That Is The Question (2)

Beware of what you wish for. Gillard, an excellent humorous attack-dog Deputy, was a poor Mother of the Nation, and Albo, a brilliant humorous attack-dog Deputy, would be too.

Fighting is not uniting. It is not consensus-building. It is only fighting. It is only scrapping.

Albo is an excellent scrapper, but … addressing the United Nations? Addressing the House of Commons? The Soviet Praesidium? The Labor Party National Conference?


He would be less like Hawke, and more like Latham. Less like Whitlam, and more like Calwell.


Leave a comment ?


  1. Bob,
    We are in accord regarding Rudd’s betrayal and ultimate sack of Gillard’s 2010 election majority. The hung parliament and every subatomic particle of the god-awful mess over the past three years is his albatross, and he’s alone.

    “I looked to heaven, and tried to pray;
    But or ever a prayer had gushed,
    A wicked whisper came, and made
    My heart as dry as dust.”

    I am not as certain as you that Rudd would have lost the election in 2010 and the true motives, or the perverse and destructive logos of the conspirators, will be forever lost to us I’m afraid.
    Even to those who saw themselves as witnesses. I think that events such as this resist the simple recounting of “this is what happened”.

    I do not question Shorten’s reckoning of the numbers, nor do I doubt his struggle to arrive at a firm and effective arithmetic.
    I question his judgements. That he could not see the endgame of Rudd’s removal speaks more to his poor (political) vision than does his ability to “speak to nurses or mine workers”.
    He could have, he should have, erased the catastrophic seductions of those 2 Byzantine Buffoons, puffed up to the eyeballs on some ill-begotten hubris, and retained his personal honour and political hopes.
    But he did not.
    He bent to the will of….of what exactly?
    The “stories” of Rudd’s megalomania, of a “dip in the polls”, of “complaints from his staff”!?!?!
    Fuck that Pol.Sci. 101 bullshit.
    Le the events play out - at worst, at the very worst, he would now be prime candidate for a three term Labor Govt.
    But instead he chose to steer events.
    Well the ride is now over and it’s time to pay the fare.

    And the the cost?

    allthumbs has calculated it fairly and I repost here with his kind permission:

    “allthumbs September 19, 2013 at 8:15 am
    This is the ad I would be running if I were the Libs:
    Still photo of Bill Shorten smiling and shaking hands with smiling Kevin Rudd Mk.1
    News footage of Bill on his mobile phone walking up and down on the night of the coup.
    Still photo of Bill Shorten smiling and shaking hands with smiling Julia Gillard.
    News footage of Bill on his mobile phone walking up and down on the night of the coup.
    Still photo of Bill Shorten smiling and shaking hands with smiling Kevin Rudd Mk.2
    News footage of Bill on his mobile phone walking up and down on the night of the coup.
    Still photo of Bill Shorten smiling and shaking hands with smiling Anthony Albenese.
    News footage of Bill on his mobile phone walking up and down on the night of the coup.
    Photo of smiling Albenese disintegrates.
    “And the winner is……….”
    Bill is tainted goods. Any which way you look at it. A clever successful strategic thinker? Obviously not. Loyalty to the party above everything else? Looks like it. Outside of the Party, loyalty to the Party is not always seen as a good thing.
    And it’s a shame, and he must wake up in the middle of the night, groan out loud, get out of bed and bang his head against the wall, hence the recent hair loss.
    If he wins, the electorate could well punish him for his role in the coup, especially if the Libs bring it all up again as they inevitably will in three years time.
    If he loses to Albo, he will look like Rudd, waiting for his opportunity, and the press will generate the same Rudd/Gillard leadership instability stories as they did before, simply cutting and pasting the names of Shorten/Albanese in place of Rudd and Gillard, because the Australian Press is a bunch of lazy hacks.”

    Bob, I don’t personally know Shorten.
    I know him publicly.
    That’s all I’m interested in.

    Thanks for this conversation. I’ve learnt more about you in these 5 posts than in 5 weeks.

    • Thank you for that. I think the thing to say is Albo would be no more effective — that is, very effective — as leader than he is now. And Shorten, as leader, would be even more effective — that is, very effective — than he is now. Shorten has an inspirational dimension that reaches beyond the rats in the ranks and the True Believers to the Undecideds. Albo is very good, but he would, very narrowly, no doubt, lose the next election, and, with it, Australia’s decent future; and Shorten might just win it, however narrowly.

      I have Marrickville grandson aged two I care about, and he has a wonderful local member. But his saviour lives elsewhere.

