I so heartily agree. Will Kev and the boys betray us?

I had to have a go here (forgive me):

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=O76L4rHX-IA

- I know, I know - "Don't give up yer day job!"

- does this mean I won't be seeing you in Cannes? :)

There's lot of hyperbole and exaggeration here. The argument that the real goalposts of political life are artificially managed by the corporate elite is basically undeniable, and the author is hardly Robinson Crusoe in pointing that out.

But notwithstanding that truism, the author indulges in a huge fallacy of equivalency, which utterly fails to recognise clear points of differentiation between Rudd and the Government. Tim's treatment of Rudd's comment that the US is basically a force for good is particularly glib and superficial. If Tim had bothered to read his article in The Diplomat, clear and cogent arguments are used to support this claim based on the bona fide progressive idea of universalism. Rudd rightly credits the US for playing a central role in globalising the rule of law, and wishes to see them return to this legacy. Yet Tim apparently can't get past his blind outrage, having fallen hook, line and sinker for the blame US first line caricature.

a good survey of oz today. but tim hasn't grasped that pollies are what they are, because the people are also 'what they are'.

things aren't going to get better, until the people reach a higher standard of citizenship. since government control of education is total, and backed by daily enhancement of surveillance and diseducation through technology, the sheep-subjects are going to become more abjectly subject, not less.

god help ozzies, because 'she'll be right' won't protect them from cybernetic management and genetic engineering, and they are culturally incapable of protecting themselves.

The Labor campaign has thus far proven to be nothing more than a showman's attempts to 'dazzle with sparkly objects'. It was with great sadness that I heard of the appointment of Peter Garrett as shadow environment minister. I had at first harbored good feelings towards the then new Labor leader Kevin Rudd.

With the appointment of Peter Garrett however, as shadow environment minister, Rudd began a long "Hello Australian public, look at the shiny ball that I now dangle in front of you" campaign. Thus far Rudd has conducted himself in a manner, which has resulted in nothing more then weak policies.

Yet the Australian public continues to be amazed by 'easy' promises like the signing of the Kyoto agreement, which while seemingly beneficial, is naught but a pinprick compared to the majority of domestic issues faced by the Australian people.

Having worked with the Republican governorship campaign for California in 2003, I can categorically say that the Rudd style is following in the very successful footsteps of Governor Schwarzenegger. Rudd's strategy however, has taken on a subtler guise given that he cannot call on a fan base to exploit (though has still tried to add 'star-status' to his frontbench with the appointment of Peter Garret).

Kevin Rudd has, as a result, come across as a complete political mediocrity, but a sound salesman. His campaign strategy will be (already has been) successful, but we will not see Kevin Rudd maintaining his position for more than a term. People cannot be distracted forever and the illusion that Rudd has set up for himself will not last once the Australian public experiences his leadership style.

As much as I hate John Howard I will not vote for a party led by a younger version of him.

I want unions to be a part of Australian society, I don't want NT aborigines forced off their land and forced to feed their families on half the dole, I want real solutions to climate change, I want a universal health care system, I want urban planning

Kevvy you had your chance but now its time to vote Green

billie, it is either labor or liberal in the reps, don't you think? But yes, greens for the senate!

The 'vote Howard out' camp do not want a carbon copy of the Liberal Party and maybe Rudd will fit that label all too well, but there are glimpses of hope that there will also be a greater social conscience when it comes to pensions, climate change and industrial relations and indeed on other social justice issues.

That is why it is important more than ever to put some Greens, Democracts and good independents in the Senate to ensure some scrutiny and review of impending legislation. Never again should a democratic country accept a governing party's arrogance in introducing major change without advising the electorate prior to an election. Whether or not one agrees with WorkChoices, it speaks to the very heart of democracy.

It is true that Rudd is yet to prove his worth and integrity as a leader but Howard has proven himself over and over again in continuing sagas of dishonesty and poor decision making - AWB, Tampa, WMD/Iraq, David Hicks just to name a few.

