they can’t find any words where Turnbull attacked Rein but it is funny how they wont admit to being wrong and they wont back down LOL!
specifically
1.Rudd didnt mention Howard’s wife or indeed turnbull’s and their wealth.
2.Turnbull’s sly interposing of reins gaining of her wealth, ie damning with feint praise.
To draw in one’s partner,no matter how “innocent or without malice” is to cross the political Rubicon
Funnily I doubt if Cossie would stoop so low
I stand by my previous posts. The conservatives are so desperate that they have lost the plot.
There is no hypocrisy on the PM’s part in blaming the GFC on neo (note the word neo) liberalism.
It is an attack on the wife when you use her situation in order to make an attack on the husband. Would they like to play the same game with Ebetz?
glen&Dyno
you had better ask Joe the same question lol
from ABC online
Good luck with getting that impression across.
The fact that he mentioned her name at all, getting into the business affairs of a private citizen (you know what I mean) – could, and probably will be, construed as an attack. He’s used the wife of the Prime Minister as a conduit to attack the Prime Minister himself. If this was the first such instance of the Liberals using TR to go at KR, there might be some benefit of the doubt. But it isn’t the first, the Liberals have form on this.
as a politician Turnbull’s a damned good merchant banker, even blind freddy can see he’s on the way out, the two most obvious heirs Costello and Hockey are both unelectable so where does the coalition go from here?
St Tony Of Cabernet (pittwater lodge)
Bronwyn Bishop – she’s always wanted the job. Or maybe Ironbar Tuckey – he’s always god for a laugh.
Who’s Dux of Shore this year? Find the kid a seat!
Or Barnett’s chief of staff Deidre Willmont, after they “encourage” Julie Bishop to resign her seat of course
nope, the Abbott is God’s political comedian at this point in time
v good
That would be Bree
My dream Team is barnaby as Opp. Leader and tuckey as deputy
banjo’s at 10 paces chaps
Or Dad & Dave
(sorry, no video illustration
)
737, yes we are but we’ve a ban on this blog for the score so you need to open another internet window and see what it is
How big a lead required before Ponting declares? Although SA will only have 9 batsmen I still think a lead of 500 with 6 sessions to bowl them out is about right. Declare overnight.
Frank,
i heard that Barnaby likes the King. So this is rather appropriate being the Dream Team …. dream on:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Am05yZehlAM
And another Presley track for the Libs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrQexmXrt1U
Steve K, 5 sessions will be enough with 600+. He he he he
dyno, Glen
your rather enfeebled attack has faltered and spluttered to nought.
Do you at least concede that MORALLY it is wrong to “go” in whatever shape of form one’s partner/spouse???
I await your reply with interest.
The Liberals political stupidity in attacking Therese Rein is mindboggling – the Poison Dwarf and the Costello Club see it immediately and have stuck a few picas in the stupid bull as it has charged past.
Stupid to attack Rein because anyone with any knowledge of her business knows that if capitalism can have a compassionate face, its Therese Rein. Her companies specialise in services to those that government systems have been unable to help or have not bothered to understand – the disabled, the sick, those that society leaves in its wake. Her companies typically don’t abandon cases when funding runs out – they wear the costs of eventually getting a good outcome for their case clients. If Therese, her fellow founder, and the other senior people who built the business had been more ruthless – more neo-liberal – they’d have been ten times as wealthy, and that extra wealth would only have come from human misery. The woman is as near to a saint as Australia has.
Trubbell, I’m mighty impressed.
is tuckey11.com available?
Yes.
Can anyone here explain why Costello has resurrected workchoices as the solution to the GFC ??? is he just trying to throw a spanner in the works? does he care if the libs r ever electable again in his lifetime ??
Joe says it’s ok, the poison pen says it’s an act of stupidity, Glen and dyno are going for “it didn’t happen”, don’t like your chances boys.
Turnbull lost me at the third paragraph.
“There, a lonely figure sat hunched over his laptop constructing a political fantasy of his own. The Prime Minister was having great fun. Imagining himself once more in a heroic pose.”
Rudd effort was a serious attempt to finger the problem, Turnbull went for a personal attack. Just plain dumb.
Because he really loves SmirkChoices, so much so that he would intensify it over what it was, ever given the chance.
But it lost them the 2007 election! why persist with something that lost them an election!!, It would be like the Tory party in England going to the next election with the Poll Tax!, Or the Republicans in the US with Jeb Bush.
What he loves most about SmirkChoices is that it seeks to destroy that which he hates most – workers’ unions – and by extension the Labor Party.
It’s a blind sort of hatred he (and some other Liberals) have, such that it blinds him to the toxic nature of that which he loves.
Because he actually believes that if low skilled workers are paid less, that will free up money to pay high skilled workers more, which means the gap between rich and poor will grow.
For him this is fine, because so long as rich people are fine, then everything is fine.