    • ‘tainted goods’ - these ads would not run till the next election, and guess what, Rudd and Gillard will be the last thing voters will be thinking of by then if the leader of the opposition has done his job in the meantime

      get your head out of your arse of tricks and gimmicks and turn the conversation to policy and the Libs’ fuckups

  2. Far be it, for me, to offer an opinion on who should lead the Labor Party
    However, a matter of names -
    Robert/Bob; William/Bill; Michael/Mike; Edward/Ted;
    Anthony/Tony and so on.
    It’s odd that this Anthony remains an Anthony; evidently he’s preferred his little-boy name (and yes, there are famous Anthonys) but this one isn’t a writer, nor an actor - he’s been been called a larrikin here. An Aussie scrapper named Anthony?
    Bill is a good name for a leader; but Shorten looks dodgy, or guilty, and sounds feeble.
    And I ask
    What sort of man utters the words
    “We are where we are”

  3. It has to be Shorten. Albanese is a great party man and strategist but Shorten is the only one who has the policy and presentation to defeat Abbott and make the Liberal maggot’s rule as short as possible.

  4. Neither Bill or Albo have the brilliance of Kevin Rudd but, let’s face it, Julia Gillard hacks, Rupert Murdoch & the ABC, are never going to allow Rudd to come back. From someone in TV land observing Bill Shorten, I’ve always found him pretty unimpressive & unlikeable. He tries a bit too hard to appear “nice” but ends up coming across as a bit sneaky and smarmy. He says irritatingly patriotic things like “this great country” in his speeches, and has a bad habit of trying to defuse a situation by flattering the person asking him questions, saying he “really admires” them etc(as he did with a single mother asking about welfare cuts on Q and A). I don’t trust him on party reform either - he’s already got the unions working behind the scenes to try and secure his numbers in the leadership contest. Albo isn’t perfect, but he’s funny, is a great performer in parliament, and has a bit of larrikin charm. Out of the two, I think he’d be the best option.

    • Is my little baby Shortenen “Bred” left or right and is the right wrong or is the left right. Ditto for “Sharpy” elbow?

    • Lozza, a good summary.

      And, unfortunately, spot on about the prospects of KR. You are right to include the ABC alongside the perhaps more obvious factors.

  5. Anyone watch Albanese do his half hour launch on Sky News tonight?

    He was very good. Better than Rudd and Gillard.

    Bob, I think you might need to reassess Albo. He could possibly get up and win the Communists over at the Praesidium too.

    He could even deal with hecklers in the crowd. Supportive hecklers I mean.

    If I were Abbott I would prefer to take on the polite and respectful Bill Shorten, Albo has a bit of mongrel about him and that is what Labor needs right now.

    • Frank, and he will cheer us all up too. Politics in Australia might even become so interesting we rush home to watch Albo demolish Abbott. Knock out to Albo!! ( is that the way it goes? I hate boxing, sword fights are okay though. :razz: )

    • full of shit as usaual, F

      • No. Common sense. Something you evidently lack.

        • Frank, you should fuck off. There’s a good lad. Nobody here values your knuckle dragging opinions.

          How’s those boats going? Has Tony Maggot stopped them yet?

          Personally, I’m looking forward to a political assassination. Just one bullet between the eyes and the budgie-man drops. It’s just a matter of time.


    Australia, one of the world’s richest natural resource country has its credits ratings reduced from its largest state, Western Australia, from three stars to two stars.
    Instead of having used its riches to bolster the wealth and it’s crumbling infrastructure for the whole of Australia and its citizens, all what that frenetic mining exporting has done is to enrich the few billionaires and their shareholders.
    The profits of its resources, especially iron ore, did not get taxed at between 50 to 70 % as is done in Norway, instead WA received tax concessions and other inducements.
    Ah well, Mr Abbott. Cut the mining tax and see the soup queues grown even longer.

    • When will Four Corners track down the Swiss bank accounts of the LNP cabinet in WA? Barnett is WA’s Pinochet and Abbott is Australias

      • Don’t make lies up.

      • The typical Government response is to cut back on already impoverished services instead of, what should have been done decades ago during the Hancock years, take control of the resources belonging to Australia, and made sure the country would benefit, above all and especially the original owners.
        My poor country Australia.

    • they ripped theUSA off when this same issue played out 15 odd years ago.
      the lobby power corrupted the natural course of congress just as we’ve seen done here.
      we the Australian people in hindsight will see the wrong done here.

