Yes it's time for the real real Julia pelican;-)

I liked her more when she was herself, before the puppet masters got a hold on her. She used to show up Rudd when he was overseas, with plain talking, and a less robotic performance than the Rudd-bot. But then when she became leader she...

a) Became a monotone slow talking School Headmistress.
b) Stated after a month or two that she was faking that, and was going to now be the real Julia.
c) Continued to be a monotone slow talking headmistress, and added in an obsession with divisive instruments in class and now gender.

To me it comes across as a weakness, that I imagine she must be nodding her head and taking advice from f'ckwits. Perhaps her hands were tied by some obligation to the Queen makers, but I cant imagine Keating giving a sh't what they think.

She's played into Tony's hands and bitten every bit of bait form the Right wing propagandists, when she should have ignored them as Howard did the Howard-Haters. She would have had so much more respect from me if she had refused to even acknowledge the simple slogans of Abbott, but this blaming everything on Tony, and playing the Gender card, well, she really is showing she has no actual vision for the country. Not that Tony has either, but he's not supposed to be governming the country.

To me the ALP never really, in 6 years, got out of opposition mode. Good governments don't care what the opposition says, they get on with it. They don't yell Tony said this, Radio Shock Jock said that, it's all so unfair!

BTW:

'The overwhelming preference for male babies across many cultures, all of which are represented in Australian society, means that the tolerance of sex-selection abortion could send us back centuries regarding the recognition of the value of women in this country. '

In Tanveer's article there was a link to the US culture, which is closer to ours than say, Afghanistan, and the overwhelming majority of sex-selections are for female babies.

'A newer method for sperm selection, called MicroSort, is currently completing Food and Drug Administration clinical trials. The girl requests for that method run at about 75 percent.'

Houlley

The Real Julia was a fiasco. What gets me is that the PM takes on board so easily the hype dished out by their media advisers. Maybe they get so involved in the moment and become so out of touch from reality they forget about plain old commonsense. The Real Julia was a prime example of the disconnect with reality.

What is happening is the spin doctors are pushing the line that they have been taught. Regardless of what Joe public says about being fed up with the nonsense, they are in their still spouting their ideology based on PR, marketing and psychology, hence the mundane repetition.

I was listening to Senator Hansen-Young the other day and blow me down if she wasn't talking in sound bites, each sentence carefully scripted with repetition. Tony Abbott does the same, it is like politicians are afraid to talk frankly and dare I say - normally. One might blame the media but the solution is to keep speaking like a normal human being. The media seem to respond positively to honesty as well (if we ignore The Australian or the Bolt Report for a moment).

Have you seen that UK series 'The thick of it' pelican. It classically takes off these media advisers.

This guy is classic...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmE9Bc3F9Ss

And this is what Juliar needs to do...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Vnx4QDXj7I

"What I want to ask you is, who do you think would be worse off?
The accidentally pregnant woman who has no money, but wants to keep the baby because she feels it is part of herself, or the father who has no money, and would prefer that she had an abortion?"

There are sp many other scenarios in that mix. Why stop at just the one that suits you.

The accidentally pregant woman who chooses to abort the fetus or the man who embaced the idea of being a father when he found out the woman was pregant and has no say in the abortion.

The accidentally pregnant woman who keeps the child and has access to money without working or the man on a good income but who was left with few assets in the divorce and is trying to rbuild his life (or start again with a new partner).

The woman who gets to decide if a male is just a sperm donor or he also becomes a long term major financial contributor to the womans choices or the man who finds himself required to pay far more than he can afford to maintain the mother and child whilst being excluded from a meaningful role in the childs life.

The list could go on and one. The simple reality is that the existing system and the one you support relies on double standards that treats men and women very diffrently well beyond the biological necessities and or the practical issues around early childhood.

R0bert

Ha Ha Houlley.

Lets toss the red ball around for a bit. Could be a new technique for Cabinet.