As the author says:

Julia, we’re just not that into you. He, she, it, they, are just not that into you. What part of ‘not’ don’t you understand? We don’t need any more opinion polls. We weren’t that keen on you in the first place, otherwise you would have won a majority in the last federal election.

Therefore it follows that this is also true:

Tony, we’re just not that into you. He, she, it, they, are just not that into you. What part of ‘not’ don’t you understand? We don’t need any more opinion polls. We weren’t that keen on you in the first place, otherwise you would have won a majority in the last federal election.

Ho hum. Here we go again.

Look, I have been disappointed with Ms Gillard's stint as Prime Minister, too. But at least I am realistic enough to accept that drinking from a poisoned chalice is likely to be injurious to one's health. And that if there are enough people holding that chalice to your lips, the chances are that every so often you will be forced to take a sip.

The problem occurred at election time. Anyone who thinks that Mr Abbott would have had any more success managing a coalition of independent nobodies with aspirations only for themselves and the seventeen people in their electorate to whom they owe favours, has political rocks in their heads.

The only answer is to accept that in Australia, a government that depends upon the random whims of a couple of country hicks is no government at all. Rather than constantly demonizing the holder of the ticking time bomb, we should send ourselves back to the polls, quick sharp. And if that results in a Liberal government, so be it, we will no doubt get what we deserve.

But this process of targetted destruction of one individual is having an appalling effect on the political structure of this country - which was nothing to get excited about before. The institution is already notorious for the expediency and self-interest of its membership, and any residual respect for its role is being eroded daily. We should consciously move the debate away from personalities, and concentrate on the bigger picture.

Yeah, I know. Fat chance of that. We prefer to hit people when they're down, don't we. It's so much easier to write articles like this, for one thing. No thought or reflection required.

But Rudd or Abbott would be worse.

24/7 Kevin ignored most of his political colleagues and bullied public servants with 4am phone calls. Does anyone think Rudd would bother to consult the Greens and Independents - in this hung Parliament?

Meanwhile Abbott is a political pole apart from the Greens and Independents. Abbott exhibited intolerant rightwing tendencies when he was a henchman of the Howard Government.

Go on, just admit it Tess, you don't really like Julia do you.

This rant of an article is unfair and if the author must give vent to her rabid denunciations I'd rather she didn't speak collectively by using the term "we're".
I also have grown increasingly disenchanted with Gillard during her ascension, but that's because she does not espouse Labor values; but then neither did Rudd. There was an interesting talk on Radio National this morning wherein they discussed the fact that political machinations, misdeeds and assassinations have been par for the course in Australian politics forever, and that no one bats an eyelid when it's a man wielding the knife, so why should Gillard be demonised for her ostensible betrayal? As if any member of the party would have rejected the overtures of the backroom boys, or couldn't have easily rationalised and been persuaded that it was all for the good of the party.
I remember being nauseated by Rudd and his incongruous conservatism and blossoming megalomania and capitulation to popular fickleness after he'd received a mandate. I rejoiced when a female Prime Minister was appointed at last, though I also rued the circumstances on her behalf. In hindsight I'm sure she'd agree she'd have been better off letting Rudd lead the party to ruin and to have taken the leadership with a clean slate. And because she's had to lead the party and amend policy from a position of perpetual weakness, compromising all the way while her handlers fret and fuss over her equally perpetual makeover, she's deemed incompetent and worse in this vile article from someone who owes her at least a modicum of comradeship. Gillard may hobble away on one shoe, but I hope the author does herself an injury on her stilettos.
Gillard might have made a great Prime Minister under more favourable circumstances--though her espoused ideology needs a rethink--but she's paying the price for trying to right a party in disarray.
Considering the enormous pressure she's under, I think she's acquitting herself with great forebearance and dignity--especially as compared with the boganesque tirade on show here.

Sorry Julia is not going anywhere, she has a nation to run,

... into the ground.

Everyone is looking at Gillard or Abbott as though they are the key things that matter.

The life values of a society are lived out in their politicians. Gillard and Abbott are products of those who believe maximising personal benefit defines life. Those around them attempt to be puppeteers controlling them, society acts as though they will solve society’s problems without them having to sweat, to quote one rich Australian ‘government is there to do things for me not to me’.

Both Gillard and Abbott could be removed; but nothing will change because the root malaise is not recognised or dealt with. A society based on individuals maximising personal benefit is not a society. Gillard and Abbott are not the main argument.

Be careful what you wish for Tess.
Give me a hundred Julias rather than one (shudder!) Tony ...