  7. VOTES:-The ALP is still the most popular political party in Australia with the Liberals still having to rely on preferences from the LNP and National Party to form government. Without them they could not win an election. A look at how the Senate vote has played out makes it clear that people don’t trust Abbott and don’t trust him or his party with too much control.

    The number of primary votes came out like this:
    • Australian Labor Party: 3,596,825 votes
    • Liberal Party: 3,369,726 votes
    • Liberal National Party: 927,826 votes
    • The Greens: 893,964 votes
    • The Nationals: 489,150 votes
    The bloody Greens outpoint The Un Nationals 2-1 yet the UN Nationals get the Deputy PMship and a swag of seats in both houses. What did Sartre say? “Were condemned to democracy”.

  8. I thought you liked Calwell, Bob?

  9. Apparently the Rabbott has taken on the portfolio of ‘womens issues’ himself.
    Well that’ll get a lot of focus and effort won’t it.

  10. Bob, I heard somewhere that the LNC are recommending that Shorten would be the best Opposition Leader. Why? because he is more to the right??

    Albo would be able to throw some wit and humor around plus take up the fight. They probably could not bear that. He would enliven parliament and make it interesting. People might rush home to watch Albo give it to Abbott.

    I thought Gillard did very well as leader under excruciatingly bad circumstances. She just needed to be more of herself like Q&A. But facing off with the horrible Abbott is enough to turn anyone around the twist. It was tragic that they were never able to remove Abbott for good, in similar vein as removal of Whitlam…like shown him the door.

    • It is partly about winning a popularity contest, but as Abbs’ success clearly shows it is much more about convincing people that you and your party are a better pair of hands to have on the steering wheel than the other people

      As much as some try to demean it, this is not about coming across as a lovely person on tv shows. As, to repeat, Abbs has just shown

      We need someone who shows that they know where this cruise ship is bound, and what icebergs lie ahead, and how to avoid them. We don’t need someone who is a dab hand at arranging the entertainment or rearranging the deck chairs

      We need someone who cares about the future of this country and is prepared to take unpopular stances to protect that future

  11. In my own humble opinion the ALP can do whatever the fuck they want. Forget Abbott, ignore Abbott, pick of the slow beef in the herd.

    Hockey,Pyne, Joyce, Bishop, separate them from the rest of the herd. Tag team Opposition hitting these guys everyday all day, and don’t give Abbott one question, not a one.

    Get a frenetic pace of Parliamentary business going that puts Ruddock in a wheelchair.

    Pick off the lame and the weak. Fuck Abbott.

    • I could kiss you, allthumbs! Love it! Inspired! Add that to the ‘strategy’ list rather than the ‘perpetually aggrieved’ list, and take directly to Labor Party HQ.

  12. Go back to your first question Bob. This one is shit.

      • Bob, I like you. In fact I like you a lot.
        But I would have to venture deep into the rank and pernicious quagmire of bog standard MSM editorials to find such a jaundiced assessment of Gillard.
        Gillard not “[a]…consensus-builder”?!?!


        The woman who stitched, by deft hand and steely heart, a minority Govt from the godawful mess of a hung parliament.

        The woman who pushed through legislation against an ideological foe AND an assortment of lukewarm supporters, there ONLY by dint of her willingness AND ability to proceed with the act of governing.

        The woman who had to draw together the hostile bands within her own party long enough to translate political dreams into legislative reality.

        There is more Bob, but you get my drift.

        I would say that Gillard is the consensus builder par excellence in our recent political past. Neither Fraser, Hawke, Keating, Howard nor Rudd was put to the test as she was.
        And if for nothing else she should be complimented on performing the task for which she was CHOSEN - that of forming Govt. honourably and without the need to sell her arse to do so.

        If you want to bag her out there are other areas on which to focus but not this one; not for being a “scrapper” at the cost of being a “consensus builder”.

        Others have mentioned it in the past and I shall mention it again: it seems that on this subject (Gillard) your emotions rule your reason.

        I’d prefer you to answer more directly why it is you believe that Shorten is the man to win back Govt for Labor.

        And if you could please address those issues relevant to those, like myself, who would make the argument that Shorten’s greatest hurdle is his cardinal association with the 2 major (and unprecedented) political shocks of the past Labor Govt; the dismissal of Rudd, and the reinstalling of Rudd.

        Remember, this is NOT a critique of the man’s oratory skills nor his love of the “working man”, nor his emotional sensitivity nor his alleged ability to recruit “greyhound punters”, “nurses and teachers”.

        This is SOLELY a political question based on public perception.