I think this is a habit that conservative politicians have that they are unaware of. They think the way to get ahead is to pick a battle on some contentious issue they go the fear/sledge/wedge. Drumming up WorkChoices as an issue of fear in the GFC ( it will do this and that..) and hope to win the battle on it will help their cause. This is their old political method. People now hate it, it makes them feel uncomfortable. And in this economic climate they will feel even less inclined to want to hear negativism.
Just look at Obama and Rudd. They were through their campaigns positive and avoided the negative… and Rudd still does. He doesn’t use the dark wedge politics that Howard did.
Costello and Howard were equally responsible for work choices. Costello is doing whatever he can to save his reputation and if that means standing by a rotten discarded policy then he’ll do it. Why would he care if Labor uses it to smash them at the next election?
Surely you aren’t saying that Costello isn’t aware enough to know what toxic poison workchoices is to the electorate to even hint at it’s resurrection? I’m starting to think that Costello is so full of toxic hate for what happened to him in the succession of the liberal party that he is trying to destroy any hope the liberals have of regaining office.
No 754
How has Turnbull attacked Rein by stating the simple, undeniable fact that she has benefited substantially from the privatisation of government services?
And, if this is such an obscene attack, why wouldn’t Mr Rudd himself condemn Turnbull? Instead, he’s got his lapdogs doing his dirty work and playing politics.
Just imagine the good the Howard government could have done with the huge surpluses they had. But what did they do? The waste was criminal. Someone should have told Howard that he would have been better off ‘buying’ elections by spending on things good for the country. Howard effectively flushed something like $300 billion down the toilet.
The only thing Howard will be remembered for is Workchoices, and attack on a basic human right.
No doubt his judgement is clouded by hatred and bitterness in numerous aspects. Hatred of unions, hatred of Howard, hatred of Rudd, bitterness with his colleagues. Perhaps even (if he were honest) bitterness with himself for a lifetime’s cowardice and missed opportunities. A sad individual, despite the smug, smirking façade.
Saying that Turnbull didn’t explicitely criticise Therese Rein is pure semantics. It was still dog whistle politics to link her to the GFC and executive salaries. The average voter will no more believe pedantic arguments that no connection was implied any more than they beleived Howard’s convoluted excuses for not saying sorry. This is where an opposition full of lawyers, who think they are clever playing word games with people, outsmart themselves. They come across just as mean-spirited, and untrustworthy to boot. The perception is not unjustified IMO.
I agree with Mr Flaubert on Costello. He has obviously resurrected Workchoices to ensure that his enemy, Turnbull, really goes down in flames at the next election. I can think of no other explanation. His raising it now proves Labor’s whole attack on Workchoices was right all along. It was introduced when times were good, but as soon as times turned bad, companies would use it to force wages lower. Either Costello really does know nothing about economics (possible…) or he is just trying to kill off Turnbull for sure, so that he get the leadership next. If he’s not careful though, he might not merely kill off Turnbull, but give Labor an absolute Senate majority too.
Yeah, and after all, Turnbull must be a socialist for accepting a free university education.
Steele could be talking about the Liberal Party.
“I’M TRYING TO MOVE AN ELEPHANT THAT’S BECOME MIRED IN ITS OWN MUCK”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/us/politics/08steele.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=all
No 786
Come on Socrates, Turnbull’s wealth has been front and centre in the parliament. Why is Therese Rein a sacred subject? It is utter hypocrisy from the ALP.
Um, because she isn’t a politician?
Turnbull is in the parliament; Rein is not.
790
Go and read the last 200 posts and you’ll find the answer.
No 791
Sue Morphett? Sol Trujillo? They’re all fair game for you and others.
Fact of the matter is that Therese Rein is not a sacred subject that should be excluded from criticism, especially when her husband is running around condemning neoliberals and greedy executives. Hypocrisy and double standards.
No 792
Her extra-parliamentary status is irrelevant.
So I assume it is fair game for ALP Politicians to mention Janette Howard’s demands on NOT living at The lodge and home renovation exploits then ?
It is only irrelevant if you are trying to deny that Turnbull attacked Rudd through his wife, a non-politician.
Cuppa and ShowsOn
I am still waiting for you to find me any bit of Turnbull’s essay that attacks Rein????
I have been waiting hours and you cant come up with squat so either put up or shut up!
Everyone has the right to criticise executive salaries, that helps to limit them but without draconian legislation.
Correction, it is the Liberals who started bashing executives.
Idiot.
No 796
Yes.
No 797
Where is the attack though?
Fact: Therese Rein benefited from the neoliberal policies Mr Rudd condemns
Fact: Therese Rein is extremely wealthy
That’s all that Turnbull stated. Is it an attack to state facts?
GP 794
Nobody attacked Sol Trujillo’s wife though, did they. Given Sol’s history of funding conservative politics in the US before he even moved to Australia for Telstra, and previous problems with Sun West Communications in the early – mid 90s, I think questions about Trujillo were entirely justified. Unfortunately for Telstra shareholders, who have paid him tens of millions while market share, capital value and profits have all fallen, the concerns were justified.
