A self indulegent,incompetent narcissist comes to mind who won't listen to advice.Good leadership qualities held in high esteem in Zimbabwe.

This article is great! finally someone actually looking at what Kevin Rudd has done, and not react to the skewed views of the media.

The Mining Tax adds are a misinformation campaign aimed at scaring Australians in to thinking that the country and everyone on a personal level will go bankrupt if a tax is imposed in the mining industry.

With the stress on our economy from the GFC and a rise in the age of the average Australian leading to increased need for resources, it is only fair that the profits made from the product of mining the country that is owned by all of us is taxed at a fair rate.

What would these people prefer? the collapse of the welfare system and medicare or pay more tax personally?

Kevin Rudd has done what he has promised. He has taken care of working Australian families, said sorry for the years of inequality and abuse of our indigenous australians, and protected this country from a GFC that has caused such huge problems for the USA and UK.

We don't need someone that can run laps, we need the someone who can run Australia - Kevin Rudd!

I think Kevin Rudd lacks emotional intelligence.
I have just posted a blog about it.
How do you solve a problem like Kevin
http://blogs.bnetau.com.au/aussierules/2010/06/21/how-do-you-solve-a-problem-like-kevin/
With apologies to Rogers and Hammerstein :-)

Sure, Rudd might "actually win". However, if he does, he will continue to be the unmitigated disaster he has been in the last two and a half years. Every thing he has touched has turned to sewerage; he has not got one thing right, and he has not kept one promise.

Swan can say that the NSW by-election with it's 20-30% swing against Labor was due to state issues, rather than the Rudd isssue: but the media thinks differently. It is reported that both Coalition AND Labor urgers around the booths said that the overwhelming sentiment was Rudd's total incompentence in protecting Australia's borders against illegal immigrants. At one booth, Labor lackeys handing out cards felt the need to swap their ALP shirts for something more generic, so strong was the anger against Rudd.

Sure, Rudd might get back in:nothing is impossible. But, are Australians really that stupdid?

An opinion: best option for Labor is to dump Rudd, attack his style, and get on with the future to differentiate itself from the Coalition. He should never have been a Labor leader.

I have voted for Labor in the House of Reps every time, but will not vote for Rudd. Like I have long said, he is a dud and always will be on arrogance alone. He is clearly overrated in both intellectual and political skill terms.

"Kevin Rudd is not driven by anger. He is instead driven by a burning desire to do good."

Oh thats so funny,

I nearly wet myself -

sorry, doubling over in laughter inhibits ones ability to type

Chris Lewis: “ best option for Labor is to dump Rudd, attack his style, and get on with the future to differentiate itself from the Coalition. He should never have been a Labor leader. --- . He is clearly overrated in both intellectual and political skill terms.”

A fair assessment. On Rudd’s history of political action since the last election, implementation of the new mining tax is the “greatest moral challenge” on his radar at the moment. One likely to suffer extinction in the same manner as his pre-election “greatest moral challenge”. Immediately post-election, those morals were horse-traded: swapped for a carbon-trading proposal which would achieve no benefit other than to the industries involved in fossil fuel, promising them more subsidies than they were currently receiving.

Dear Chris Lewis... I'm clinging to the hope that you are not one of those 'former labor' disillusionisme who now would vote Green to annoy labor.

If you are thinking of Bobsled instead of Kruddy.. please let me know as I'd like to discuss the thinking and reasoning going on there.

However..if u're thinking of turning to the Abbot of Canberra.. I'd be interested in that too.

How do you feel about Cap and "TRADE" ? (see other discussion)

cheers

*waves at Sternface* :)

ALGOREisRICH

Like most, i have an eclectic range of views. However, my faith in democracy and pluralism does lead me to vote for a major party in the House and a minor party in the Senate. Like Harry Evans, former clerk of Senate, I think the Senate is absolutely essential to temper the excesses of powerful parties.

Hope this makes sense, although I would not vote for minor party in house (not yet). I will indeed vote for Abbott in the House, but I hope to offset my concerns with a different vote in the Senate.

as for an environmental tax, I support an ets but think a carbon tax may be more straight forward. I think the urgency about such a tax will be delayed for a few years, and would not bank on Rudd doing it in any case given his track record.

In regards to my previous post, meant to say this all depends on Rudd staying. I cannot stand him.

I am working on the insulation debacle, and I am embarrassed as an Australian and citizen about what happened, including the deaths.

Did anyone watch "Q and A," last night?

Listening to Malcolm Turnbull's answers
on the Panel, made me realize why I would
vote for Kevin Rudd without a moment's
hesitation. Turnbull, who I used to admire,
was simply spouting the usual Liberal spin
of condemnation. But offering nothing in its
place. He's certainly become like Joe Hockey,
another Party clone.

Australians need to remember why they ousted
John Howard, not only from his Electorate,
but from the job of running the country.

They then need to ask themselves - do they now
want to re-elect a Howard clone - along with the
neanderthals on his Front Bench? Can we really
afford to lose our health system, Medicare,
and other social benefits?