While the Rudd government does not come with a guarantee, we are all too aware of the potential consequences of another Howard government. And I should add that many years ago I used to vote Liberal when they represented the small businessperson, fair trading and competition, did not sell off our public assets and were not governing just for one particular interest group -the big end of town.

In a supposedly democratic country, the people get the leaders they deserve.

I don't hear anyone saying we should take a good look at ourselves and our faults. We just seem to be interested in our chosen leaders faults.

Remember that Australia voted Howard in last time based on Tampa (fear - security) and interest rates (fear - economic stability). Have either of these fears eventuated? Hardly. Today's interest rate announcement adds a nice touch of irony. The last Liberal electoral campaign was based on fear - and the country fell for it.

When are we all going to grow up and actually start thinking for ourselves, and for this world, before it deteriorates beyond any hope of repair?

You really think that the pollies can save us from our own excesses? How very naive.

Remember what happened to the political leaders on Easter Island when the last tree was chopped down?

They were eaten by the people.....

Mmmmmm may I have fries with that please?

spritegal

Of course we all have faults and excesses - we are not perfect - I am not sure what your point is. BUT this article was about those that would "vote Howard out" and, while the race has not yet begun, it is because we are thinking for ourselves that it looks very much like Labor will win. Maybe you can fool the people for some of the time (eg. Tampa) but not all of the people all of the time - now that there is a perception of a real alternative.

In addition I am not standing as a representative for my electorate so my faults are probably not going to affect the people around me as much as our elected politicians.

Do we get the leaders we deserve? I don't know the answer to that. If you look at the total of the primary vote last election it was higher for Labor perhaps indicating that there was a move for change but it did not make it past the post under a proportional system of representation.

Those are pretty good points you raise pelican...

My point? Really just exasperation at the multitudes not realising that we vote these "sycophants" in (please insert "any party" here) and then we whinge about them after voting them in. I can't see the logic in that. Not terribly constructive to whinge after the deed is done, either...

You are also right about the majority vote. It all comes down to seats and by my counting Labor are still 2 behind. So they have their work cut out for them, especially in Victoria.

I despair of the political system in this country and do recall that France tried a similar system out not that long ago and realised it was totally unworkable as being truly representative of the people's opinion. So they chucked it. Why on EARTH do we still have it?

Its an interesting thought...but lets not get into conspiracy theory.

The Australian Government is thinking about creating a blog to let the public discuss public policy and proposed legislation.

If you'd like some input to how this blog might work please take this quick survey at

www.openforum.com.au/Survey

This could lead to politicians listening to the people for the change so please give your views if you can.

Thanks.

CITIZENSHIP IS AT THE HEART OF RUDDS CAMPAIGN.

The Rudd, Gillard, Swan’s "whole team" understand the Micro and Macro forces within the Australian economy.

The ALP understands innovative people like myself. Those who gave everything to a small business and lost everything JUST for having a GO.

Howards Ministers failed to access the "risk factors" . They failed to monitor ground levels. They failed to address life-style issues (the invisibles) facing rural-economics in micro-areas. This earned us a backward “cultural cringe”.

The ALP understands the external, cultural and political indices contributing to a downhill slide in the local based regional economy.

ALP understands national stability and the potential within Australia’s “whole” labor force. The principal; “every citizen has the right to work”.

The ALP understands you cant build a economy on a table with NO LEGS.

That a economy running fast with No Legs, will over-heat fast, collapse, taking those “risking debt + mortgage “ with it.

The USA reflects the warning, Japan learnt it’s lesson last decade. China may have it’s turn sooner, than later.

Prevention through structural economic’s is the absolute KEY from the bottom UP. This is primary - economic infrastructure.

This liberal government actually “transferred the risk” to citizens, by not addressing the nations “micro-skills” base. We/I are blamed, vilified for becoming structurally displaced.

How many on this National OLO have skills, a technical/education/degree and industrial-experience and, spent heaps to get it.