        Don’t mistake my question as a partisan one; I don’t give a fuck who leads, I’m ONLY interested in securing Govt. in 3 years. Nothing else.
        Aside from polemic, of course.

        Make the argument Bob. There a plenty here who will listen.
        Make it.

        • re Gillard, you have well expressed the judgement of history

          re Shorten and Ruddgate, I don’t think that will matter to the electorate if Shorten has something to say to them - something more than Albanese offered in his first campaign speech (which I believe has to be a speech addressed to the Australian community)

          Abbs will blunder; but will Labor show that it is a more trustworthy replacement?

          Abbs’ own trick of lies and negativism won’t work for Labor in one term; Labor has to look like a potential government, with a plan for the nation, and with the belief, courage and unity to deliver

          This requires brains and guts from the leader, not mere fighting spirit.

        • To Judd:

          I hear you, and it is well said, and true. I said in these columns that Gillard backstage was a brilliant, witty, unselfish, decent person everybody liked and trusted — Windsor said this to me, and I believed him, absolutely — but that when she went up on stage, she turned to cheese. In dialogue, and in her sole Q&As she was excellent, but in those ‘mother of the nation’ moments she rang, not always, false and unskilled and sometimes ridiculous.

          I think what I mean, and you are right to correct me, is she was a dialogue person and not a monologue person, and these monologues included Question Time, when her haranguing tedium, paragraph by paragraph, nasality by nasality, repetition by repetition, killed the party’s chances of survival. She seemed a peculiar choice for Prime Minister, as Plibersek, Roxon, McKew, Martin, Bligh and Firth would not. And, to a lesser extent, Albo feels that way too. He feels more like a Mayor or a Premier. His ability, like hers, is not in question. His saleability, like Latham’s, is.

          • Yes, that is it : she was a dialogue person, not a monologue person.

            I think that is wisdom.

            The Leader needs to be a monologue person; one who can articulate the agenda, the program, in an entertaining and logical way.

            Such a one as a Gough, a Hawke, a Clinton, an Obama, a Blair.

            Is there such a person available?

            • This great country of ours has just elected a man who sought to frame our national narrative in three syllables, and not very entertaingly at that. I want a Labor leader that is going to kick the living shit out of Hockey and Pyne for a good while. Labor won’t win in three years with Bill Clinton as its leader. Shorten can have it in 2016.

              • Agree, Spleeney, someone who can kick the kickers.

              • Didn’t know Bill Clinton was available! Just an example of a monologue leader, Spleenblatt.

                Don’t you think Clinton circa 1992 had charisma? If such a one had led Labor for the last 10 weeks we would have had a very different result to celebrate.

                • Old Willy’s just waiting for the call, but even his ethereal charisma would be to no avail. Labor’s toxicity needs to decline at a faster rate than the LNP’s rises, and I don’t see that happening within three years. Shorten - whom I do admire, and acknowledge will ultimately be a sane, sagacious and sufficiently palatable leader to our News Ltd overlords - I doubt will maintain his party’s and the public’s patience beyond a lost election. He should bide his time until 2016, develop an approximation of unaffected charisma, and let Albo go at it in the meantime.

          • I appreciate your thought provoking reply Bob. Your writing is much better served with a little meat on the bone.

            Whilst I disagree, for the most part, on the monologue/dialogue distinction you make, I would like to leave that for another discussion.
            I’m more interested in this question at the moment - if, as you say, the issue rests with one’s ‘saleability’ to what quality, expression, or history do you credit Shorten’s ‘saleability’?

            To my present mind Shorten is worth about $3.75. He WAS a million dollar man whom I had once pegged, along with Combet, as future Labor leaders.
            That of course turned to rancid shite when his EXPLICIT role in Rudd’s removal was revealed. I never understood why such backroom dealings should have been embraced so lovingly, owned so jealously, and with so much fucking celebrity.
            Only hubris could guide such an action. Nothing else.
            It was a profound error of (political) judgement.
            His ashen face three years later confirmed that.
            It’s hard to remember the last time I saw a man so ensnared. I had the distinct feeling that i was witness to something Shakespearean that June evening as he announced his decision, his face older, much older, than his 46 years.

            I’m not sure that that rude Machiavellian stain can be erased so soon.
            Unless of course people are idiots with short memories.
            My dad thinks they are.

            I suppose we’ll see soon enough.

            Anyway, Shorten’s ‘saleability” - what is it, where does it come from, and what’s the pitch?
            Fuck the first two Bob, leave them to those that care. I’m only interested in the third - ‘what’s the pitch?’