Speaking of John and Janette, why do they remind me of this famous movie couple – especially considering John’s Numeracy skills
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bfq5kju627c
I never wrote he attacked her, I just think it is completely unnecessary bringing in members of the family to try to make a political point.
Turnbull is trying to become P.M., not First Lady.
No 799
Oh, I see. Some executives are more equal than others. Therese Rein runs her own company, even though she has sold out of her domestic subsidiary.
Anyway we shouldn’t be grumpy that GP and others keep trying to defend these tactics (personal attacks, Costello sniping and Workchoices as an antidote to the GFC). If the Liberals keep up these tactics as their “answer”, all I can say is roll the 2010 election, which we will refer to as “armagedon day” for the boys in blue.
And your point is?
I have read that some Liberals despise Turnbull because he’s wealthy.
It’s possible Turnbull despises Rudd likewise because Rudd’s wealthy.
A fair bit of the green-eyed monster among Liberals, I feel.
Whether this bears on Turnbull’s dragging Rein into his attack on Rudd, I’m not asserting, but it’s possibly a motivation.
They’re just scared as buggery about the next NewsPoll figures.
No 801
My point was that the ALP supporter argument is that Rein is not a politician and therefore does not deserve criticism. Yet, non-political public figures are criticised all the time. It is absolutely absurd to claim that the Rein is untouchable, even though Turnbull simply stated broadly known fact.
Hughes to 99*, one more run to become the youngest test player ever to score a hundred in both innings.
Glen said [I am still waiting for you to find me any bit of Turnbull’s essay that attacks Rein????]
I didn’t make that claim but you made such a claim about Rudd attacking Turnbull’s family. I’ve been waiting even longer than you for your evidence but you’ve not delivered. I’ll just have to put that down as another unsubstantiated comment.
She doesn’t deserve criticism for running a private company. You can criticise how much money she has made, but my understanding is she received a bonus because the share value increased.
Born to rule Liberal types can’t handle the fact some Labor politicians (and their families) run businesses. I mean the attacks on Keating for owning a farm were based completely on the principle that according to Liberals Labor politicians shouldn’t be able to own or run businesses.
No 806
You called me an idiot for stating that her extra-parliamentary status was irrelevant. Given that she is an executive of her extremely successful company, why is she above criticism?
Remember, you said this:
GP
Your claims are hardly worth refuting, but here goes:
- Therese Rein is not ripping off other shareholders with her salary – its her company and her money.
- The inference regarding the causes of the GFC are irrelevant – the financial crisis was caused precisely by financial firms like the one Turnbull used to run, not Rein’s. I don’t recall a lot of employment agencies listed in Lehman Brothers counter parties. Goldman Sachs was though and Turnbull was Australian manager up till 2001. How embarrassing for Malcolm.
She wasn’t criticised for the mere fact of running a private company. Indeed, it was Mr Rudd who was criticised for attacking so-called neoliberals, when his wife had benefited handsomely from the policies that these same neoliberals espoused.
Also, Richard Pratt was rightly criticised for price fixing and collusion. He runs a private company: Visy.
Once again, your argument is full of meaningless platitudes and little substance.
She isn’t. However, the fact Turnbull had to talk about Rein to score some vague point about Rudd’s ideology is just bizarre, and shows that he is completely losing the political debate. It is also unnecessary, surely he could’ve made the same point more directly, and made it more of a criticism of Rudd?
It seemed to amount to, Rudd is a socialist for saying he is a social democrat, but hey, he must be a capitalist because his wife runs a successful business. Which just made me wonder what Turnbull’s argument is? Is it that Rudd is a socialist, or a capitalist?
Hughes – youngest player ever to score hundreds in both innings.
No 814
So what? That doesn’t make her any less susceptible to criticism. Being the PM’s wife does not make you untouchable.
GP and Glen doesn’t matter what you think, you Hero Peter Costello, wants the Liberal party to sink badly, and to sink now, in fact he is determined to scuttle the “Good Ship Liberal Party”
You mean like how Turnbull attacks socialists, even though he benefited from public housing and free education implemented by the Whitlam government?
And most likely some sort of Social security benefit as well.
Good, now can you please retract your personal attack.
It was just a stupid essay. If Turnbull wanted to argue that the Liberal party are not neo-Liberals, he would’ve had to explained how WorkChoices isn’t an example of neo-Liberalism, but he didn’t do that, he pretended that WorkChoices never existed.
He would’ve also had to explain how Medicare, Superannuation and enterprise bargaining fit in with his argument that the Hawke and Keating governments were purely neo-liberal.
He accuses Rudd of mischaracterising neo-liberalism, and then promptly proceeds to do exactly the same thing.
No.