How many of us fell from opportune careers, within this last decade, through fowl play because we had NO REPRESENTATION, access to face-to-face legal aid or; a COUNCIL WHO CARED?

How many of us used our courage – to squeal, disclose openly, press our case to problem-solve.

HOW MANY GOVERNMENT INDIVIDUALS PAID TO ASSIST, OVER THESE YEARS, KNOW HOW TO ASSIST?

I know Rudd’s and Howard have heard me.

I know it is Howard’s own Ministers who failed Me.

I.e.: The DISCRIMINATION and “STONE-WALLING” I have experienced is wrong, hostile, a-typical, illiberal, a government-administration from “fly-in” club-med.

NOT GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICE.

It is they who Failed, Not Me.

http://www.miacat.com
.

Billie,didn't you listen to Peter Garrett?When they get in,they'll change all that.No problemo.You can now safely vote for Labor.All your wishes will be granted.Julia Gillard's socialist state will prevail.You won't have to think or work,the state will provide all.It will be neo Gough nervana.

I'll have a lobotomy or a bottle in front of me and retire to my little humpy.

You must have had a lobotomy already Arjay, either that or you have a memory problem - or is your head stuck in the sand, are you a typical denier 'blind' to what is happening.

Arjay does not remember the "never-ever-GST" or the "ram-it-through-workchoices now we have control of the senate."

Howard *does* backflips, Howard *does* obfuscate - Garret knows this and joked about it, so what.

Spritegal,

'Remember that Australia voted Howard in last time based on Tampa (fear - security) and interest rates (fear - economic stability). Have either of these fears eventuated? Hardly.'

That is just so correct. Today we have very secure borders and interest rates are still low ... simply because we voted for Howard.

The consequences of unsecure borders and high interest rates under Latham and labour were truely avoided.

I reckon our current low unemployment, profitable coal industry, stable economy, low housing interest rates, reasonable investment return (Interest) and low inflation will be maintained once again by voting Howard.

If we vote for the alternative we'll suffer the consequences of high unemployment, abandoning of our coal industry, high interest rates, high inflation and an economy beset with strikes and unrealistic wage demands. The fear our country will descend to another labor/union led mess is very real.

Hmmmmm but investment return might just skyrocket to 17% ... Now there's a thought.

Yes Tim, I thank you for the summary.I'll keep it to tick off the next three years.The Leader has become so important because the others elected by being in the party look to him to keep them in their seats.Such is the way our system works.Polies have to work the system!But we as concerned citizens can help keep them in place as our employees.The rate increases are welcomed by the "haves" their investment returns increase. The "havenots" can't buy houses. But they can vote!Let's give Kevin a go!Howard is leaving anyway, but I DON'T WANT A BAR OF COSTELLO THE CLEVER PERFORMER!

Keith says:

“if we vote for the alternative (Labor) we'll suffer the consequences of high unemployment, abandoning of our coal industry, high interest rates, high inflation and an economy beset with strikes and unrealistic wage demands. The fear our country will descend to another labor/union led mess is very real.”

I understand that this is your opinion, and you believe it (because Howard et al say it? or because you’re a Liberal stalwart?) – but many people are not and it is these people that you (Howard et al) have to convince … and please, not by fear or scaremongering that conservatives are very adept at (they really do believe it is their right alone to govern).

Specifically,
1. How will voting for Labor result in high unemployment?
2. Why do you think Labor is abandoning our coal industry?
3. Given Rudd’s policies are supposed to be a copy-cat of Howard’s, how will they contribute to high interest or inflation rates when Howard’s don’t?
4. What Labor policies will lead to the strikes you suggest?
5. What leads to unrealistic wage demands (not a trick question)?

Ok, you fear Labor – but there are also many who fear where Howard is leading (or not leading) us. Rudd has shifted Labor to a more *centrist* political ideology (unsettling for the staunch left and the small ‘l’ liberals) and where has Howard left to go but more to the extreme fascist right or the fundamentalist neocons? This is what many rational and reasoned people fear and would therefore prefer Rudd’s Labor – just my opinion.