Kevin Rudd and his Government had many obstacles
to overcome, from the global financial crisis,
to the blockages in the Senate, to the absolutism
of the Greens, and yet despite all that - there
are policies that are being pursued - and given
the chance, shall be carried out. It's easy to
blame Rudd for things, but don't forget who's
placed every single blockage in his path as he
tried to get things done. And then accuse him
of not achieving anything. Hypocrites!

Does any one seriously want Tony Abbott as the
next Prime Minister? The only people who will
benefit from him and his Party are the ones
whose only interests are profits at our expense.
The multi-national corporations.
Heaven help the rest of us, because Tony Abbott
and his Party certainly won't!

foxy,

I disagree. I found I was in almost complete agreement with Turnbull. For instance, just wait and see what happens to the region once Western troops pull out of Afghanistan. World is indeed a complicated and competitive place, and to expect our leaders to be any different is rather naive, although we do need capable people in politics. I would rather Turnbull than Rudd any day.

Also, leaders of major parties must be somewhat pragmatic in their dealings, or else no legislation may be achieved. Incremental change is always better than nothing.

I just love the way the Libs like to "play the man" all the time. They did it to Hawke, Keating, Beazley and Latham and now it's Rudd's turn.

It's been reported that Keating offered Latham "a file" on Howard, who had quite significant private character flaws of his own, but it was never used.

Despite his other shortcomings but to his credit, Latham refused to play that game and to him family attacks in particular were strictly off-limits.

Not so for the Libs as will become all too apparent in the weeks ahead.

You really have to wonder about the level of political discourse in Australia when you read the spiteful, subjective, personal and prejudicial "bile" that gets an airing in this forum, not just about PM Rudd but about other authors who dare to offer alternative viewpoints.

Perhaps it is sport or tongue-in-cheek for some, but the same (small) group of contributors keep banging away at the same issues over and over and over, apparently in anger and hatred. They are so opinionated they even start to quote themselves as if they are some sort of authority. The worst part about this pathological focus on denigrating personality is that it is absolutist and leaves no room for other diverse perspectives.

Thank goodness the silent majority will determine who rules this nation, and not a bitter and disturbed minority.

Hear Hear Donkey!

Elise>>With the stress on our economy from the GFC and a rise in the age of the average Australian leading to increased need for resources, it is only fair that the profits made from the product of mining the country that is owned by all of us is taxed at a fair rate.

So what is a 'fair rate' in your view.

Surely you don't expect anyone to expose themselves and their shareholders to huge risks, knowing that they can only earn 6% on their investment then pay 40% of what's left in tax.

Remember, one billion dollars, invested @ 6% would return 60 million per year with zero risks, zero employees, zero insurance, zero complience costs. The list goes on.

This is why the currect proposal is wrong and, this is why it is being rejected.

As for Kevin winning, well that wouldn't suprise me, esspecially if TA upsets the welfare recipients. After all, most of them don't give two hoots about the mining tax as they don't pay tax, at least in a posative manner.

It seems that the debat keeps coming down to one issue. Ceiling Batt's. Remove this point and you have a typical first term government that is unsure of itself and is administratively shaky. I know it was a long time ago but Howard was gone at the end of his first term until he got the gun debate happening and the electorate showed its weakness to fear. This was the tactic he employed from that time on and it was a winner.
Now we are all deeply disappointed with the poor administrative performance of this government. There is much complaint that Kevin is too controlling but after all he is the leader. Before Kevin the labor party couldn't have won a chook raffle.
I can only reiterate the base issues that are passed over constantly on this debate.
1. the Ceiling batt's program was a success on the basis that it achieved what it set out to do. short term jobs, sales, supply.
2. OH&S is a State responsibility.
3. The problems were already there and only came to light because of the scheme.
4. Funny the electrical trades warned of a problem that they created with poor fitting standards over generations.

We have weathered a storm called the GFC that has sunk most of the major economies around the world. This was not done by a strong mining sector, this was achieved by a strong Chinese economy and the guts of the government despite all the scare tactics by the opposition over debt and has seen the first steps to rebuilding a run down and out of date country.

A second term with a more sensible senate will see the implementation of an ETS, national health scheme, a fair mining tax to boost infrastructure and national savings, the desperately needed broadband infrastructure and the debt wiped away. These are all feasible. On the other hand Abbott will continue to erode health care, block advances on climate change, sell the countries soul to big business and sprout about his surpluses while the nations infrastructure crumbles. Yep a real step forward

Dear Elise,

Is it, "Hear, Hear, Donkey,"

Or

"Hee Haw, Hee Haw, Donkey?"

Hrrumph!

I am with you Foxy! I used to vote for Liberals for many years, until Howard took the helm. Far too conservative for my liking.

Anyone who says the elections should not be about the leaders of the party, but about the party policies is naive.

I agree that Abbott is a Howard clone, and I will truly despair if such a man were to be PM in this country.
How embarrassing would it be to have such an inarticulate, bumbling conservative as him representing us internationally?