GP 818
It makes a world of difference. Trujillo and Turnbull were the bosses of listed companies. People invest their savings in them to prepare for retirement and rightly resent teh fact that up to 10% of the profits (more in some cases) dissaperance into the hands of executives for the service of achieving average returns. Thanks to Howards CLERP 9 regulations they can’t even stop it, with shareholder resolutions on salary being non-binding. Hence theya re right to feel angry about beign ripped off. None of these concerns apply to private companies like Rein – its her money. She isn’t ripping anybody else off.
No 820
I don’t recall Turnbull ever being the beneficiary of public housing.
As for free education – it’s not like he had a choice to pay his own way.
No 824
You’re a typical thug ShowsOn.
Turnbull obtained his double degree in Arts/Law during the whithlamesque free period!
No 825
Socrates, you can make these pedantic distinctions until hell and high water. The key point here is whether the PM’s wife should be subject to criticism. You say no, I say yes.
GP still to cowardly to answer why your Uber-Hero Peter Costello seems bent on destroying the Liberal Party by resurrecting the most hate policy in Australia’s History “WorkChoices”, r u mad or are you JUST insane?
HB but he didnt have a choice he couldnt pay for his education even if he wanted too, god your spurious arguments are shameful.
TR had a choice to create a business, she made the right choice and made a lot of money good for her, she had those choices available to her thanks to neo-liberalism hence Ruddy boy is a hypocrite….
Game, Set, Match!
Next Newspoll is when?
Wonder if Turnbull has more tactics to distract from the economy?
I did predict that the Govt’s poll have probably peaked and that inevitably numbers will leak back to the L&NP among those that think maybe they would be better at the GFC or dissatisfaction with increasing unemployment.
However Turnbull distractions and distastefulness may delay the process.
SOCIALISM! He is a SOCIALIST! No other explanation for it.
Thank you for confirming you lost the argument.
No 828
What’s your point? Even if he wanted to pay his own way, he couldn’t have. It’s a silly argument and irrelevant to the question of whether Therese Rein deserves criticism.
No 833
Excuse me?
You lost the minute you decided to call me an idiot.
There were no laws against creating a private job agency even when we had the CES.
Incorrect. That’s when I started winning.
No 837
Now you’re being a facetious twit.
You lose.
Still cowardly avoiding Peter Costello, and his solution to the GFC “WORKCHOICES”
Glen 831
“Game, Set, Match!
This proves my earlier point – neither the Liberal politicians nor their aparachiks want to engage in substantial debate. They are more like lawyers playing gotcha and word games, hoping to score points and “win”. It makes their egos feel good, but its futile. The only message it conveys is that they don’t care about what is true, only about winning. Thankfully an increasing % of the Australian population is starting to see through that. The number is about 60% now.
No 840
It is an aversion I shall endure as stoically as possible.
Turnbull seems to have some sort of class-envy of Rudd. Recall Turnbull’s bizarre self-disclosure upon being elected Liberal leader, that he’d spent some time living in a flat as a kid. This was clearly to compete with Rudd’s narrative of having to sleep in a car when he was a youngster.
This latest attack on Rudd, again smacks of class envy. Ooh, look, he is the wealthiest Prime Minister in history! {gnash, gnash} The sub-text being, perhaps, that the Rudd family “owes” its wealth to the Liberals, or at least their neo-liberal policies.
Indeed Humphrey, lesson one in playing Liberal wordgames is avoiding the battles they know they can’t win, like Workchoices, or denying they exist.
No 841
Socrates, you haven’t made a point, except to say that Therese Rein is above criticism.
and Socrates, remember, the libs solution to the GFC appears to be “Workchoices” according to their great sage “Peter Costello”
Night all; happy decade in oblivion Liberals.
No 843
It’s a bit rich to be condemning Turnbull of class-envy when Rudd called Turnbull the member for Goldman Sachs, the defender of porsche and ferrari drivers,
You’re an utter hypocrite Cuppa.
It is like Springborg’s mental health policy – rely on volunteers!
Yes this is correct, all Liberals care more about rich people. It is a pre-requisite for becoming leader of the party.
Just remember…
“?? ??? ?????????!”…eventually
My vas pokhoronim!
You’re an utter attacker, Generic Person. Don’t attack me for what Rudd said.
The Rein/Turnbull stuff doesn’t bother me much, stupid and pointless the Argument was, but the whole Costello/Workchoices argument that the Liberal party seems only to happy to ignore, Makes me sick to the Core of my Stomach!! So the Liberals next election promise appears that they will ressurect Workchoices in all it’s Ugly, Nasty< Devisive form for the works of Australia, Well Thankyou Call-bearers for the Liberal Party “Generic Person” and “Glen” you truly are bastards beyond reproach!!!
Yes, their slogan next election is going to be “Go for slavery!”
sorry works => workers
No 853
You go from being a virtual parrot of Rudd to distancing yourself from him when it doesn’t suit your pathetic argument.
You’re a hypocrite and you don’t want to admit it.
The miserable Liberals will “introduce” SlaveChoices just like they did last time. That is, after an election.
