Thank you, Kevin! On the top of all the improvements you have made in this country, it seems that we shall also remember you as the last democratically elected Prime Minister.
With this bloody execution of the choice of the nation, personally, I fell robed of my civil rights and assurance in the future. Should we in future vote for party, not for the person? There is no guarantee now that the person you voted for would continue to be on the position.
Such erosion of the democratic future!
I should also add that after ‘killing’ lawfully elected Prime Minister, labor might not be governing party in a few months. They also ‘killed’ the great leader who has managed to finally bring the party from opposition.
What was this rotation for? Deputy Prime Minister could use her great negotiation skills on her position for her Party and for Her Job as a Deputy. That would be seen that new Prime Minister has fought for the job (even for couple of months) just because she could not have it through next federal elections and as so - never.
Thank you, Kevin! You have respected nation opinion when come to be Prime Minister.

Rudd made two fundamentally terrible mistakes. On all the talkback radio that I've been listening to lately, only one of these has been mentioned, and then only fleetingly, with the other one seemingly escaping everyone's attention.

The one that I heard mentioned was the weakening of Australia's border protection policy. This was an insane thing for Rudd to do. The issue of asylum seekers, people-smuggling and mandatory detention had been solved. It was bleedingly obvious what would happen if Howard's policy was weakened.

If Rudd had wanted to improve Australia's humanitarian input and record on refugees, then he could have significantly increased the financial assistance for refugees through UN programs and boosted our national intake. The approach he took just boggles my mind.

Secondly, and much more significantly, Rudd greatly boosted our immigration rate as soon as he got into office, to record high levels, without any mandate or even a mention in the election campaign.

There should have been enormous outrage over this, big enough to see him forced to reverse the policy or get booted out after no more than three months in office.

The last thing we need in this country is massive population growth, that will both increase problems in our already badly growth-stressed capital cities, cause smaller centres to suffer similar problems, cause new centres to be developed, and in general just completely blow out any chance of us living in balance with our resource base and environment.

Rudd's 'Big Australia' was an abomination.

I'm glad to see the back of him. But it is most unfortunate that his biggest mistakes are not recognised as such, and the same old policies will continue under Gillard.

People whooping about the ‘first woman Prime Minister’ might very well be celebrating prematurely, as they did with the totally disgraced and discarded Kevin Rudd. All that has happened is that a male monkey has been replaced with a female monkey. After all, Gillard was Deputy Prime Minister, seen most nights on TV defending EVERYTHING Rudd did. She is responsibly for the BER fiasco, in her own right, and she is firmly to the Left of everything. She, and all of the others, including Wayne Swan, now, amazingly, the Deputy PM, who plotted against Rudd, sat back and did not say boo as Rudd went his arrogant, merry way isolating everyone and ruining everything, as the Australian Labor Party now belatedly admits.

Gillard is not to be trusted. The problem is, that she will have time to call an election while still in a honeymoon period and, thanks to all the girls who think that they have certain rights just because they are girls, she has a fair chance of rescuing her government – even getting it re-elected.

The girlie brigade needs to realise that the only thing that their gender can do, simply because of their gender, is re-produce. And, how many of them are old enough to remember the harridan, Margaret Thatcher: super-feminine down to pearls, twin-sets and perms. Even to us conservatives, Maggie was the most vicious, inhumane old trout since Bodieaca.

It’s doubtful that sexist Australian females would go for a Thatcher, but they don’t seem to realise that females, just like males, should not be lauded simply by dint of gender.

Of course, the plotters in the ALP are using this feminine weakness by elevating Gillard, in line with the growing feminisation and leftism of society. They are using the blind it’s-about-time-women-took-over sentiment rife in Western society.

Now the self-styled “expert” consultant, Joanne Jacobs (did she go to ‘expert school’?) spent only a paragraph on Julia- adoration, but there’s little to say about Kevin Rudd, except, was there another Kevin Rudd we didn’t know?