I would go back to voting for Liberals if Julia Gillard took the helm though. She is a woman after all, and surely a change is good :)

I suppose it is possible that Ozies could be stupid enough to re-elect this idiot Rudd again, it would be a pity though. Most Ozies may be a bit slow, when it comes to getting rid of a dill, but they don't deserve the total wreck more of Rudd will leave.

The most dangerous leader you can get is a fool who thinks he is the most brilliant man to have walked the earth. That's what we have now.

The ones to suffer most, if the idiot is re-electedm will be the rusted on labor lot, like many here. Another term of Rudd will have done so much damage to brand Labor, that they will be in the wilderness so long, they may even set a new record.

How everyone can not see this bloke for the egotistical twit he is, who despises most of his party is beyond me. Labor seems to be able to pick some really horrible people to lead them, but this one takes the cake.

rehctub>> "Surely you don't expect anyone to expose themselves and their shareholders to huge risks, knowing that they can only earn 6% on their investment then pay 40% of what's left in tax."

I am a full time worker and I pay 30% plus 4.5% to pay back my HECS, and I pay tax on all of my living costs, none of them are tax deductible. In business, any items quoted for purchase are quoted ex GST, because they claim the GST back on tax. They don't pay tax on anything they buy, so 40% on profit sounds about right. I would expect that business would be on at least a comparable rate to the average income earner, wouldn't you?

Also – when did shareholders become the be-all and end-all? We are judged on how we treat the weakest among us, not the rich– I think I’d be able to handle a bit more tax if I had the money to pour into shares!

To the rest of you>> this is a forum to express opinions, I find it very sad that personal attacks are being made against the intelligence of anyone with a differing opinion to your own. In my opinion, only the ignorant don't respect another's right to express their own values and beliefs.

Dear Elise,

We need to lighten up when it comes to
politics. We need to be able to tell
the difference when things are being
expressed "tongue-in-cheek, by posters
who can't see themselves voting for a
Party that believes in no taxation for
the rich.(Tony Abbott & Co).

Besides, its best to remember that
the law of obfuscation or
"that wasn't what I said," applies to
all politicians.

All political statements whether by
government or opposition, must be worded
so that the opposite meaning can be extracted
from them. The hidden agenda of such a simple
statement as "we shall abolish poverty," reads
as follows :

"We shall abolish poverty sometime in the future,
subject to the state of the economy, if the Senate
lets us, if we haven't got more important things
to do, if it suits the international bankers
and if there is no more important measure necessary
to win the next election."

Dear Suze,

I'm happy that we agree on Tony Abbott.
If you want to know more about the man,
google Malcolm Turnbull's blog - and see
what Abbott had to say about the Emissions
Trading Scheme - and other important
decisions he wasn't capable of making.

To those critical of this first term Labor government I would like to pose the following questions:-

If 12 years of Howard/Liberal leadership was responsible for Australia's economic success and the resources boom at that time had nothing to do with this success, but rather was because of Liberal economic skills, then when Labor took office amid the most catastrophic global meltdown since the Great Depression, why do you attribute Oz's immunity from recession/depression to the resources sector and suggest it has nothing to do with Labor's ability?

Do you seriously believe that a Liberal government would have stimulated the economy so succesfully? If so in what areas would they have done so?

Perhaps those still employed might like to ponder these questions. Apologies that Question 1 is somewhat verbose but it needs some context!

What you fools dont seem to understand is that it simply does not matter who wins the elections. No society in the world offers any legitimate democracy.

For more information, visit www.Truthmedia.8k.com and find the democracy lecture.

It could be party time tomorrow. I am hoping Gillard wins the ballot.

I can't believe it!
Have just heard about the leadership challenge for the Prime Minister tomorrow morning!

Go Julia Gillard.
Our first female Prime Minister, I hope!

Kevin Rudd reminds me irresistably of the story of the Emperor's new clothes. the only suprise is that it has taken so long for the voters to wake up to what a phony he is.

His only talent is to look the part and make the right noises to get elected.

Those who say "he saved us from the recession" need a reality check. The G.F.C. is a long way from over. America is still wallowing, Europe is lurching from crisis to crisis and without their demand for finished goods Chinese demand for our raw materials can only slow. Rudd squandered the surplus (left to him by the much-maligned Howard Government) to buy a short-term fix which kept the retail sector alive but that is all it achieved. When, not if, the next wave of recession hits what will be left to fight it with?

I have little time for Tony Abbott but could not bring myself to vote for Rudd or whoever may replace him tomorrow.

We do so enjoy public executions

In the US they political parties have animal mascots

the Elephant for the Republicans and the Donkey for the Democrats

I think the Australian Labor party should honour today and adopt an appropriate mascot

a headless chook

- of course the Liberal / national coalition could get into the spirit and be

Crowing

Well, not now he wont, & good riddance to the dill. Yes minister is alive, & well, & playing at a labor party near you.

Julia may not be much better, but at least she won't be quite so arrogant. She may even talk to some sounder heads, & make some sensible decisions. Fat chance I suppose, but one can hope.

Now, if only the yanks could dredge up the good sense, & the courage to get rid of the dill they were silly enough to elect.

Great posts, Foxy