Bring back Malcolm Turnbull please, coz all is forgiven :)

What is it that Julia Gillard is doing so wrong? Handed a poisoned chalice in the first place, she has beaten the odds by staying in power in spite of constant and vitriolic criticisms. Her very real achievements, such as keeping the Government on track since 2010, hampered by a tiny and treacherous majority, are derided. Alone she carries the odium for the brutal deposition of Rudd, when it seems to me - a disinterested observer -that far from being instrumental in that unsavoury episode, she was, like him, a victim of the faceless men who wanted someone to rescue them from the mess they had made. In the best traditions of chaotic Governments when they know they have lost the plot they handed the leadership to a woman, in this case to a woman who was clearly not prepared for it, I say she was not prepared because from what I have seen of Julia if she thought she was in the running for the job she would have prepared for it. They would never have handed the job to a woman in the first place had there been a man available - and prepared- to do the dirty work. I say she was unprepared because I remember her emphatic protestations of loyalty to Kevin Rudd and I remember her colourful and apparently sincere statement (on 17 May 2010 The Age)"There's more chance of me becoming the full-forward for the Dogs (Western Bulldogs AFL team) than there is any chance of a change in the Labor party."

Not a trace of evidence has ever been shown though that Rudd was this supposed tyrant - I suspect the truth is more that he was smarter than the toads who gave us Gillard.

Let's get one thing very clear from the outset - Gillard is racist to the core, I have attended meetings and had talks with her about refugees and the Iraq war that curdled my blood with her total disinterest in anyone not white and "good migrants' like her parents and her.

No PM ever has told refugees they have to stay home and die, not even Howard, yet this one told Sri Lankans to do just that and we now pay more than ever for refugee jails here, in Indonesia and Malaysia than we ever did.

I have never liked her and never will.

But having had a drink with Kevin and listened to and talked to him he is highly intelligent and just plain decent no matter how much the right wing toads in the ALP claim otherwise.

579, thank god for that if she managed to get a job running a school tuck shop, we'll all be doomed.

Suse I'm afraid your taste is all in the wrong place.

When did you first discover this attraction to slimy con men, that you display?

Marilyn Because you don't like her doesn't count, you should take into account our economy to form your opinions.
Didn't bishop get a belting today.
Hasbeen, We are doing fine, Turnbull would be the better option for the coalition, at least the man can talk. Tony is an embarrassment. The same negativity as last year. Nothing to contribute. Abbott accused Julia of dropping poker machine regulations. [ he must be in favor ]
New poker machine regulations be ready by the mid year

If Labor were to replace Gillard with Rudd I really think that would be the end of the line, with Rudd losing a vote of confidence.

Put another way, Rudd claims that if he returns he will be doing a Napoleon.

If Rudd does a Napoleon, Abbott will do a Duke of Wellington.

How much longer do we have to endure this sleazy, accident-prone government? What is the moral position of a government that relies on the support of Slipper and Thomson?

With the world about to collapse into another major depression, we need a good, stable government that can steer us through the turbulent waters ahead.

Of course if Abbott becomes Prime Minister, he would need to do something about the Senate. I would expect a double dissolution on stopping the boats.

Interesting analogy, plerdsus.

>>If Rudd does a Napoleon, Abbott will do a Duke of Wellington<<

In that scenario, who will take the part of General Bülow and his Prussians?

Not Bob Brown and the Greens, surely...?

Hasbeen "Suse I'm afraid your taste is all in the wrong place.
When did you first discover this attraction to slimy con men, that you display?"

Is that so?
If that was the case, then I would be also be attracted to some posters on this site :)

Which slimy con-man politician are you attracted to then, Hasbeen?

Marilyn Shepherd:
"Let's get one thing very clear from the outset - Gillard is racist to the core, I have attended meetings and had talks with her about refugees and the Iraq war that curdled my blood with her total disinterest in anyone not white and "good migrants' like her parents and her".

That's rather a startling accusation to level against the Prime Minister and I would hope based on more than your impressions. Another matter they talked about on RN this morning was the prevalence of low-brow, vicious and libilous commentary that gets aired in social media. Not sure where you stand there but I am interested in the phrase "racist to the core", since we are all racist, xenophobic or prejudiced to some degree beneath the political correctness that tends to modify our utterences--at least those of us who are constrained by civil convention. In my experience it's usually the men who are guilty of transgressions against decorum--indeed it's an Australian institution for the blokes--yet here we are with a hastily thrown-off invective, written by a women for a woman, and another woman throwing fuel on the pyre. For shame, ladies!
More incongruous for me than all is I find myself defending a politician I would much rather criticise--for her policies and lack of vision--than make excuses for apparent intolerance, or at least innuendo.
You do the cause against hardcore racism no good in hurtling the charge against anything the least bit suggestive, and I'd recommend you make sure you have some solid evidence before you name the subjects of your calumnies.
Unfortunately Gillard ministers to a largely intolerant electorate and is bound to be motivated as much by popular opinion as her own ostensible prejudices.
Though granted I'm tired of her romantic tale of her rags to riches, hardworking immigrant roots.