            • Removing Rudd was a reaction to Rudd’s unreachable, wayward, impulsive insanity. It was not done to advance Shorten, he knew it would harm him, but to save the party from defeat. Gillard would have won easily but for Rudd’s (again insane) leaking against her, and there would have been no Hung Parliament, and Gillard would have yielded power in 2023 to Clare or Plibersek. Shorten knew this and acted selflessly. He can add.

              I know him, and he can add. I asked him repeatedly to remove Gillard and replace her, and he would not. He was acting selflessly again. You must not judge someone you do not know. I saw, repeatedly, good things in Abbott, because I knew him. You mustn’t be like this. Believe me, I am a witness.

    • Judd, I feel Shorten is a bit too careful, almost unsure when he answers questions, rightly or wrongly I also feel that he tries to please.

      Albanese exudes confidence and positivity, in my humble opinion.I personally prefer that.

      • Shows the difference in people, H: I like some uncertainty; one of the things about Rudd in his last days was his willilngness to actually DISCUSS things, to admit there were other views and that he had to put a case.

        Pity pollies nowadays only try it as a last resort.

        There was a time when politicians didn’t feel the needed to pretend they were Hollywood-style supermen who could solve all our problems for us (and tell the richest people in the history of the world how hard up they were). [personal pet peeve: the harm the immense persuasive power of hollwood in the service of vile capitalists has done our culture]

        Maybe you weren’t coming at it from this angle, H, but that is my take

        • Too careful to … what? Win? Or lose? Rudd won by being careful. So did Abbott. So did Howard.

          • The old adage is that oppositions don’t win, it is governments that lose. A careful leader is often more effective than one who demands a leap of faith.

            But cometh the hour, cometh the man.

            • old adages are just that, old.

              Let’s make up a new one - bad governments are defeated by an opposition which convinces the people that they have a better way, partly by pointing out the failings of the govt, partly by HAVING, and believing in, and explaining their ideas for the future

  13. Soapy Mirabellaopolous has conceded defeat in Indi. This blog was the first way before the election to say she was in trouble.

    A festering infection has been incised from the House.

  14. Bob, Ar thur Calwell had a very difficult job, I have always felt.
    He had the Fairfax organisation against him and, of course, the brilliance of Menzies but, I feel, he did his best.
    If you will excuse me, I do not like to see him denigrated.

    • A timely reminder that Turdoch is just more crass, not more biased than the media in Australia always has been against a people’s party

      Brilliance of Menzies? See my comments on the Bull below. Menzies had more rat-cunning than the Bull, enough to keep his ego in control anyhow, but how about an example of his brilliance?

      Cocky was a real Australian, not a good thing to be in the land of cultural cringe

  15. …..addressing the United Nations? Addressing the House of Commons? The Soviet Praesidium? The Labor Party National Conference?


    • plenty of people could do it. And, frankly, it is cultural cringe (or worse) to say that Albinese or Calwell couldn’t represent the REAL Australia very well.

  16. Tony said whilst being sworn in today, he will govern for all Australians including all those that didn’t vote for him.


    Let the sackings commence.

    “TREASURY secretary Dr Martin Parkinson will voluntarily leave his post next year, avoiding the fate of three other department heads sacked by Tony Abbott today.”

    - See more at:

    This is just the start.

    There are about 12,000 other names Abbott will systematically wipe out with great efficiency.

  17. Albanese has all that it takes, but I feel that Shorten would be the better choice. Of course then it’s a field day for the Liberals.. it’s a bit hard to win at this point.

  18. Latham? Who?

    A thousand curses at the mere utterance. Who?

    • It seems to me the denigration of Latham often comes from those who buy into the closed-mind, old-boys, born-to-rule, ever-increasing-GNP old Australia that is increasingly being left behind by the electorate (yes, I know he failed, but the reasons for that are complex)

      • He denigrates himself regularly. When is it wise to compare oneself with Clive Palmer? He displays moments of brilliance, he always has. The comparison with Albo though, or Hawke. Wrong sport let alone ball park. Only Rudd compares IMHO.

  19. Bob, love your passion towards Labor but beware of yourself going overboard and doing this idealising thing you tend to do, in this case the idealising of Shorten. Personally, I get the sense that Shorten’s not quite ready yet. Listen closely, he’s not articulating his thoughts nearly as clearly as Albo is. He’s stumbling and hesitating and is more jumpy and less sure-footed than he should be. I think this gives Shorten’s unreadiness away. I don’t get a clear view of who the man Shorten is when I listen to him but I do when I listen to Albo.

