Today I heard a list of ppl who despise Rudd, it numbered atleast 2 dozen ranging from Qld politicians from the 90s like Goss, to ppl like Latham, Swan, Crean, Conroy, Wong and many many more.

Why is Rudd hated so much by his own party??

I don't know.  I think he is a lovely intelligent chap.

BUT

I have been a QLD public servant.

And years before Rudd became leader of the opposition - I was told by colleagues who had worked with him that he was a nasty piece of poo.

I didn't believe it at the time.
I still have seen no evidence of it myself.


BUT - people who's opinion I respect told me it was so.

His public persona is now matching the opinions I received form collegues years ago.
I still respect their opinions.  Even more so.

Rudd is seen as an arrogant 2-faced pr1ck by the majority of his ALP team.

The fact that they are prepared to meet political death than to elect him shows their hatred for him

We saw this arrogance when he won the 2007 election in the way he treated his staff and the air hostess.

He could be described as narcissistic - needing constant adulation and praise by his backers.

This is why he will rage, rant and pout when he does not get his way.

Yesterday - despite urgings from people who voted against him previously Rudd selfishly sacrificed them because he was pouting in the corner.

This guy is now exposed as a coward.

Thoughts?

My thought is you are acting above your station.

Rankers should be seen and not heard son.

Bly stil Korporaal!
As we say in Afrikaans.

Like to post a link to back it up?

I didn’t think so.

Don’t listen to these leftards, Woof Woof. They’re all mouth and no trousers. At least Toni Wright-Windsor up in Hornsby had some decent animal welfare policies.

I'd be more inclined to trust Crean's word than Rudd's, and going by what Crean was saying on the radio today, Rudd is far more interested in himself than the party.

It seems that Rudd was prepared to put the heads of others on the line just to have a peek at the numbers that he may have, and then decline to stand when he realised that the numbers weren't there, falling back on his bs "won't challenge the leadership" comment.

Abbott commented that "It's time for the adults to take charge".
I think that he was correct in saying that because we need the best people available doing the job for the country, not constant reshuffling of positions based on who supports who within a political party.
Contrary to popular belief, we vote for a team, not a PM.

Amadd wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 12:05am:

I'd be more inclined to trust Crean's word than Rudd's, and going by what Crean was saying on the radio today, Rudd is far more interested in himself than the party.

I am inclined to agree with that


Amadd wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 12:05am:

Abbott commented that "It's time for the adults to take charge". .

I am inclined to laugh like a drain at what ever old Punchy Abbott says.

Punchy will not be leader at the next election.  What he says is irrelevant.

Quote:

I am inclined to laugh like a drain at what ever old Punchy Abbott says. Punchy will not be leader at the next election.  What he says is irrelevant.

It's Labor's fault for giving him any credibility at all.
They make him look good.

woof woof wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2013 at 9:30pm:

Today I heard a list of ppl who despise Rudd, it numbered atleast 2 dozen ranging from Qld politicians from the 90s like Goss, to ppl like Latham, Swan, Crean, Conroy, Wong and many many more. Why is Rudd hated so much by his own party??

Yesterday I heard a list of people who despise sauerkraut. It numbered at least three dozen ranging from well known sportsmen, two tradies and a guy who takes stones out of horses' hooves.

Think my source might be the same as yours, woof woof?

Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 2:30am:

woof woof wrote on Mar 22nd, 2013 at 9:30pm: Today I heard a list of ppl who despise Rudd, it numbered atleast 2 dozen ranging from Qld politicians from the 90s like Goss, to ppl like Latham, Swan, Crean, Conroy, Wong and many many more. Why is Rudd hated so much by his own party?? Yesterday I heard a list of people who despise sauerkraut. It numbered at least three dozen ranging from well known sportsmen, two tradies and a guy who takes stones out of horses' hooves. Think my source might be the same as yours, woof woof?

Were they all a part of the sauerkraut fan club?

You idiot.

woof woof wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2013 at 9:30pm:

Today I heard a list of ppl who despise Rudd, it numbered atleast 2 dozen ranging from Qld politicians from the 90s like Goss, to ppl like Latham, Swan, Crean, Conroy, Wong and many many more. Why is Rudd hated so much by his own party??

It seems the QLD public love him. Dont know why. Even my flatmate who is a liberal voter likes him. Hmm maybe thats why . . . 

SOB

Amadd wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 12:05am:

I'd be more inclined to trust Crean's word than Rudd's, and going by what Crean was saying on the radio today, Rudd is far more interested in himself than the party. It seems that Rudd was prepared to put the heads of others on the line just to have a peek at the numbers that he may have, and then decline to stand when he realised that the numbers weren't there, falling back on his bs "won't challenge the leadership" comment. Abbott commented that "It's time for the adults to take charge". I think that he was correct in saying that because we need the best people available doing the job for the country, not constant reshuffling of positions based on who supports who within a political party. Contrary to popular belief, we vote for a team, not a PM.

Obviously you prefer to listen to those say what you want to hear according to the agenda. Abbott of course is going to trash him - abbott trashes anybody that might be a threat to him.