Before the election they will say nothing about it. But if they win, BANG! our kids get their wages cut and job security abolished!
But Glen and GP still have yet to agree with there Demigod “Pete Costello” That Workchoices is the answer to the GFC in Australia. Are they super shy, or are they cunning bastards like most liberal party hacks are????
No 854
The Liberal Party stands for a more liberalised industrial relations system. Simple as that. We’ve never retracted our stance on that position.
No 858
Stop obfuscating with workchoices and admit that your class envy attack on Turnbull was utterly hypocritical and inappropriate.
Yes my friends SlaveChoices is the natural habitat of the native liberal beast
http://business.smh.com.au/business/chomping-through-debt-mountain-20090308-8seh.html?page=2
Back up the accusation that I’m a “virtual parrot of Rudd”. Let’s have some examples.
If you do not provide evidence, you will be exposed as just another lowlife Liberal attacker, like your leaders, past and present.
Rudd speaks as a free agent, and so do I.
Liberals don’t like that.
GP,
What is the Liberal position on IR again?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuCO68Oe2kw
GP just remember when our side does win again Cuppa and all his mates will not be enjoying themselves
What the hell is wrong with the system we had? It was a system that provided almost 12 years of positive growth (I’m ignoring the quarter where Costello sent the economy temporarily in reverse).
What exactly was wrong with it when it ties increased wages to increases in productivity? Labor has agreed to reforms like secret ballots, no secondary boycotts. Why is it that the Liberals are completely unable to compromise on industrial relations, and instead always want to make the system anti-union?
The system we had was neither pro-union or anti-union. It was a fair system, the Liberals just HATE fairness. They want a system rigged in the employer’s favour.
No 864
Cuppa more obfuscation.
Stop obfuscating and Admit your Uber-Super-Upper Hero “PETER COSTELLO” thinks ‘workchoices’ is the answer to the current global financial crisis. This is the same man who said in late 2007, there was not enough “sub-prime” loans for his liking, and that there should be more of them. A PURE FINANCIAL GENIUS YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!
You won’t win while you retain pro-unemployment environmental policies, and while your backbench is full of climate change deniers.
How is asking for evidence to back up an accusation obfuscation?
It’s obfuscating not to provide the evidence.
Stop obfuscating, Geriatric Person, and back up your accusation.
Bull butter
When we do win it will be with a more liberalised ir system but one that doesnt go to the extremes of wc.
It will only be fair if people can opt out of it, and if people can opt out, they will.
So no one will use it, and thus it will have no economic benefits.
You know, like AWAs before WorkChoices was introduced.
Glenny baby you hero “Peter Costello” said there was not enough “sub-prime” loans for his liking, and that there should be more of them. A PURE FINANCIAL GENIUS YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!
No 879
The ETS that Rudd proposes is pro-unemployment, pro-high energy prices, pro-deep recession.
Glen,
Didn’t see you on the barricades opposing Howard’s Work Choices. A bit late to be writing yourself into the plot as moderate fighting a rear guard action against Howard and Co.
Now he’s obfuscating by shifting to the ETS.
Enough obfuscation, Geriatric. Let’s have some evidence that I’m a “virtual parrot of Rudd”.
I meant economic policies.
However, Turnbull’s environmental policies will create more unemployment, because he constantly insists we should set higher targets (exactly what he doesn’t say, of course).
Turnbull said by 2050 Australia must produce all of its electricity without creating any carbon emissions. We could do that, but it would be extremely expensive, which means very high energy prices.
Of course, according to Turnbull’s own policies the price of energy must increase.
I supported the original AWA system that had a no disadvantage test. Plus i backed the job WC did in rolling back Union powers, which will be brought back when we win again.
At least he was willing to admit it went too fair. According to G.P. WorkChoices didn’t go far enough, because it was too complicated (it’s amazing how much legislation is required to curtail the activities of unions).
GP, so whole species extinctions and sea level rises is acceptable? Hmm, I always expected Tories like you can right off species/landforms so long as you horsies/doggies aren’t affected!
ShowsOn it is easy,
dont build coal fired power stations and build nuclear power stations to carry your base load = no carbon emissions.
Well youj will have no objection to the AMA, the ACCI and other “Business Unions” being subject to the same rules then ?
So you don’t think I.R. policy should be fair, you think it should be biased against unions, and in favour of employers.
The Liberals won’t win with an I.R. policy like this, they need to finally adopt an I.R. policy that isn’t biased for or against unions.
No 877
You support his every endeavour Cuppa. I neither have the time nor the need to recount every single post of yours.
Also, geriatric means aged and senile. I’m not aged.
I would suggest it is impossible for an opposition to win an election proposing the legalisation of nuclear power.
If Turnbull wanted it so bad he should’ve convinced Howard to legislate for it while the Liberals still controlled the Senate.
But you are senile! HAHAHAHHAHA HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHA
GOT HIM THERE!