    • And who would win more seats?

      Abbott seems uncertain and fumbling most of the time, yet has seen off Rudd, Gillard, Bradbury, Combet, Oakeshott, Windsor, Slipper, Thomson, Kelly and Roxon.

      Who would win more seats?

      • Abbott would not have seen off Rudd, Gillard, Bradbury, Combet, Oakeshott, Windsor, Slipper, Thomson, Kelly or Roxon without the unswerving support of a deeply corrupt mainstream media, led in part by a doddering old cuckold who taps the telephones of dead little girls.

        You’re absolutely correct; the next leader must be able to win seats back - and that’s why it’s got to be Albo.

        Albo is the one candidate who can heal the deep divisions within the party and return it to a united party, ready for government, with the least amount of fuss.

        Bill Shorten’s very public switching of support from Gillard to Rudd is still fresh in the mind of many punters, and so I feel that many will switch off from supporting him because of this.

        And I would certainly feel far, far more pride seeing Albo address the UN, or the Commons, or the US Congress, or the Russian State Duma, than the dishonest, misogynistic, pederast-protecting vandal presently leading that illegal junta of wingnuts in Canberra.

        • “Albo is the one candidate who can heal the deep divisions within the party and return it to a united party, ready for government, with the least amount of fuss.”

          You are so right, Umberto, I think only Albanese can do it. It also matters that people like him, he’s a genuine person, not a pretender, not a pleaser.
          My intuition about people is (almost) always right. :cool:

        • For want of better words, Abbott is the type who spreads his s**t around. Happy you are in his company if you join the tribe. If not, get the hell away. The rest had had enough and I don’t blame them. I think both Abbott and Murdoch are the bad eggs. We need someone brilliant who knows how to handle them. You’re right! at present there is a vacuum, but of Abbott’s making too, not just Labor without a leader. Abbott is a very unpopular leader, and this has the possibility of creating the other extreme.

  20. Still the same question:

    Which candidate is feared most by the Liberal Party? Shorten or Albanese?

    My guess is Shorten: representing the next generation, cool-headed, articulate, ambitious.

    But whoever it is, they will be up against Turnbull at the next election. So we should also be asking ourselves the next question: who will win against Malcolm, the charismatic spiv? That’s where it starts to get even more interesting.

    • Glow Worm, what about Albanese against Abbott, and Shorten against Turnbull.

      Turnbull is more civil and not a bully like Abbott, so Shorten would be fine.

      • Yes, Helvi, but I’m opening up the possibility of Plibersek or Wong going up against ‘ole Spivo. They need space to ready the plodding populace for another woman in power.

      • Turnbull has as much chance of becoming the leader of the Liberal Party again, as women have of dominating the Rabbott cabinet, I fear Helvi.

        • Don’t be too sure - the fire of ambition burns brightly in ‘ole Spivo, and by the time the election rolls around and the grey porridge start getting restless and are tired of Tony’s lizard-like qualities, he could still make a move.

          Or switch sides! No there’s a thought.

          Anyone holding meetings with him in dark and gloomy Canberra car parks?

    • The Bull charismatic?


      A beautifully turned out GPS born-to-rule Australian aristocrat, quite without ideas or guts. A fine example of the old squatocracy.

      And also blessed with a Rudd-strength self-opinion.

      Sadly, I don’t think he has the fire to retake the leadership or hold it for long if he did

  21. We have a new PM :cool:
    And he’s going to govern for all

    He’s going to govern
    for Helvi
    for Tony Windsor
    for Swan, who had fewer people to thank
    for little Marieke
    for Big Tanya
    for Penny who couldn’t add up
    for Shorten, new Labor leader, no question
    for Barbara, whose prayers weren’t answered
    for those delicate flowers we call Emily’s Listers
    for Fran and Phil and Barrie and Bonge
    for Bob who once was a friend
    for everyone!

    And they will learn to love him
    As he governs for all.

    We are where we are

    • What about me?

    • No no, you’ve got it all wrong.

      He’s going to govern
      for christian men
      for other men
      for businessmen
      for the rich men
      for christian women
      for the other women
      he can’t think of anyone else

      • He does not care about:

        Gay men
        Gay women
        or their children

        Children in public schools.
        Children whose dad has run away.
        Poor pensioners.
        Disabled men, women, children
        nor their carers.
        According to him:
        climate change is crap.
        Asylum seekers are our enemies,
        their skin colour is all wrong.
        Foreign aid is wasted on foreigners.
        Sport is good,
        Art rhymes with fart.
        Foreign countries should understand us,
        no need to agree with us.
        And more….