Ludwig, "Secondly, and much more significantly, Rudd greatly boosted our immigration rate as soon as he got into office, to record high levels, without any mandate or even a mention in the election campaign."

I believe you are right, Mr Rudd crashed on regardless without a mandate for his 'Big Australia'. This along with support of diversity for the sake of diversity, contributed significantly to his dramatic slide in popularity.

These issues tie in with Mr Rudd's apparent casualness about border protection.

It is interesting that surveys of political opinion have not asked about immigration policy and overpopulation, however that doesn't mean that voters have forgotten, or will forget as hoped by Abbott as well.

Well, if ever anyone needed proof that you can fool some of the people, all of the time, there it is.

LUGWIG says:

//Rudd greatly boosted our immigration rate as soon as he got into office, to record high levels, without any mandate or even a mention in the election campaign.//

See

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html

and....*drum roll*....now you know WHY he did it!

Anyone who believes "Immigration" is "not" about votes.. new material and pandering to old loyalties (migrant vote?) lives in a very wierd twighlight zone.

It is unfortunate that the Labor Party
did not have the faith of their appointed
leader who in two years has achieved more
than many previous governments in a longer
period of time.

I fully agree with Tatiana. I also feel
cheated! And many of us are totally
disillusioned with the Labor Party.
The current non-elected Prime Minister could have
used her negotiation skills to convince
the Labor Party factions that the programs that have
been scuttled by the opposition, were to be
pursued in the next term of office. And the
issue of the mining tax was being gradually
negotiated with the mining companies as was
demonstrated in the media by comments from
various mining magnates.

Border protection was another issue that
does take time to resolve when dealing with
Asian countries who themselves have a larger
problem, however Kevin Rudd made it quite clear
that this issue will take time to resolve - and
it was an issue that he wasn't going to ignore.

It would seem to most logically thinking people,
that the action taken by the factions of the Labor
Party were undertaken without much thought and in
panic. Relying on a few minor opinion polls (that
change weekly), and thereby robbing most of us of
a duly elected Prime Minister.

Past demonstrations of previous Australian Prime
Ministers who were controlled by the factions
showed the inability to achieve many of their
proposed programmes in the duration of their terms
in office.

The voters should feel cheated at the moment, and many
will turn to either voting for Independents or the Greens
or simply throw away their vote, because it's been
demonstrated that voters choices don't count for very
much, as far as Labor is concerned.

Julia Gillard's explanation for why she undertook her
action is not adequate. That they will continue with
the programmes that were initiated by Kevin Rudd,
and they he was pursuing anyway.
She should explain in greater detail,
why she took the course that she did. The voters deserve
nothing less.

Foxy,

Contractors who have done some consultancy work with the public bureaucracies would recognise in Mr Rudd the sort of personality that is often confronted in the Senior Executive Service (SES) of departments and even more so in semi-autonomous governmental authorities.

Without going into the subject at any depth because it really isn't needed, Mr Rudd was demanding, egocentric and aloof, believing in the rightness of his own opinions and dismissive of all he believed were lacking of his intellect, education and status.

Like the archetypal SES gnome, Mr Rudd delved in the minutiae of the normal daily decisions of those he delegated responsibility to, under-cutting their credibility and confidence. In fact, for thirty plus years the PM's department has developed sections that duplicate the policy areas of ministerial departments and second-guess advice given by those departments. That encourages the Howards and Rudds to go it alone, winging through interviews that should have been directed to the subject ministers. However Rudd didn't have the years of political cunning of Howard and Howard was never a public servant.

Sure Mr Rudd had Australia's interests at heart and he was practised enough to appear humble, but leadership is not about being a one-man band. Senior bureaucrats only get away with it because they work in the iron lung that is the public bureaucracy in Canberra and anyhow, their mistakes are easily buried, along with any unfortunate auditor who might discover them.