ShowsOn only when the Unions start donating 50% to the Libs
You have just walked straight into it with the latter part of that statement
And I’m not referring to the Aged bit either 
Glen, unions stand for employment. No employment, no workers, no unions.
They also stand for fairness in the workplace.
What is it you have against employment and fairness?
No 889
Yes, that was an amusing oversight.
Well he must be opposed to the AMA and other pro business “UNions” using that logic.
It’s great to know what the 2010 election slogan of the liberal party will be “Workchoices, you hated it then, get set to hate it even more next time ’round”
fantastic, will ensure a Labor government in Canberra for my lifetime
There goes Geriatric Person.
1) Makes an accusation
2) When challenged to provide evidence, obfuscates
3) When challenged again, says “I don’t have to”
An accusation without evidence is as hollow as the Liberal making the accusation.
I have it against right of entry and collective agreements
We dont need Union involvement so much as we did before.
Unions are in it for one reason, themselves. They are a business like any other.
No 890
Fairness is a nebulous term Cuppa.
In 1997, for example, the maritime union thought it was fair that wharfies got paid for doing nothing and maintaining one of the most inefficient port systems in the world.
That won’t happen while they retain their anti union policies, and while they argue that someone who is in a union can’t be a good politician.
Think of this Glen, Labor supported banning secondary boycotts (so one union couldn’t call on another union to join a strike), Labor supported secret ballots for strikes, whereas before they were just done as raising of hands.
Labor MODERATED some extremely long held policies before the last election. What I think makes some people suspicious of Liberals on I.R. is that THEY never seem to compromise, THEY never seem to moderate their policies. They seem to think that any I.R. policy that allows union involvement is automatically going to cost the economy thousands of jobs.
Read a little bit of Paul Sheehan in the SMH and noticing that to me at least it seemed pretty partisan.. I checked some of his earlier stuff. Does this guy hate Rudd?
What he writes seems like junk to me, but I don’t know his stuff that well.
A little bit of googling very quickly brings up some distasteful things…
And the Wankley Award goes to… Paul Sheehan
http://www.crikey.com.au/Media-Arts-and-Sports/20080807-And-the-Wankley-goes-to.html
Paul Sheehan shouldn’t live in a glass house
http://www.chaser.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2968&Itemid=44
When you are a teacher you will thank them for your pay and conditions.
And of coure Medicare and Superannuation, and maternity leave were all won by agreement between unions, government and business.
Our country works better when organisations with different interests come to agreement, rather than being at war with each other.
No 897
ShowsOn, the Labor party is the parliamentary wing of the union movement. It thus makes no sense to suggest, implicitly, that if the Liberal party threw its weight behind the unions that it would suddenly become the beneficiary of millions in union donations.
Hmm Glen and GP appear to very unrationally anti-union for no reason. One might get the feeling that a great big hairy unionist molested them when they were of the much more gentler sex.
You only join teachers Unions as you would for business insurance….
Does it ALWAYS have the same policies as the ACTU? No.
Does it often consult with unions? Yes.
I never said it did, but it would gain more support from voters if it took more considerations into account when formulating an I.R. policy rather than what the ACCI wants.
I think the problem is that anti-unionism is one of the few things that all Liberals agree on, so they have to bash unions for fear that they will end up fighting about any other policy.
Will Glen and GP be behind the medical profession if THEY decide to withold their services over pay and conditions ?
You don’t have to if you don’t want to. But you will still benefit from the EBA they sign with the government. So you will still get pay and conditions that they have fought for.
No 902
I can get much more eloquent imbecility from Adam Carr.
Speaking of the AMA, I seem to recall that one of their most vocal critics was that bastian of Conservative Premiers, Richard Copurt, who once described them as “as one of the most militant unions I’ve ever dealt with” or words to that effect.
Speaks volumes really.
Many conservatives won’t be happy until they create an under class of working poor which the removal of unions would allow. Then their next task would be to expand the size of that under class of working poor who would of course be powerless.
Why doesn’t the Liberal Party come out and just admit what they are on about, a Liberal Party and Big Business aristocracy with a compliant bunch of servants called Australians.
It is sad but every time someone votes for the Liberals they are voting for their ultimate enemy.
That should read COURT.
And for today’s dose of gloom.
Recession on track to be longest in postwar period
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/08/recession-on-track-to-be-_n_172845.html
“Recession on track to be longest in postwar period”
I’ll survive. My wife and I have always had a policy of no debt or low debt. We paid our house off in 7 yrs and have a c/c max credit of 2.5k which we pay off completely every month. No car loans, boat loan, holiday home loan or anything else loan.
Most people I know are hocked to the eyeballs and all I can see for some of them is bankrupcy down the track. We may not be well off either but we’ll survive better than most.
and encouraged to do so by Howard and Co – The Kath & Kims are now swimming in their own effluent of over spending etc.
Indeed.
One of the glaring hipocracies of the Howard govt before their election was their “debt truck”.
Now a fleet of triple roadtrains.