PS: personally, I don’t think we have secure borders (thanks to Bush’s misadventure into Iraq). The biggest border of all (the troposphere) is the least secure of all, and both Bush and Howard seem intent on denying this as well.

How can you sleep when your ears are burning?
How can we dance when the worm is turning?
The time has come,
A tax is a fact,
We'll change our minds,
And never give it back!

This is Peter Garrett waxing lyrical than all the reseviors in Kevin Rudd's ears.

This bunch of no talent,lying shysters are just Labor Bonobos.Everything they touch,they want to fornicate with.

The Labor party has lost it's way,85% of it's powerbase comes from the Public Servant Unions.They believe in high taxes and a decaying nanny state.Note well the performance of DOCS in NSW.

Seems Keith is otherwise occupied, that's ok.

Arjay, what do you think?

Anyone?

Dear Q & A

I do have a life outside of this forum and sometimes I just get busy living it. And contrary to your exhibited centralist controlling view I don't need anybody's approval for that.

In answering your questions I shall also pose to you a few of my own. And please don't give me Kevin's bland motherhood statements, that insuinuate much but actually promise zilch, in response.

1. The promised rolling back the unfair dismissal laws has caused me to roll back my business. I don't employ anyone now. Small business will merely employ people on a yearly basis to avoid the threats from that particular promise. I can see increased unemployment in the small business arena... or an employment pool made up of people who work for 11 months. Of course the extra training of staff will simply be added to the price of production. (That will also be inflationary). We were all bitten once before.

2. If as Garret has promised we implement Koyoto and set a target for 2020 the coal industry will be greatly affected negatively. My great fear is that since Rudd and Garret won't announce a target now and given Garrets gaff's I think after the election they will simply impose one. I suspect this is one of Garret's intentions in regard to his spilling his guts to media people recently.

3.The biggest single problem with Labor's policies is that they do not exactly copy Liberal policy. The big difference is Work Choices and specifically the timing of the proposed roll back. The Union influence, once labor is elected will ensure the rool back begins as soon as the election is over. I just can't see Rudd's finger in the hole holding back the force of the overwhelming flood from that particular dyke. Rolling back work choices will be inflationary.

But pray tell me how Rudd proposes to hold down interest rates?

4. It is not so much it's policies but it's controlling figues. eg. 'Howard's gone and I'm back'. From the mouth of a known union bully and strike proponent. And of course there are many others.

5. Unrealistic expectations lead to unrealistic wage demands. And to quote Glenn Milne in todays Sunday Mail. "When it comes to cost of living Rudd is engaged in a giant election ruse...and a cruel one at that.' He's running around highlighting the increasing cost of living but not promising to fix it. However many voters in focusing on Rudd's criticisms, have developed an expectation their petrol, groceries and interest rates are going to be more affordable under Labor. And that is something which can only be achieved if wages go up...and that's what a weak leader looking for simplistic solutions will allow.

But please tell me, since you obviously toe the Labor line, why you think Garret either a fool or a liar. Tell me how Rudd will resist the expectation, among his troops, according to Latham, that Labor will be more 'progressive' once it's elected? You can define 'progressive' ... since Howard has.

Now in your own word's use your own ideas to answer my three question.

"The last Liberal electoral campaign was based on fear - and the country fell for it."

What election campaign or for that matter any government campaign is not?

Dear Keith,

Thanks for replying. You raised some interesting points that I wished to pursue but you have obviously taken offense in that I merely wanted someone (anyone) to continue the thread – they have not. Besides, other threads will overtake this exchange, don’t you think?

It appears you are a prolific contributor to OLO with 700+ posts. A cursory reading shows that you are a stalwart conservative voter. As for me, I am less intransigent and am therefore up for grabs. I voted Liberal last time and will probably vote Labor this time, the Senate another issue.