The last time Australia suffered an egocentric renegade labor prime minister, it was Malcolm Fraser who stabbed him but that time Whitlam got it head on, in the chest.

This time the ego maniac copped it in the back

Not that I have anything to thank him for

He took a healthy economy and raped it

He squandered peoples taxes in the name of ego

He held pointless talk fests, inviting celebrities by the score and ignored nearly all the recommendations.

He held tax reviews and ignored nearly all the recommendations

He has cherry picked whimsical, jingoistic goals, certain that by the time delivery was anticipated, public attention would have moved on so the failure of the plan was not apparent.... exactly mirroring the Victorian government and all their urban, green wedge and transport plans which end up achieving nothing.

The difference with the Victorian plans and Rudd is, where the Victorian plans achieve nothing, Rudds plans keep sending us backward.

Thank God he has gone before his national health plan was implemented, otherwise a prepaid funeral plan would have been the electorates preferred option

Mind you, he has only been replaced by someone of equal culpability for profligate squandering of resources and opportunity, so I expect no change in governmental competency before the next election.

Joanne Jacobs:>> I want to take a moment to reflect on the thoroughly decent man who was our most recent Prime Minister.
I was very sad to see Kevin Rudd’s speech at his removal from office.<<


JJ, Kevin’s self appreciating departing rhetoric turned my stomach and assaulted my senses. When the egotist started to blubber over his failed career my thoughts recounted his demeanor when addressing the deaths of those young Aussies who were unsupervised and unprotected by his government during the Pink Bats cash grab. Not a waver in his voice as he addressed that issue, nothing but bureaucratic platitudes to the mother of one teen. He is a pathetic human, and you are a pathetically poor judge of character. You are not related to Therese by chance, as you would have to have that sort of vested intest in the issue to discount and disregard the fact that he and his government are failures.

I was truly shocked about what happened to Kevin Rudd. I was a Liberal candidate in the last election and saw first hand how people within in my area and indeed Australia wanted Kevin - not the Labor party to help deliver their dreams and aspirations. It was all taken away last night - without thought or consultation with those who put Labor back into power. Taken away by the same woman who only days ago wanted all of us to believe she was going to stand by the man she told us she believed in.

I think it very naive to believe that Labor would have won the last election on its policies - Labor won because of Kevin07 not anyone else, he was the soul of that election - I saw it first hand. I remind everyone of this because I can't believe that the Australians I met would be proud of a party that treated Kevin in the way they have after only a few bad polls, and after getting his advice from the very people who have now been promoted to Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister. It makes no sense that 70 faceless men and women are able to overturn the votes of millions of Australians who voted in the Kevin07 election, they voted for his policies, his dreams for the country, Labor could never have sold their story without him. I personally do not feel any pride as a woman that another woman has allowed herself to be used by a party in this way to become the first unelected Female prime Minister. Gillard could have said NO she may have only had a few months to wait. It should have been the choice of the Australians who voted him in to vote him out.
I think we have lost far more than we will ever gain by accepting this to be a legitimate act of democracy.
We should be sobered by the fact that this has never happened before to a first term Prime Minister - a man voted for by the people.

The majority of people who voted for the Labor Party and the Leader Kevin Rudd gave him their support so that he could tackle the issue of climate change. The people believed him when he said it was our greatest challenge and gave him unprecedented support to do this. Mr Rudd should have taken the ETS to a double dissolution. Abbot would have been seen as the spoiler washed away and we would have the ETS and Rudd would still be Prime Minister. At the time he was assassinated he was still the most popular of the alternatives and the government was still the preferred option. The factions have won and Gillard is another good Labor female sacrificed.