Same here, own home, debt free, money in the bank etc, not rich but safer than many. However sister in law having lost on shares is talking of borrowing to more to make money back
I guess only the die hard ALP supporters still thinks the stimulus works
http://www.smh.com.au/national/greed-is-a-spent-force-say-researchers-20090308-8sh3.html
It is telling most of the electorates thinks the money spend was misguided, but Rudd, Swann and Henry did not see it
Neil Henry has been a disaster, making so many misttakes, he and the RBA are the main reasons we are in this mess
Thomas Paine
Please spare me the BS, a class of working poor, median wage is $49,000 up about $15,000 since the last ALP government.
This class of “working poor” owns plasma TVs
Lets not talk about 10% unemployment under the last Labor Government, at least the “Working Poor” aren’t the “On the dole with no hope miserables” that the ALP (set a wage higher than market) so people are out of a job, that the ALP likes
From that SMH article:
Around my office most of my colleagues think the same thing, which can be shortened to:
“I deserve the handout. It’s the other bloke who doesn’t deserve it.”
The “other bloke” is defined as “druggies”, “welfare bludgers”, “pokie players” and suchlike. My colleagues have all worked hard for their kickback and are comfortable with receiving it a due recognition of their past contributions. None of them are spending their handout. But not one of them has uttered even a whisper in the direction of sending their money back.
The double standard is truly breathtaking.
I think we’ll see a lot of this.
I ask them the question: “What is the point of the government keeping the money?”
When they answer, “To keep our international credit rating high,” I reply:
“But if you don’t want Australia to go into debt, what does having a good credit rating matter?”
That’s usually when the argument stops. Having to answer the phone is a good excuse.
I thought you were going for the “it didn’t happen line”, try and be consistent.
Anyone with a tiny bit of political nous would realize it really doesn’t matter what you think, it’s how the average voter will see it.
You don’t attack another mans wife, that is just the way it is.
GP,
Therese will deserve criticism when she does something unethical, immoral, illegal or just plain greedy. She hasn’t done any of those things.
She ran a successful, ethical, responsible and caring company, and she married Kevin. Neither of which justify criticism.
That you refuse to acknowledge the unethical behaviour of Turnbull in his use of TR to attack KR shows that you are so one eyed that you have been blind-sided.
Polyquats.
We have waited 920 posts to properly put the lid on the Rein attack – thanks.
Socrates @ 848, at the moment, the Libs have even less of a clue than the Proteas
Yes Poly, well said.
The Turnbull tactic also draws another comparison with Latham, the more desperate Latham got the more desperate his actions, culminating in that handshake.
What a great united opposition we have have, mad Malcolm bouncing off the walls, Tony scoffing bottles of red and falling asleep in his office, Peter talking up Work Choices, fatty yelling incoherent phrases in between mouthfuls, Julie being Julie and the mincing poodle attacked by his own party.
Ouch
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/comrade-rudds-great-con-game-20090308-8sce.html?page=-1
Must say this makes some sense
“The response of policymakers has been to pump a massive increase in liquidity and government debt obligations into the system. But as the eminent economic historian Professor Niall Ferguson, of Harvard and Oxford, recently warned on his website: “The general assumption seemed to be that practically any kind of government expenditure would be beneficial, provided it was financed by a really big deficit.”
Sound familiar? Ferguson continued: “There is something desperate about the way people are clinging to their dog-eared copies of John Maynard Keynes’s General Theory. Uneasily aware that their discipline almost entirely failed to anticipate the current crisis, economists seemed to be regressing to macroeconomic childhood, clutching the multiplier like an old teddy bear.
“The harsh reality that is being repressed is this: the Western world is suffering a crisis of excessive indebtedness. Many governments are too highly leveraged, as are many corporations. More importantly, households are groaning under unprecedented debt burdens. Worst of all are the banks. Some of the best-known names in American and European finance have balance sheets 40, 60 or even 100 times the size of their capital …
“The delusion is that a crisis of excess debt can be solved by creating more debt. Yet that is precisely what most governments currently propose to do.” Space precludes listing Ferguson’s prescriptions but they can be found on his website, and summed up with this sentence: “The solution to the debt crisis is not more debt but less debt.”
As the former Labor leader Mark Latham wrote on February 20, in The Australian Financial Review: “When Kevin Rudd lobbied me in October 2004 to become Labor’s shadow treasurer, his sales pitch was straight from the neo-liberal playbook. He was enthusiastic about pro-market policies such as deregulation and reducing the size of the state. [As leader] he went to the polls as Howard-lite.”
Michael Costa, former Labor treasurer of NSW, dismissed Rudd’s recent attack on the excesses of market capitalism, in a critique in The Australian on February 6 as “rambling and selective” and warned that Rudd’s response to the global crisis “is likely to do more damage to the economy”.
