This is yet another trendy lefty lament, that the electorate does not take the apocalyptic revelation of climate change seriously, and certainly not with degree of panic expected from card carrying members of the Brahmin case.

So too, Lyn Bender decries the fact that most Australians are really filthy on those Labor incompetents who scrapped John Howard's policy, which was working, to the now unacceptable situation where everybody in the Third World knows that Australians are not serious about protecting their own borders.

Do you live in some grossly overpopulated priest and mullah ridden cesspit, and want to go to a nice place where they are prosperous because they don't think like your people do? Just pre book your passage in your own country on a people smuggling boat, and wait until your number is called.

Don't worry about getting refused, the people smugglers know all the lines you can spin to fool the Australian immigration people, most of whom are probably your own countrymen anyway. And the people smugglers now have a new tactic that is working wonderfully. Just swamp the Australian Immigrations system with so many boats that the stupid Labor government does not know what to do.

There are plenty of people around who will argue your case, because they seem to have a compulsive need to think that they are better than everybody else. And what better way to display their presumed moral and intellectual superiority than by always opposing the interests of their own people?

Lyn, I love the philosophical tone and content of your article. So few writers even know what philosophy means or understand its importance.

Philosophy should be taught in schools and should be up there with language and science. If students don't realize there are various ways that humans can live their lives, they are stunted and fall victim to the greedy 'climb-the-ladder' crowd and become pawns of the avaricious capitalists.

Politics is another subject that is not taught or not taught properly. We need to change our current mind-set before we destroy ourselves!

< Will the election debate and conversation hover around petty fears, and selfish concerns, or finally address the great moral challenges of our time? >

Um….. let me think about that one.

Of course it will be the former! (:>/

No no Ludwig you are wrong. Kevvy will come out and tell us all facing climate change is the 'greatest moral challenge of our time' like he did before Julia advised him to dump that, then worked to dump him, then dumped her committment to dump climate tax, then she dumped that, then kevvy dumped her then......

Hells bells there's too much dumping going on over climate change.
Lol, you just have to don't. That these people take the leftists at face value is the greatest laugh of all. It even beats the 'climate science is settled' joke.

Kevvy's policy on boats will be

'what boats?'

Suddenly Mr Abbott faces an opponent far more
popular than himself. And as political commentators
tell us the Opposition leader's assured run to
the election win has now been radically challenged.

As one commentator pointed out, "Mr Abbott has to
do more than just keep breathing to become the next
PM. It is not enough to have the job presented on a
plate. Australians need to know precisely why they
should vote for him and the Coalition. This requires
work, not glad-handing, nor empty rhetoric."

"If Mr Abbott believes he leads the next government-in-waiting
then it is incumbent on him to enunciate the policies
and the vision that drives them."

"Clearly, there has been huge advantages while in Opposition in
offering a small target to Labor, but to carry that
strategy any further now is to treat voters with
contempt."

Throwing out a government is not the same as electing an
opposition. Commentators tell us that "the electorate, like
nature abhors a vacuum. Without detailed policies it cannot
properly assess who deserves to govern."

The PM will be putting pressure on the Opposition leader
to have a public debate, and the question of detailed
policies is certain to come up. In return of course so
is the question of carbon pricing, and asylum seekers.
And as we know - there are more votes in the "hard-edged"
approach. Still pressure will be applied on coming up
with policies that work as opposed to slogans that
sound good. Both competitors have their work cut out for
them - and voters will be watching and listening.

Interesting times ahead, that's for sure.

It is somewhat "passing strange" that of some 7-8 Billion people, scattered like confetti upon this globe, it is seemingly up to us, a paltry 23-24 million of us, to solve the great "moral challenges" of our time, for all the rest.
For God, for Harry and Saint George?

Ah, Lyn, >I have admired and respected Kevin Rudd for his intelligence and depth, and have held out hope for his commitment to the greatest moral challenges of our time.<

So, "Joan" is foist on the petard, and "the Pretender" takes up the mantle, oh so reluctantly, to once more strut and bluster and crow, as head cockerel in the painted coop.
Heaven save us from the beguiled, squatting hypnotized by the wily serpent, immobilized and unmoveable, even as the strike is set.

Life may be a 'shadow', but Rudd is an illusion, a mean conjurer's trick, let loose to weave yet another fairy-floss castle for an adoring, albeit diminishing throng of "true believers".

Was it the scorpion, hitching a ride on a frog to higher ground across the swirling waters, which plunged in the sting halfway, causing the frog to retort "what have you done, you have killed us both"? To which the scorpion could only respond "I couldn't help it, it is my nature".
Or was it the fox and the rabbit?

Chances are, a diamond ring, offered for a dime, is only worth a dime.

For the frog and the rabbit enlightenment came too late. Shall we be forced to suffer the same fate? A second time?