    • LOL, AM, good to see some humour amongst the Libs. :cool:

    • Abbs has no intention of governing for all. If he is talking he is lying

  22. Discuss? What is there to discuss. Brilliantly put. Slam dunk. Case Closed. It’s got to be Shorten.

  23. Wasn’t Tony Abbott considered ‘unelectable’ when he became opposition leader?

    • would have been, too, confronted by a united Labor

    • Yes, Abbott was considered the most ‘unelectable’. Even more ‘unelectable’ than the other most ‘unelectable’ (Howard) who hung around for nearly 12 years.

      We are where we are.

    • He still is unelectable.
      People just wanted rid of Labor, because of the dishonest, negative campaigning against them over three years.
      Tony was the last man standing.
      As soon as there’s a viable Labor alternative he’s gone.
      That’s why he’ll be replaced before his first term is out. Also because of his hare-brained schemes like PPL and no workchoices.

      • Well put. Also, the Libs had just enough brains between them to figure out that they could add ‘instability’ to their list of empty slogans at the election. So they stuck with Tony like limpets. Do you think he is well-liked? Admired? Not a bit of it. But it worked. They are in, and we are out.

        That Gillard ran one of the most effective Governments in decades was buried in Murdoch’s avalanche of shite.

        • Abbott’s reign as leader is secure whilst he surrounds himself with powerful women.

          If you watched his swearing in ceremony today, you couldn’t help notice Peta Credlin stalking the room, head and shoulders above the suits and scowling at lick-spittle Libs like a she-lion protecting her cub.

          She growled at any suit that happened to wander in Tony’s general direction. Malcolm Turnbull looked a bit lost and forgot to make his oath clutching his bible. So rattled was he.

          Credlin is a tall threatening Amazonian lady covered in a leopard animal print blouse - probably something she killed and tanned herself. A lost leopard from Toronga Park Zoo perhaps?

          In any event, Tony has the wit and the good sense to protect his office with an Amazonian warrior woman dressed in animal skins. Enough to make any potential Lib wither and shrivel away… Turnbull will never be a threat. Like an old stag his antlers will never connect with Abbott.

      • So they unelect Labor and elect and unelectable mmm?

  24. I vote Latham.

  25. I agree.


    “The Soviet Praesidium”…?

    There has not been one for over 20 years. I assume that reference is just literary dramatic licence based on … something from the past.

    • Its a detail to be used as a spring board to the leap up to the heights where giants shoulders form a perch to see furthur than they ever could.

      Of course one can always choose to hang out on their toe nails looking down at the ground and seeing no forest or trees with duhkha duhka duhkha

  26. How did Gillard get over 500 pieces of legislation passed if she couldn’t build consensus? It’s easier to look statesmanly when you have a comfortable majority, rather than being forced to scratch out a living leading a minority government. It’s even easier when the body and suit fits comfortable assumptions. Unfortunately, no one cares how we present on the world stage. If they did we wouldn’t have the current election result.

    • And don’t forget how hard it was for Othello to look good with little Iago creeping and scheming around every corner.

    • Gillard was a bloody masterly leader.

      from the political sword

      “It is to [Windsor adn Oakeshott's] eternal credit that they stuck with Julia Gillard throughout, until her own party removed her. They said their loyalty was based on mutual respect earned as each adhered to the agreement they struck in 2010. They said she had not let them down - she had kept her side of the bargain. In turn, they did not let her down.

      “In a touching tribute to a wistful Julia Gillard, in his valedictory speech Rob Oakeshott told her he had tweeted her on the night of her replacement by Kevin Rudd: “Your father would have been proud of you”. In the same speech he wryly observed: ““I have been shocked, frankly, over the last three years, to meet ugly Australia and just to see the width and depth of ugly Australia.” Is it a surprise then that he would seek relief from the unremitting nastiness and ugliness that surrounded him for the life of the 43rd parliament?”

      “ugly Australia” = misognyist Australia

      • Totally agree JSA. I had huge respect for Gillard history will be on her side.She is a good woman who truly believed Rudd was removed because he was incompetent ect ect. I just cant forgive him for his disloyalty to the ALP and the Australian people.