As Niall Ferguson has also warned. When the recession in Australia gets worse, and Rudd’s Keynesian cliches have increased the long-term cost of the government intervention, Labor will run a diversionary personal campaign against the Leader of the Opposition, simply because Malcolm Turnbull is a wealthy former merchant banker.
dovif
I don’t believe that, but if it is true then its comforting to know that 62% of voters are “diehard Labor voters” on current polls. Meanwhile the Liberal solution is back to Workchoices. Should make the next election a hoot.
It may not get worse in Australia, the free trade agreements being negotiated with the Asean nations should see a boom for our agriculture and China may well decide to further increase spending which will benefit us.
For all of his empty talk Howard did nothing to improve our trade relationships with the Asean and other nations, one pissy little trade agreement, a stalled agreement with China and a one sided agreement with the USA was the total result of his 11 years.
Dovif,
Flog us with a feather.
The sensible economists and more importantly, the ones with influence support Labor’s strategy. You just can’t seem to deal with the new reality.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/imf-smiles-on-rudds-stimulus-spending-20090306-8rhj.html
As for MarlK Latham, if you are not careful, we can roll out Fraser and Hewson to demonstrate all their love for the current Liberal incumbants.
As for Turnbull, the gold toothed gouger of the Goldman Sachs stable, it is unlikely he’ll be troubling the scorers for much longer. He seems to be running his own personal campaign to undermine himself. With friends like himself, Malcolm does not need enemies.
My two cents worth on TR and MT.
I agree with GP and dyno. All this faux hysteria about Turnbull is just a sideshow to avoid discussing Turnbull’s argument. Labor could try to explain why Rudd isn’t a hypocrite but they can’t.
Turnbull didn’t attack Rein. He used her to point out that Rudd is a hypocrite, which was a fair point. As an argument, there was nothing wrong with it. But in politics it isn’t the done thing to use a family member to attack the politician, even if you’re not actually saying anything bad about the family member.
It’s exactly the same as the attacks on Cheney who supported anti-gay legislation at the same time as having a gay daughter. Cheney was grossly hypocritical but the attack backfired because it used his daughter.
Castle
The trade agreement with China started negotiation in about 2000. China does not want to lower its trade barrier, that is the reason the FTA did not complete
China became our largest trading partner under the Howard Government, we are already the biggest wheat exporters to China and the middle east
Please get your facts correct
GG
can you please read the article first
I believe debt is a way to get us out of this too, but the article makes a good point
If what got us into this mess in the first place is Debt, ie debt by companies, now that we think the solution is the Government going into more debt?
Is there an inconsistency their
As for the international monetary fund, Costello has a seat there ….. ie those people are not “economists”
No 928
Correct.
Digs,
On the one hand it is ‘faux outrage” and on the other hand Turnbull is using Rudd’s wife to make a political point which is morally wrong and doesn’t work anyway.
Obviously, you are not in surgery today. Looks like you’ve been over tippling already.
I wonder if the Liberals are really thinking of changing leaders for a third time since the last Federal Election. Nelson/Turnbull/Costello? it would just show which of the non-Labor parties is the most stable.
Neil Henry? The coach of the North Queensland Cowboys? I know he coached the Raiders last year but that was a close as he got to decision-makers in Canberra. I’m sure you mean Ken Henry. The Libs hate Ken Henry because he whispers no sweet nothings in their lugs and says things they don’t want to hear.
Dovif,
The IMF seem to be steering the ship as to the direction Governments should take to address the GFC.
The following table demonstrates that Australia’s level of indebtedness is insignificant, even after the latest stimulus figures are factored in. BTW, Turnbull and the Libs simulus plans would have made “bugger all” difference.
The Libs are just running a scare campaign about debt. When the reality is presented you just parrot the old ‘all debt is bad” and “what we need are tax cuts”. Both are simply political rhetoric in the context of the current situation.
http://petermartin.blogspot.com/2009/03/whose-set-for-unsustainable-debt-then.html
GG
I didn’t say it was morally wrong to use a politicians wife. I said it wasn’t the “done thing” and that it doesn’t work.
I’m not a big believer in doing the “done thing” by the way. But if you ignore the social niceties, you have to expect retribution.
And I’m not in surgery today. SA has a public holiday for the Adelaide Cup. Have you got a tip?
No 932
It was Ms Rein who said that she wouldn’t be the mere appendage of a middle age man. I’m sure she is quite up to the task of dealing with criticism.
Also, there is nothing immoral about Turnbull’s statement of fact that Rudd is a hypocrite. He did not misrepresent anyone – he simply relayed what everybody knew.
The problem is that the Labor supporters can’t deal with the notion that their beloved leader is a hypocrite.
Diogenes,
Labor to returned with an incresased majority in 2011.
I’ll also point out that the Rein tiff is another example of Turnbull being a crap politician. He has a good intellectual argument and has Rudd on toast. Rudd is being a hypocrite with his anti-neoliberal retrospective diatribe and should be attacked for spreading BS. But Turnbull stuffs it up and loses face over it with a misguided attack.