Neither Rudd nor Gillard were elected PM. They were elected as MPs by the people in their electorates, and elected to lead the ALP by members of that party. The people in Rudd's electorate still have their elected representative, as do the people in Gillard's electorate. People from outside their electorates who think they voted for either Rudd or Gillard need to read their ballot papers more carefully. People who chose their local representatives purely because of who was leading the party at that particular time could be accused of short-sightedness. Is this undemocratic? Hardly. The PM has no executive powers (a la the President of the USA) and, while she can exercise control over her party, one thing we have been reminded of over the past week is that the party can also exercise control over the PM.

Otokonoko, what you say is technically true, but only a fool would argue that the reality isn't that people vote for a Prime Minister, or that parties' campaigns aren't built around a leader.

This was particularly true of the ALP's 'Kevin07' campaign, so it makes it doubly disturbing that the faceless men have so ruthlessly assassinated the leader who dragged them out of the electoral abyss.

I disliked Kevin Rudd and his politics, but I am thoroughly disgusted at the way the ALP, its factions and its new leader have behaved.

While it is true that the PM is not elected, the presidential style of campaigning, the treatment given to leaders by the media and by their own parties and the encouragement to vote for a party leader when casting both lower house and Senate votes deliberately convey a very strong impression that the PM is voted in by the people, at least indirectly.

Although politics is tough and highly competitive it was never the dog eat dog, anything goes that has become apparent since the Whitlam dismissal and certainly during the Howard regime when ministerial accountability became a complete joke.

kw is right to remind us of Kevin Rudd's appeal and tireless work in winning the last election. Julia Gillard has strengths but along with others I doubt that she could ever have led Labor into government. Also like others I very much doubt whether she supported and advised ex-PM Rudd as a loyal deputy should have done. She appears far too ambitious for that and ambition is her Achilles heel.

As it now stands, Gillard is the best person available to lead Labor to the election, but few would be so innocent as to think that she didn't contributed to Rudd's downfall, as suggested by her refusal to answer some of Kerry O'Brien's direct questions on that subject. No-one would see Julia Gillard as a statesman, she has feet of clay - her consuming ambition ensures that.

What will harm Labor and democracy is the obvious interference and boasting of those powerful interests who were never elected but successfully conspired to unseat an elected PM. I do not rule out the long arm of the billionaire miners in that either.

A lot of electors would have lost a lot of faith in Parliament and democratic processes, but they are only 'punters' as the party machines see them, so it doesn't really matter, right?

Mirror Mirror on the wall, who do you see. Just look at yourself.

Sugar coated candy dressed in red? - impossible now- no real spin or vision.

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=5784&page=0

I couldn't go through this again. No amount of make-up will change the so called new face. If this kind of politics is what women of Australia stand for, then I am not a Aussie women. I am no fem-O-crate and nor do I support them.

Didn't Labour abolish Work Choices and wrongfull dismissal? Sacking people based solely on poor performance? [asks Tim] Add your comment SBS

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/yoursayarticle/1286242/Can-Julia-Gillard-take-Labor-to-election-victory#display_comments

'Rudd's leadership of the ALP was an historic point of departure from the ALP of old. For the first time, the ALP became an alternative for all voters regardless of income, or, social status, and cultural background. AWU + FACTIONS = OPPOSITION WILDERNESS (13yrs?) You have traded the new face of New Labour; Kevin Rudd with 25 yrs experience, for Gillard, the face of Old Labour ( Bill Shorten, power broker; 5 minutes experience in fed. politics!) '

But the winner is not Bob Brown , given he is partly - part of it.... and he knows it!

Where are the Australian Democrats?

We need the Democrats
.

Mirror Mirror on the wall, who do you see. Just look at yourself.

Sugar coated candy dressed in red? - impossible now- no real spin or vision.

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=5784&page=0

I couldn't go through this again. No amount of make-up will change the so called new face. If this kind of politics is what women of Australia stand for, then I am not a Aussie women. I am no fem-O-crate and nor do I support them.

