I would slightly disagree with the author in one area.

Gillard should have be moved out some time ago, but has been retained to present a female face to the electorate. That may pay off for the Labor party, with Gillard attracting the female vote based solely in gender lines.

For example: -
“The female worm was noticeably more positive throughout the debate, although there were only a few times when the pair differed in overall trajectory.”

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/election2010/7934802/worm-picks-gillard-as-debate-winner

As a minister, she was disastrous.

As Minister for Education, she helped implement the Myschool website, which will help to create some accountability into education.

She then oversaw the massive expenditure of money for computers into schools. This will cost an estimated $11 billion, with about 100% of that money going to foreign companies through the importation of hardware and software.

There was also nothing put into place to test whether or not these computers actually do improve student performance.

As a minister, Gillard would have to be the most costly and ineffective minister Australia has had for many years.

However, she is likely to become Prime Minister, based mostly on gender, and not on performance.

More dreary hyperbole. Though it is touching to note Jensen's concern for the fate of the the Labor Party in the 2004 Election.

Dr Joseph Steiglitz put it well on the 7:30 Report last night: unemployment, taxes forgone, businesses gone to the wall, etc would have been a much higher price to pay than what has resulted from the Stimulus Programme: AUSTRALIA'S ECONOMY IS THE ENVY OF THE WORLD.

The Insulation Programme has resulted in regulation of a previously unregulated industry (though I still believe that the businesses which rorted and wrongly implemented the programme ought answer for their misdeeds in court) and the BER recorded complaints in less than 1% of projects - and of these very few complaints have been found to be substantial).

I know we can't expect too much, but it would be nice if Liberal mouthpieces had a peep at the facts every now and then.

Our economy might be the envy of the world, but only because we started the GFC with a government balance sheet in credit. Now we have an economy that is in debt because so much of the stimulus was wasted on consumption rather than on production, with little benefit except for those that rorted the system. It may have preserved a small amount of employment, but it only mortgaged the future. Not only does the principle loan now have to be paid back, but the interest as well, by us the tax payers.
We live beyond our means, then we have to suffer pay-back time. It's a crazy notion to borrow more money to get out of debt as the world is beginning to discover.

Of course a balance has to be created here but conservative governments always try to create wealth while socialist governments tend to distribute it.

Where is the muckraking article on Tony Abbotts car crash of a ministerial career in Howards government?
Or is OLO showing its true colours as a mouthpiece for the right in a time of electioneering?

What you say in this article is correct. If there is credit due, it is to Rudd and his initiative in providing a buffer against the global economic crisis and as you say, Joseph Steiglitz supports that viewpoint.

If I was a Labor person, I would encourage Kevin Rudd to tell what really happened. Cabinet secrecy, phooey.

We already have the doubts over Gillard’s lack of support for both pensions and the maternity allowance and I have no doubt this is true, Pensioners and mothers should be aware that as Prime Minister she is unlikely to treat such matters differently than she has in the past. She appears to have an inability to see things from other than a single woman’s viewpoint.

So Gillard is a washout, for more reasons that those mentioned today.
However, Dennis, if you as an obvious Liberal supporter, can honestly look at Abbott and see him sauntering across an International stage in some distant location representing Australia and not cringe at the thought , then you are past saving. There never has been a more feckless candidate for PM, yes, including Billy McMahon. What we have in fact is an election that should be scrapped, now. The parties should be forced to go back to the drawing board and find candidates across the board that are intelligent (not like Arbib) , have some appeal (not like Robb), know what they are talking about, (not like Abbott) and are honest and compassionate (not like Gillard; ask her for an opinion on Palestine). Then there is Barnaby Joyce (save us from him), Pyne (an arrogant puppy), and the rightwing Laborites with their skeletons in the cupboard.

They say the electors get the politicians they deserve. What have we done to deserve this motley collection of misfits, both sides of the fence . Back to the 1930’s again.

Don’t write off Rudd and Turnbull. At least with them you have men who have credibility, strength and appeal and you could accept their presence in representing Australia in an international environment and not throw up.

Where is the muckraking article on Tony Abbotts car crash of a ministerial career in Howards government?
Or is OLO showing its true colours as a mouthpiece for the right in a time of electioneering?
Mikk,
You're an insult to your own intelligence with remarks like that.