As to your questions:
1. “How Rudd proposes to hold down interest rates?” Difficult really when the RBA yesterday said the interest rates are likely to rise a few more times with inflation heating up until mid-2009. Of course, throwing money around like confetti doesn’t help. Personally, I think Rudd has better monetary and fiscal policies and we will see on Wednesday if indeed he is more an economic conservative than the Howard/Costello conservative. Certainly, slowing an overheated economy would be responsible (e.g. carbon taxes) and would help.

2. “Why you think Garret either a fool or a liar.” I don’t, simple as. However, I would much prefer Turnbull as our environment minister (he is very astute and sensible when it comes to environmental issues; he is an environmentalist after all). Unfortunately, the Howard *machine* rolls him in Cabinet purely on political and ideological grounds, so has to scurry back with his tail between his legs – politics can be ugly, as he is finding out. What do you think of the issues raised by Guy Pearse, a former Liberal insider that worked for Robert Hill? Check it out here

http://www.highanddry.com.au/extract.cfm

Con’t

Con’t

3. “How Rudd will resist the expectation, among his troops, according to Latham, that Labor will be more 'progressive' once it's elected?”

Latham was/is a dork – get over it, every one else has.

Being progressive (in my words Keith) in terms of political ideology means adopting a more centrist or balanced position. Rudd has done this since both Howard/Costello are leaning further to the neo-con or “New World Order” Right. National/International problems can only be solved by convergence (not divergence as evidenced by Bush, Howard and Co) – this is progressive.

I too have a struggling business but I have not rolled it back as you have, I'm confident. IR reform is/was needed and Howard pushed it through the Senate without the checks and balances – he went too far.

Coal will be around for a long time but a carbon tax is needed, amongst other things. The coal industry is amenable to Rudd’s plans and when the study is finalised mid-2008, we can then look at the specific numbers. Howard/Costello have not commissioned the equivalent and come across as still in a state of denial while other countries’ leaders and captains of industry are being more progressive and proactive – Oz is still dragging the chain.

We needed balanced IR reform, Howard/Costello went too far (look at the bureaucratic nightmare and back-log this has produced lately).

You are not stupid; costs of production/services are pushed up by high demand, for example. We are living in a consumer driven society and low unemployment means those in the market can virtually ask what they like – this is why we need balanced IR.

My daughter is about to graduate with a $60K HECS debt and was threatened with the sack from her (P/P-T) hotel job because she would not sign the new AWA (reduced hourly rate, no penalty rates, no meal breaks, etc). They did not sack her (she was good at her job) they just reduced her work hours and employed younger immigrants who could not negotiate the conditions. She is hanging-in till after graduation.

Yes I did take offense. I fear no-one, am an original thinker and rarely intransiant. You'd agree my thoughts on the issues you raised are quite original in many respects and I'd enjoy discussion.

You agree Rudd cannot hold down interests rates. You understand why he keeps highlighting their rising. You'd agree with Milne's assessment? So why trust someone who is being so devious?

I didn't ask about Turnbull ... If you consider Garret as reasonable that's fine but how can you trust him given his about face on the issues he's traditionally held so dear?

I respected Latham ... he was honest and bagged for it by the media and his own side. I don't think he had a fair go.

You see Rudd who keeps adopting 91.5% of Howard's positions as progressive but that same policy when applied by Howard is seen as Neo-Con rightwing and divergent. I can't see any reason for regarding that as in any way progressive. You'd have been much better off highlighting the progressive positions of Rudd which are... Rolling back IR reform? Surely an oxymoron there.

My businesses arn't struggling. I rolled one back. I'm older and wiser. I don't need the hassles of looking for staff or dismissing anyone. Nor do I need as much money from that source any longer ... nor do I need an education revolution nor family welfare assistance. But I would like downward pressure on inflation coupled with higher interest rates. (Selfish eh?)

I'm not convinced climate change is totally man made. I'd like much more evidence than that provided by that UN body and the climate change fanatics. I am reserving my judgement. I guess I'm weighted down by the chains and shackles of a rigidity and discipline of reason.