        • And neither should we forgive him. I am all for forgiveness. Forgiveness should follow the criminal’s acceptance of his vile behaviour, and repentance. Forgiveness on other terms sets a dangerous example for other weak characters

        • I disagree with johnsa, totally.
          (except on Malcolm Turnbull)

          Lu Lu, will you next claim that Gillard hadn’t one ambitious bone in her body and totally had never joined the plotters in anyone’s removal, ever? Where was she when Rudd “was removed” - when it “happened”? Knitting like a good woman? I totally don’t think so.
          Oakeshott wry? He should be. He wanted the ugliness of beauty.
          I’m totally satisfied that he got what he totally wanted.

          • “He wanted the ugliness of beauty”

            I love it when people break the mold of language; sadly, I also often have to reread V Woolfe several times over years to reach understanding

        • If it was right for the left to remove him (KRudd) in 2010 then it was wrong to make him leader in 2007. That is called divine logic and divine logic is one way to Reason.

          Once KRudd became LotO in 2007 and then PM in November he should never have been removed by a few insiders - that is why it takes high crimes and misdemeanors to remove US presidents or other high ranking politicians.

          None of the accusations made against Rudd are of that type but are rather trivial in contrast but his removal borders on criminal conspiracy because it reeks of treason and would be seen that way were the head of government elected by the people.

          Twaddle? Silly? How about reasoned responses??? I will not respond to the usual reflexively abusive responders. Only serious responders need apply. A constitutional convention is serious stuff and this is it.

      • I smell a rat, Johnsalmond! If you are a bloke I’ll eat my slip. Your sensitivity and concern for the issues that affect half the population is HIGHLY suspicious! No, offence meant- it’s actually a complement.

        • I bolster my manly status by pointing to the words of the undoubted bloke Judd above re Gillard

          Judd September 18, 2013 at 5:31 pm

          • On a more serious note, since it gives me a chance to give a shout-out to my favourite author, in my age I have come to some wisdom on maybe this one subject, and in the process have become a great enthusiast for the works of Virginia Woolf. A brilliant mind and a wonderful imagination and a great heart.

            ‘A room of one’s own’, her diaries (notably the condensation ‘A writer’s diary’ are always a pleasure. And (except the diaries) all free on the intertubes thingy

            • Solid Objects is still one of my favourite short stories.

              • My disorderly reading hadn’t come across that. It brought to mind another of my favourites Phillip K. Dick; I wonder if he wouldn’t have written such a story if he hadn’t needed to support himself by his writing (which was the reason he went in for SF) - a thought that brings us back to VW and her Room.

                Maybe VW herself would have by choice eliminated even the slight structure and just left the scenes like a heap of those bright objects?

                • John! Thank fuck I’m not the only one here reading PKD. We will all be eating horse meat from the Lucky Dog Pet Store if these libs aren’t kicked out soon.

            • I had not read any Virginia Woolf before meeting Gerard; he had all her books, so no need to buy any, also all of Aldous Huxley, Oscar Wilde, and of course Patrick White. Took me a long time to get into White, for me his books are for slow reading, and are totally different to what I was used to, as in Finland the must reads were the Russian and German authors, besides our own and the writers of other Scandinavian countries.

              • oh, don’t start me on White!! another who I haven’t read all of, and as you say takes an effort, but Tree of Man is THE Australian novel in my limited reading, the parts of Riders in the Chariot centred on Xanadu and its owner especially, lots of Solid Mandala are magic

                (The suburb name Barrenugli encompasses Barry Humphries’ entire output :wink: )

  27. This titillating of the imagination has me quickly moving on from the two old paradigm candidates to the Honorable Member for Sydney - the eminent new paradigm candidate who has the genius and talents to make Australia proud in each of those fora you mention Bob.

    • Now this rickety old Westminster house of cards lends itself to a caretaker leader of the opposition like the hapless Dr. Nelson of Bradfield who was LotO until he passed the baton to Mr Turnbull who carried it and passed it off to the maggotty puppet to wriggle on home on Ruperts coat tails.

      Is that the next question - who will be caretaker LotO until the final lap when TP sprints to the finish line and gold?

  28. another krudd farce

    Abbs policies are unravelling as they had to, and Labor is spending a quiet month navel-gazing.

    It will take 6 months to regain momentum, perhaps a unique chance has been lost for a wanker

    POLICY is the way to go when confronted by a liar who lied all through the years of his leadership

    Reality will now bite

    • this prompeted by exNavy boss pointing out that send the boats back will be easily defeated by sinking boats, and our Navy will then have to risk their lives saving people

      what a grand opportunity for an Opposition leader to establish themself on a clear issue

    • just to be clear, ‘the liar who lied, blatantly, insultingly, all through the years of his leadership of the Opposition’

Leave a Comment

NOTE - You can use these HTML tags and attributes:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>