An alternative thesis to that of 'Dr' Prassers.

With epochal changes to the global(ised) Capitalist system on their way, Rudd and his wealthy 'mates' and 'comrades' who control the L-A-B-O-R Party have been given the nod by Murdoch and the like to take over the reins from the HoWARd-Costello regime, in order to 'manage' (ie control) the resultant open dissent and social upheaval likely to occur. History records that whenever the need has arisen to 'discipline' the labourforce and the Working Class in general,
the L-A-B-O-R Party has been allowed to govern ... at the discretion of the local and inter-national members of the oligopoly who RULE our society ... sorry, ECONOMY!

In a liberal democracy we will change governments from time to time - get over it.

At some point the things that the public perceive as needing to be done will only be do-able by the other side.

I think on IR Howard significantly misread the public's willingness to accept his arguments for reform (and seriously underestimated the union movement). Unrestrained by the Senate the public saw Howard as likely to upset their economic apple cart.

Howard who for so long has been on the right side of the electorate is now finding himself on their Right side and struggling to find space in a middleground being resolutely defended by Kevin Rudd..

If Howard's myopic cheer squad keep claiming long enough and loud enough that -

a) he should be given credit for economic prosperity substantially resulting from a minerals boom driven by China and India,

and

b) that it is reasonable to compare present day unemployment figures with those of the past, despite the two being calculated in quite different ways,

perhaps it will become the truth....

Isn't neoliberalism wonderful!

Despite the overwhelming evidence that it creates ever greater disparity and thus social division, is undeniably unsustainable, leads in no small part to greater militarism by the west to maintain dominion over the 3rd world and will quite probably be the root cause of either US economic collapse and/or nuclear war between the US/UK axis and the Shanghai countries over the unserviceable debt mountain it has created, "serious" pundits still sing its praises as economic wisdom.

And worse, they do so using a false argument that the "left" will do things differently if they gain power. The rhetoric will change, not much else will. We'll still be hitched with the sinking USS Enterprise and its accompanying flotilla of IMF, World Bank, OECD and US Fed Reserve all bailing funny money dollars out to the elites as common wealth floats off over the horizon.

The ALP and the Liberals are two heads of the same snake. The bankers and the media are in control and they ain't letting it go. A trained monkey could have run the OZ economy through the resources boom. A competent government would have used the boom to make provision for the bust cycle that will surely come, and looked after the population rather than just their corporate mates.

Those yelling about the evils of socialism don't seem to have a problem with socialism for the rich strangely.

There really are a lot of silly posters out there. The fact is both Labor, under Hawke and Keating, and the Coalition, under Howard and Costello, deserve credit for the transformation of the economy in the past two decades. However, the lion's share of the credit for the prosperity of recent years goes to emergence of China and India in the global economy and the astute judgement of the RBA.

To argue that a Rudd Labor government would revert to some form of 1970s socialism is just fanciful. In a globalised open economy, no government can afford to stray too far from the "Washington consensus" of commitment to free markets and liberalised trade, independent monetary policy and fiscal responsibility.

The fact is there is simply no difference between Howard and Rudd on macro-economic policy. The differences are around issues of fairness, government accountability, due process, transparency and openness and Howard's failure to invest the once-in-a-generation windfall generated by the commodities boom in improving the productivity of the economy.

After voting for 40 years somethings do remain constant. Labour rhetoric never changes just the people spruking it. We are in an extraordinary situation. We have young drivers that have had drivers licenses for 5 years and have rarely driven in wet conditons and we have young voters who only know one government. The arrival of the inevitable wet weather to young drivers is akin to the arrival of a possible labour government lead by a equally unfamiliar leader. The young voters will find out how disasterous these 'unfamiliar' conditions can be.

With no track record to attack it gives Rudd a decisive advantage, however, he is trying to provide some ammunition for the critics and may wobble a lot more before the election arrives. He can only carry the party for so long. There is very little behind him to provide any substance to the 'messiah' and any labour run government