Costs are currently being driven up by a lack of labour. That 4% unemployment is really a buggar. With regard to all the conditions being abolished under WA's ... so long as they are compensated when removed I don't see a problem.

You like me and about 2 millon other Aussies, in running a small business, are no doubt accutely aware you don't get a paid annual leave, meal breaks, penalty rates or many of the other artificial perks employees have enjoyed for many years. I tend to think a minimum wage that takes in all those perks would be a much simpler and reasonable way in future. I had come to that conclusion long before Howard and Costello implemented the current IR regime. I'd employed casuals as the backbone of both my business ... for years.

That AWA your daughter was offered was illegal. If I had an employee I knew was about to graduate I would expect her to resign in the near future so I'd naturally reduce her hours to concentrate on and encourage newer employees who would be continuing once she'd left ... but then again I'd see that as putting my business first and not the HEC's debt of my soon to be former employee. (Who wouldn't be required to repay that debt while in my employ, anyway).

God, What degrees has she completed? My son would have had a HEC's debt of $35,000 with a double degree in Applied Science (Mathematic's) and Engineering (Electrical and Computer) I don't think he cares too much about his income, but it'll be substantial. He's a nerd and prefers achieving things.

He, like me, is very busy, unlike me he has contracted work experience at $24.50 an hour and ... but he's as opinated and talks just as much as me.

700...wow. 700 x 350 = 240,000 or a small book.

I think that deserves an explanation.

I work less than 20 hours a week, and have done not much more than that for many years. I've just managed things to give me time to do the things I enjoy ... like raising my kids alone, reading, writing and sailing. I guess I'm just organised.

This year I've been ill.

Hello Keith, thanks for your response. Sorry I haven’t got back to you – I guess there are more things to life than OLO.

I think you may have misinterpreted what I’ve said, but that is of little consequence. Rudd's a very astute politician, as is Howard – but there are fundamental differences in their ideologies, agreed.

Maybe I wasn’t clear enough. It's been the Howard/Costello camp that condemns and complains about the Rudd ‘me-tooism’, but that is the point. Howard can’t have it both ways. There are fundamental differences between the two ideologies.

Examples: Iraq war and national security; infrastructure spending and planning for the future; health; education; climate change and sustainability; human rights and international/domestic law; industrial relations; so called free trade and protectionism; foreign affairs and international relations, even polling strategies – there is no me-tooism in these respects.

I'm encouraged by Rudd’s response to all these things, I think he is intelligent as well as smart, he can mix it at all levels and I believe he is genuine.

But make no mistake; he is a political animal – just like Howard, it seems we expect that in our leaders.

I don’t trust Howard anymore, I think he is devious. Examples: Iraq war and WMD, children overboard; Tampa/Pacific Solution; now a climate change believer; Senate power (IR laws); AWB; never-ever GST; indigenous affairs; demonising of unions; his incessant scare campaigns, core and non-core promises (not to be confused with latest auditor general’s report), his lies about $100k degrees.

Howard’s lost the plot, should’ve handed over to Costello – too arrogant.

I’m happy for you Keith, you’re doing ok – but many aren’t. You don’t need an education revolution, good for you – many think Australia needs it.

My daughter’s AWA is illegal (you know it, I know it, so does the boss and Howard, but what is she going to do, what are all the other sods going to do, and how long is the ombudsman’s waiting list now?

Howard’s old conservatism, Rudd’s new.

Just came across this, explains things better than I can.

Talks about convergence in terms of progressive ideology,but also articulates differences in monetary and fiscal policy between Rudd and Howard/Costello - oxymoron, maybe.

Best wishes

Bugger, copied the link but didn’t paste and had to wait for the post and time limit to expire – been penalised for trying to post early too?! !?

So, here it is:

http://business.smh.com.au/metoo-a-mixed-blessing/20071116-1atx.html?page=2

No need to reply, the thread is dead.

Keith, sorry mate, I couldn't help it.

http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/phillipadams/index.php/theaustralian/comments/pms_porkies_are_a_true_indicator

This would be so funny if it wasn't so serious.