Didn't Labour abolish Work Choices and wrongfull dismissal? Sacking people based solely on poor performance? [asks Tim] Add your comment SBS

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/yoursayarticle/1286242/Can-Julia-Gillard-take-Labor-to-election-victory#display_comments

'Rudd's leadership of the ALP was an historic point of departure from the ALP of old. For the first time, the ALP became an alternative for all voters regardless of income, or, social status, and cultural background. AWU + FACTIONS = OPPOSITION WILDERNESS (13yrs?) You have traded the new face of New Labour; Kevin Rudd with 25 yrs experience, for Gillard, the face of Old Labour ( Bill Shorten, power broker; 5 minutes experience in fed. politics!) '

But the winner is not Bob Brown , given he is partly - part of it.... and he knows it!

Where are the Australian Democrats?

We need the Democrats

http://www.miacat.com/
.
.

I agree, Clownfish, that people do vote along those lines. And I also agree that the parties generally campaign around the personality cult of their leaders. But, at the end of the day, an informed person is better off voting for a candidate who will represent his/her electorate at the federal level. I would much rather have a federal MP who will look after the seat of Herbert than one whose leader is charismatic. This is what representative government is about, and why we have electorates in the first place. In theory, the member for Herbert will advocate for our region and make decisions that are good for us when Parliament is sitting. Voting based on who will be PM takes away from that level of representation. Instead of ensuring that our voices are heard, we help someone get into government who is unlikely ever to visit our region, and even less likely to think about us when making decisions. No wonder we think our pollies are out of touch!

As for the Kevin07 campaign, I would say that Rudd himself is culpable for the feelings of hurt and betrayal that have arisen out of these events. To market himself rather than his party and its members gives the false assurance that he will be there in the long run. As Gorton, Hawke and now Rudd have discovered (and surely knew all along), that assurance is impossible to give with any certainty.

I agree that one should vote for a good local representative - all politics is local, after all. For instance, as a formerly rusted-on Labor voter, it pained me that the Liberal incumbent at the 07 election was a decent gent who really worked hard for his constituents, while his Labor opponent was frankly a dill who got shoved into a difficult seat to meet gender quotas. Which made it a crying shame that she squeaked in solely on Green preferences.

To date, her greatest achievement seems to have been being able to nod *and* frown whenever her mug peeked over Rudd's shoulder during Question Time.

In *theory*, yes, a member should represent their constituents. In *reality*, and this is doubly so for Labor members who are rigidly locked into party solidarity, most of them follow the leader.

I wouldn't actually blame Rudd himself for the 'Kevin07' nonsense - there would have been an army of pollsters, marketers and campaign managers behind that one. But I do agree that Australian voters have the right to be hurt and betrayed that their choice has been so ruthlessly abrogated by the faceless men.

Another nudge left. When will you wake up Australia. After all your freedom and peace are gone. Mix that mud,krac, stomp that hay, krac, make those bricks, krac.

Missing The Obvious

by Rich Deem

Lone Ranger and Tonto

The Lone Ranger and Tonto are camping in the desert,
set up their tent, and are sleeping. Some hours later,
The Lone Ranger wakes his faithful friend.
"Tonto look up,and tell me what you see."
Tonto replies " Me see millions of stars."
"What does that tell you?" asks the Lone Ranger.
Tonto ponders for a minute.
"Astronomically speaking, it tells me that there are
millions of galaxies and potentially billions of planets.
Astrologically, it tells me Saturn is in Leo.
Time wise, it appears to be about approximately a quarter
past three.
Theologically, it's evident the Lord is all powerful,
and we are small and insignificant.
Meteorologically, we will have a beautiful day tomorrow.
What it tell you Kemo Sabi?"
The Lone Ranger is silent for a moment, then speaks
" Tonto, you dumb hoss, someone has stolen our tent."

Thank you Joanne for your post. I feel the same way in that I want to thank Kevin Rudd for his service as Prime Minister. Overall, I think he has done a great job and he gave everything he had in the service of our country.

