Criticaster,

And anybody can apply for and gain admittance as a Rhodes Scholar?

But you miss the point. Abbot has three degrees in four areas of study ... and that counts for nothing?

Mate his ridding the Government of it's senior office holders isn't at all impressive to you is it?

And mate what's all this crap about an education revolution if you try to cheapen the efforts of those, like Abbott, who excel?

Is this a case of Wayne's war on middle Australia ... you know become educated ... but don't get too educated ... like the efforts of successful miners ... get rich ... but not too rich?

You labor blokes really do tie yourselves up in stupid little unthinking knots.

579,

Or 5 for short ? More friendly :)

The rumour, as I understand it, was - along with a host of peripheral issues - that PM Gillard offered the position of FM to Bob Carr, then under pressure, withdrew the offer.

Then she denied that she had offered him the position - 'completely untrue', as she put it.

Then she offered the position to him and he took it up.

Yes, it's true, Tony Abbott was somewhere on the planet, so he must have been up to no good somehow. The Murdoch press pursued the story, yes, which thereby makes it 'completely untrue' in the eyes of some.

But she did precisely what she denied doing. 100 %. What 'The Australian' reported was - substantially and fundamentally - true, wasn't it ? Yes, they seemed to find out a great deal of 'juicy' information, as one would expect from the competent staff of a reputable newspaper. Did this make it somehow less legitimate ? Is getting "all of this juicy information" somehow less legitimate if it accrues to The Australian and not, say, The Age, or my beloved SMH ?

I don't think Tony Abbott had anything to do with this one, 5. But throw him into the mix, something might stick.

She did, she said she didn't, then she did again. Yes ?

Cheers,

Joe

Rumors are sometimes believable, if you want them to be.
You must admit there is a lot of information that obviously came from someone. Mr abbott was very close at hand, not somewhere on the planet.
Why was this particular media so interested in the procedure of obtaining a suitable person for the role of FM.
Front page story, who was to benefit from running it as a front page story.
I say there are people that have not yet come forward.

Good morning all,

Thanks for the further feedback.

@Imajulianutter, not sure how last week will impact Tony Abbott.

It will probably depend on just how seriously his inept performance in Parliament on Wednesday 29th plays out with his supporters and those of Mr Turnbull. I just don’t know.

@Raycom, have you read the Hansard yet?

Pretty sure you will find that both Ms Bishop and Mr Abbott did indeed mislead the Parliament with their assertions that the PM’s choice of Bob Carr as foreign minister had been overruled.

@579, agree entirely with all your points.

@Don Aitkin, may I please ponder your observations on backgrounding further before responding? They are critical.

@Leo, why are you so dismissive of conclusions based on evidence? Yes, this is how courts of law work. Is this unsatisfactory?

It is also the basis of reaching conclusions in all the sciences, the humanities and most other areas of formal inquiry. It is also how we all make assessments in our daily lives, including indeed reading newspapers.

Quite patently, if the seven fresh elements in the story in The Australian on Wednesday of last week were true, Gillard’s authority would be diminished, at least one of her colleagues would have criticised her publicly again, her polling numbers would have declined, Bob Carr would not be a Senator and either Crean or Smith would be Foreign Minister.

None of this has eventuated. Patently, those seven claims were false. 100%. Completely untrue.

Why does this surprise us? The Murdoch media routinely fabricates news. See here:

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=12286

Look, I understand it is frustrating when assertions which suit our political preferences are shown to be fabrications. But in the end we are all better served by truth than by falsehood, however embarrassing in the short term.

Cheers, AA

AA: ponder away. My observations have no particular political colour. I'm just interested in how you can be so certain about things that most of us, anyway, can't really know anything much about. And I used to be part of the media game.

"@Leo, why are you so dismissive of conclusions based on evidence? Yes, this is how courts of law work. Is this unsatisfactory?"

What evidence is that, AA, you have none.

"Look, I understand it is frustrating when assertions which suit our political preferences are shown to be fabrications."

Of course you do, AA. Yours are obviously based on your political preferences, and have just been demonstrated to be fabrications.

You might have the decency to withdraw your baseless slur on the Press.