Dream on do me this one favor goggle Bill shorten then Paul Howe's.
Read the speech's of both, right now slander is bout wrongly claiming these two bought about Rudd's down fall.
It is not uninformed just a lie.
Shorten saved Australia's oldest union after a rough amalgamation.
Howe's too does so every day.
My fear? that Howe's will enter Parliament before his task is complete.
Tanner, loved the bloke, Faulkner, now he is from the left, and worth bottling his blood.
Once the right faction [who always win voting out comes in NSW ] called for him not to be returned, they then voted him back!
We have talent, Maxine? not sure she lives in a box post victory, Garrett that must happen better send Kev to China.
But put an end to safe seats for morons lets put talent in the house.
Rudd however is not the biggest looser Abbott and his mob lost the most the ALP scored another win.

*I just wonder what any of it has to do with the ostensible topic of the discussion, i.e. the demise of Rudd as PM.*

Well of course you don't CJ, for clearly you had not been following
the thread and what I written in response to Pynchme, last Friday.

Then you clearly had not either followed all the other threads
that I have been involved in for the last week or two, where
I tried to get people for one minute to think a little rationally
and objectively, about the role of coporations in our society,
why they exist and what their limits are. Yes they are flawed, but
we also need them for good reasons.

Apart from Mikk, who seemingly hates everything and wants anarchy,
nearly all the posters happened to be female, from thinker 2, Unique
and a whole lot more. What poured out was a heap of emotive rhetoric
about those "evil corporations", with seemingly no or little
understanding of the directors legal obligations and why they
can't just do as they please with shareholders money. All we
got was lots of hatred and little understanding. Pynchme was
just the last straw. Thus my post.

Dear Yabby,

Simply because people (some of whom happen
to be female) disagree with your point of view
on any given topic does not necessarily mean
that their opinion is less worthy of consideration
then your own.

The thread on corporate capitalism to which you refer
had more than one dissenting opinion that ran contrary
to yours. You claim that females didn't understand
how coporations work. On the contrary - from the posts
given, they understood only too well. However, in your
opinion, that can't be the case - because the posters
were female.

Yabby, you're going to have to learn to live with the fact
that females do have a brain, which they are capable
of using. And if corporations are perceived by them as:
"an ingenious device for obtaining profit without
individual responsibility." That does not reflect hatred
of any sort, merely an opinion.

It looks like Rudd is such electoral poison that he might not even get a seat at the kitchen cabinet.

Abbott's policy of focusing exclusively on Rudd might backfire in that JG by shafting Rudd, can distance herself from many of the policies and disasters that she had a large part of.

The coalition's task is to ensure that she takes full accountability for her past actions, and does not get away with simply using KR as a scape goat for all past mistakes including her own.

Dear Shadow Minister,

I realize what you're saying about the role
of the opposition, except that they are not
squeaky clean themselves - especially having
gotten rid of at least two previous Party
leaders. Tony Abbott has a lot to answer for himself.
And he's the last person that needs to be finger-
pointing.

The sooner that the Liberal Party realises that they
can't win with Abbott and Co. the better for them.
They need to actually address the issues with genuine
policies, not just condemnation of Labor and the
"big tax and boat people scares," (ad nauseum),
and get rid or the neanderthals that
exist on the front bench currently -
(Howard clones), and get themselves a new leader.

Other wise they may as well not bother running
in the next election. It will prove embarrassing.

*On the contrary - from the posts
given, they understood only too well. However, in your
opinion, that can't be the case - because the posters
were female.*

Foxy, when I read responses such as "we'd be better off
without corporations" it becomes rather clear, how much
emotion and how little reason posters are applying.

There have in fact been a number of threads. How many
of you posters objectively thought about the role of
corporations in our society? Would we really be better
off without corporations? Who would make your consumer
goods, who would provide the finance to build the
factories, to supply your computers, cars, toilet paper
and all the rest? It seems that none of you have even
thought about why corporations even exist. If they are
so evil as claimed, what is your suggestion of a better
alternative? So far nothing.

There are in fact females who think things through a little,
but they are few and far between. So my response was
to the many females who had clearly given it no thought
at all. They just happened to be female, I did not
choose it to be that way.