Well done Mr. Rudd! As someone who voted for you as PM, I am sorry to see you no longer as PM.

I think Rudd's downfall was brought about by two major factors - the 'presidential' style of his ascension to the ALP leadership and thence to winning the 2007 election, and his about-face on climate change.

His government's abandonment of its commitment to implement measures to reduce greenhouse emissions made a lie of Rudd's hyperbolic 'greatest moral issue of our time' claim, and it was from that point that his personal popularity in the polls began its freefall. It's ironic that it was precisely his 'presidential' posturing that meant he personally embodied the betrayal that those who voted for him felt at his refusal to negotiate on the CPRS and its ultimate shelving.

I've commented elsewhere about the shallowness of personality politics in Australia, and I think we've just seen where 'presidentialism' leads.

gdog: >>The majority of people who voted for the Labor Party and the Leader Kevin Rudd gave him their support so that he could tackle the issue of climate change.<<

Climate change is certainly a political issue, but not a core voter issue in the suburbs, except for those who have a penchant for positive causes and they tend to reside closer to the CBD.

Kevie only has himself to blame for this one. for he clean forgot
the fundamantals of politics.

As they say when it comes to taxation, if you are going to try
and pluck the goose, do it with minimal hissing from the goose
and avoid it biting you. Kevie totally misjudged the mining tax
situation and its bitten him in his arse.

For of course it was ALP MPs who overwhelmingly went against him
in the end, the numbers stacked so against him, that he did not
even test the vote.

Too many of those MPs come from marginal seats in Qld and WA, they
knew that the mining tax would cost them their seat at the next
election. So they acted out of self interest to preserve their
skin, as people do. Rudd had stupidly painted himself into a
corner on this one and acted more like a dictator then a leader
of a democratic party. Rather then consulting with leaders of
the mining industry and business community, he tried to lecture
them.

Power does go to peoples head sometimes, such as this case.

So he really did get what he deserved, for he had lost touch
with the real world out there.

Ok, so some bleating hearts will shed some tears, but politics
is more realistic then that.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10611#174795

Tatiana, agreed, about the betrayal, but you're wrong on one thing.

The Red/green/getup/labour coalition, achieved nothing, hence the fall, in the polls.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10611#174807

Ludwig, correct, about the mistakes & it being unannounced, official party policy, implemented, by all of them, including Gillard.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10611#174809

Leigh, correct, talk to EX Labour voters, top of their hate list is Fe"Man"Nazism.

If they think dropping a right/male leader for a Loony, Left, barren, unmarried woman, is saving them, they are in for a shock.

Many of the Ex Red/green/getup/labour coalition voters i talk to will be voting http://www.australiafirstparty.com.au/cms/ or http://www.dlp.org.au/ & preferencing the conservatives.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10611#174812

Cornflower, everybody has forgotten about Pauline Hanson. Please correct me if i am wrong, but she got 49%, 1st preference votes.

The only racists in OZ are the Loony, Left, who just hate white people.

Whatever you do, don't bring back the "White Australia" policy. We will then be deluged in educated, working & middle class whites, with trade & professional Qualifications.

Fleeing their "Multicultural" Nirvana's in North America, Britain, Europe, South Africa & New Zealand. Not just thousands either, Millions of them will be lining up to come to a safe place, free of ethnic turmoil.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10611#174820

ALGOREisRICH, spot on again, you have your finger on a lot of pulses mate, but i disagree about it being, about votes. You were correct earlier with this one on other threads.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8630135369495797236#

"Multiculturalism" is just another branch of "Political Correctness" & these "Religious Fundies" like "C J Morgan" etc, have been preaching this rubbish for so long now. They really have succeeded in brainwashing themselves completely. They genuinely believe it. So Sad.

Gillard for example is still waving the ETS, Economic, Treason, Scam flag. Suggesting she can convince us that Quadrupling, Energy costs. So that "Wall Street" can go back to business as usual with "Carbon Default Swaps" is a good idea?

