Your balance is appreciated Tom Clark. With this government I believe the responsibility is essentially with each of us. I believe that the previous team in federal office conveniently ignored the human part of “every-day” life and the need to stand up for it.

The ALP is known for its courage when it comes to fixing the focus back on household affairs. I hope households embrace the same need to have long-term vision and practical focus.

Howard's government tried and is still trying but unless you have the depth behind the need for integrated policies and the knowledge foundation that backs those human like polices, no amount of money or new framework can replace the reality of things felt, as they occur at ground levels.

Trust is to be the essential element of change here. We need all citizens to embrace its meaning and become more protective of the goodwill and the importance of critical thinking, as a whole nation of people.

I think the "spin-out" over basic needs and the way the particular voices within particular sectors in the national community were being smothered is essentially why Howard’s effort failed. I believe administrations themselves became timid, defensive and scared to action the truth, as it appeared outside government, under Howard’s Team.

My greatest hope is that politics becomes something we can all be part of and that our citizenship can be rejuvenated with renewed satisfaction and celebrated pride.

For myself I know I learnt a lot from Howard’s Team. It is the importance of politics and how easily the openness for it can be lost if we are not mindful, together, between ourselves, as a whole nation.

http://www.miacat.com/
.

This is the first time I’ve ever posted feedback on an article, so be kind, even if I do refer to David Letterman.

Excellent observations Tom, particularly on Rudd and his “talent for narration to embed his Government in the imagination of the Australian electorate”, and use of pro-nouns.

Politics is a nasty business, so whilst to some Kevin Rudd may use narrative in at times a less than stimulating fashion, I believe it is imperative.

That words are used carefully shows thought has been put into the overall wordspeak, and content delivers intellectual, and strategic merit, unlike George Bush.

I would have to differ on your assessment on George Bush offering moral and intellectual certainty. You only have to watch, Lettermans sarcastic ‘Great Speeches in History’ segment to see the relentless nonsense garb George Bush comes out with. Or, perhaps it’s intellectually certainly Bushit, and most certainly immoral.

Our Bookish Scriptbound Parson also ensures consistency of Policy now, and in context for future Policy. Remember, loose lips sink ships, and sometimes even have children thrown overboard. Unlearning from the ‘litigating solicitor’ Howard, Rudd is in control, so whilst he may be using a script, it’s a script that he is crossing the T’s on, and delivering with an honesty that is believable, and as you note ‘earnest’.

In control, in self-control, and in Policy control, not pandering to US persuasion in Defence Policy whilst still maintaining continued relations.

In fact, I find Kevin Rudd to espouse a sense of self-assuredness, as opposed to “nervousness”. Kevin Rudd has no qualms appearing on; ‘Channel 7 Sunrise’; ‘ABC 7.30 Report’ where answers seem to be off the cuff. I don’t think Kerry O’Brian would be providing Kevin his list of questions, nor Rudd require them, or am I, ‘home viewer’ being naive?

Perhaps for Wayne Swann the case is different, in fact his body language in Parliament has only inspired me to squirm, and turn the channel unfortunately.

With Rudd I think Politics can be renewed, reinvigorated, and can restore confidence in this multi-cultural democracy.