Interesting times we live in.
In a recent article in The Age - the following
caught my eye:

"Despite the media's relentless speculation about
the PM's leadership and while holding a minority
government together during a period of major
reform the PM continues to be more popular than
her opponent."

Therefore perhaps the question that we should be
asking is "How much longer will the Coalition put
up with consistently unpopular key people such
as Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey when far more
popular and competent people like Malcolm Turnbull
are binding their time in the wings?"

According to The Age: "The unpopularity of Tony Abbott
and Co., will probably make the Coalition unelectable
at the next election."

Therefore - we should follow The Age newspaper - and ask:

"When will journalists pick up on this story and apply
some heat where it belongs?"

I don't really buy the argument about stabbing Prime Minister Rudd in the back...after all, doesn't everyone do it? Didn't Howard at some stage do a similar thing, as well as Keating, as well as Hawk? It's called politics.

I do buy your argument "You are an embarrassment" though. It's called reality.

I love that claim of the conservatives that they are the "better economic managers" than the other mob. There methodology when it comes to economics is to go to war with some poor bedeviled third world country on the pretext that the little blighters running the show there are about to destroy our American way of life here in the capitalist west. The conservatives then proceed to spend billions with their mates the multinationals buying the perfect consumer product, military hardware, bombs etc. In their quest to protect our American way of life the conservatives then proceed to bomb the crap out of the enemy, killing millions, whilst creating a booming economy at home with full employment and Macca's four times a week.
That is the problem at the moment in the capitalist west, we don't have a decent war going. What are those Kiwi's across the Tasman up to? Should we not brand the All Blacks rugby team as a weapon of mass destruction. Ask Donnie Rumsfeld, I'm sure he'll tell you they are.

I trust Paul1405 understands that our American cousins would be mightily displeased to have their political lifestyle compared to ours

Squeers, it is not based on my impressions, it is based entirely on conversations in person with the stupid woman.

And hearing her giggling like a silly girl with Jeremy Cordeaux, Adelaide former premiere racist, what a great lark it would be to shove boats out to sea.

Just imagine if a constituent came to her and said "my white boyfriend has a death sentence because he is gay" - Gillard would ring the president of the country to demand he be released.

Then think about this truth: when confronted with a young lawyer asking for her to intervene in the case of a young Iranian homosexual who had a sentence of death by stoning issued by the mullahs she said "if Mr Ruddock says he is not a refugee he can go home'.

Stoning to death did not count.

We have no authority over the laws of another country, lets just think how lucky we are to be living here. This country with a progressive economy, and security to be admired by the rest of the world.

Marilyn please stop exposing this information about Julia.

You will increase her popularity immensely, & may even get her elected.

Have you ever fallen off your stilletos Squeers?

579 you're right, Julia is going nowhere.

You can all say what you like about Abbott but no-one can deny he has been something Julia has never been ... an extremely effective leader of the opposition and that is a great indication of how he'll go as PM.

Marilyn have you ever talked to Tony Abbott or the faceless ALP men?

I love the way all you lefties love Malcolm ... just goes to show the libs have got it right.

Hasbeen,
that is darkly funny and probably true! I've heard the comments many times from people who appear decent that the boats should be turned around or sunk even.

Marilyn Shepherd,
Well I admire your courage in presenting such first-hand evidence. The thing is that indifference and even comments such as those just mentioned are often mouthed by people who are only garden variety racists--a shallow "I'm alright" set incapable of empathy or compassion--though admittedly it's not much of a stretch from that to popular support for genocide.
Still, we all say things off the record or darkly comic and not necessarily with conviction.
I'm with you however in condemning such callous indifference and xenophobia, so prevalent in Australia.

I guess I'll have to vote Green again though as I don't like Rudd either.

and to be consistant and retain a shred of cred you'll preference the liberals ...

Jeez what am I thinking?

Nah,keep Juliar and Kevin so they can run this nation into abject poverty.Only then will the moronic masses awaken.Then we will have real change with a new party that is free of corporate dominance.

The coalition is the only party that is in bed with the corporations.
That is what Liberal stand for. We have a middle of the road govt; that can see both sides of what needs to be done, as we witness with the constant barrage of no's from the opposition, because there is nothing in it for the fat cats.
If you think Howard was one sided, watch out for Abbott, he is a religious fanatic and can only see one side. This man is dangerous to the well-being of AU