Madness, that will wipe the Red/green/getup/labour coalition, off the face of the Earth shortly.

I propose giving the "Maoists" what they want, a real "Cultural Revolution". Starting with the Loony, Left, Humanities Academics.

I disagree, Yabby (surprise!). The RSPT was just the straw that broke the camel's back. While I personally support the tax, it was strategically suicidal for Rudd personally when the polls were already going south after the CPRS backdown. Some may recall that I predicted Rudd's imminent demise as PM some weeks ago here at OLO.

Formersnag: << I propose giving the "Maoists" what they want, a real "Cultural Revolution". Starting with the Loony, Left, Humanities Academics. >>

You're surreal, mate. Keep 'em coming :)

Agree Severin - Yabby just doesn't get it. ;)

The tax is not the problem it was how it was presented and leaving little room for discussion and negotiation. Rudd's style of tough talk put himself in a non-compromising position making it impossible for any future negotiations that would not be seen as another backdown after the ETS, cancellation of the insulation and green loan scheme etc.

Many people support the tax even if it means some compromise on the final figure or how it is linked in with corporate taxes.

There was much that came before the tax including failures in delivering the stimulus package and the Education Revolution. Rudd's own personal leadership style and failure to be inclusive of his team. Turnbull suffered the same fate for the same reason it was not just division over the ETS.

Rudd was the master of his own undoing despite the fact that I believe he really did care about many policies and one cannot deny his strong work ethic (perhaps too strong). He did not get the approach right in delivering on his promises and goals.

Whoopsie...I meant to say Agree CJ (not Severin). :)

The Guardian newspaper (uk) carried an article that was quite positive about the ruthlessness of Australian Labor in paying attention to what the electorate wanted.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jun/24/australia-labor-julia-gillard

Pelican

That's OK - I concur with everything you have said. Kevin has great integrity, however that is not enough to be a leader. One must be able to communicate and delegate to one's team, in this respect Rudd became a liability. The failure to collaborate was fatal.

Looking forward to seeing more negotiation and a sustainable future for Australia.

The last thing I want in a PM is a "leader".

I know who I am, what I want, & where I want to go, I do not need some egotistical twit deciding for me. I think most Ozies are the same.

I am prepared to bend my interests to that of the majority, but I am not interested in being dictated to by some twit who thinks he knows it all.

Twit Rudd is gone because he tried to be a dictator. He was too stupidly egotistical to even look where we, the people, want to go. Labor could see we would not take any more of this "leadership".

Let's hope our parties have seen this fact, & apply the message for all time.

What we need is a good manager for PM, the more boring the better.

Unfortunately, I don't think we have found one yet. To get one we may have to become politically incorrect, & ban all lawyers from cabinet positions, & linguists from parliment house completely, other than as interpreters.

Joanne as a CONSTITUTIONALIST I have a considerable different view because Kevin Rudd was one who during the 2007 election promoted himself as a “Federalist” but ongoing did everything as a centralist and playing the dictator by ignoring the true meaning and application of the constitution. For sure so did John Howard and is Julia Gillard doing likewise but Kevin was claiming to be a federalist. We all must abide the rule of law and the wasting of billions of dollars and unconstitutionally was obviously not an issue with Kevin as he placed himself above the constitution and as such he had to go. The proposed ETS, the proposed SUPER TAX and other issues are actually unconstitutional and if just Kevin had considered this he could have avoided his own downfall. The same with border protection he could have considered a more humane way to deal with it by sending uninvited refugees back to refugee camps and let those who spend years in refugee camps and patiently waiting their turn in to Australia. Then people smugglers would be out of a job and the real refugees are looked after and the so called “economical refugees” are send back. And, Julia Gillard despite her claims seems to be doing another Kevin Rudd and if she too ignores constitutional limitations then she too has to go.