SOB

the media is spinning rudd and dog whistling the trolls again. Rudd didnt "give up on the leadership" he has been saying all along he didnt want to go back to it.

SOB

Why? Because he is an incompetent egomaniac control freak!

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 4:54am:

Why? Because he is an incompetent egomaniac control freak!

You mean like every single pollie?

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 5:02am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 23rd, 2013 at 4:54am: Why? Because he is an incompetent egomaniac control freak! You mean like every single pollie? SOB

No, not like all politicians. I haven't heard of anyone else reducing a flight attendant to tears over a hair dryer...

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 5:04am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 23rd, 2013 at 5:02am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 23rd, 2013 at 4:54am: Why? Because he is an incompetent egomaniac control freak! You mean like every single pollie? SOB No, not like all politicians. I haven't heard of anyone else reducing a flight attendant to tears over a hair dryer...

Just because you havent heard if it doesnt mean it didnt happen. We only hear about these things when the media wants dirt. Look @ the abbott fist in wall thing.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 5:11am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 23rd, 2013 at 5:04am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 23rd, 2013 at 5:02am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 23rd, 2013 at 4:54am: Why? Because he is an incompetent egomaniac control freak! You mean like every single pollie? SOB No, not like all politicians. I haven't heard of anyone else reducing a flight attendant to tears over a hair dryer... Just because you havent heard if it doesnt mean it didnt happen. We only hear about these things when the media wants dirt. Look @ the abbott fist in wall thing. SOB

What fist in the wall? Yet to get any credible proof that happened way back in 1973! Besides that, he was a young Uni student back then, not a politician. I'm sure Gillard didn't have an event-free time in her Uni days...

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 5:23am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 23rd, 2013 at 5:11am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 23rd, 2013 at 5:04am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 23rd, 2013 at 5:02am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 23rd, 2013 at 4:54am: Why? Because he is an incompetent egomaniac control freak! You mean like every single pollie? SOB No, not like all politicians. I haven't heard of anyone else reducing a flight attendant to tears over a hair dryer... Just because you havent heard if it doesnt mean it didnt happen. We only hear about these things when the media wants dirt. Look @ the abbott fist in wall thing. SOB What fist in the wall? Yet to get any credible proof that happened way back in 1973! Besides that, he was a young Uni student back then, not a politician. I'm sure Gillard didn't have an event-free time in her Uni days...

Exactly. Im sure none of them did and they are all the same. As far as i have heard rudd wasnt a bully @ school.

SOB

Amadd wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 3:36am:

Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 23rd, 2013 at 2:30am: woof woof wrote on Mar 22nd, 2013 at 9:30pm: Today I heard a list of ppl who despise Rudd, it numbered atleast 2 dozen ranging from Qld politicians from the 90s like Goss, to ppl like Latham, Swan, Crean, Conroy, Wong and many many more. Why is Rudd hated so much by his own party?? Yesterday I heard a list of people who despise sauerkraut. It numbered at least three dozen ranging from well known sportsmen, two tradies and a guy who takes stones out of horses' hooves. Think my source might be the same as yours, woof woof? Were they all a part of the sauerkraut fan club? You idiot.

There's definitely an idiot on this thread, but it ain't me.

Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 6:57am:

Amadd wrote on Mar 23rd, 2013 at 3:36am: Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 23rd, 2013 at 2:30am: woof woof wrote on Mar 22nd, 2013 at 9:30pm: Today I heard a list of ppl who despise Rudd, it numbered atleast 2 dozen ranging from Qld politicians from the 90s like Goss, to ppl like Latham, Swan, Crean, Conroy, Wong and many many more. Why is Rudd hated so much by his own party?? Yesterday I heard a list of people who despise sauerkraut. It numbered at least three dozen ranging from well known sportsmen, two tradies and a guy who takes stones out of horses' hooves. Think my source might be the same as yours, woof woof? Were they all a part of the sauerkraut fan club? You idiot. There's definitely an idiot on this thread, but it ain't me.

You take anti psycho pills because you aren't an idiot.

Yeah, that makes sense.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 5:04am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 23rd, 2013 at 5:02am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 23rd, 2013 at 4:54am: Why? Because he is an incompetent egomaniac control freak! You mean like every single pollie? SOB No, not like all politicians. I haven't heard of anyone else reducing a flight attendant to tears over a hair dryer...

No, it was over a sandwich filling!

The hairdryer episode was at a different location

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 4:54am:

Why? Because he is an incompetent egomaniac control freak!

So says the ppl that just want to hate on him. Who knows why? Perhaps his wife said to stop. Perhaps he had enough. Perhaps he is doing whats right for the party.

SOB

I don't 'hate' him.  Hate is way too personal a term.  I don't personally know him

However, I do detest him

It's my personal opinion that Rudd is mentally unstable

The way he speaks, for one: that 'Schoolkid reading a book to the class' voice he uses. It's not normal.  It's not manly.  It's affected.  He sounds like a precocious ten-year old who's in love with himself

Then there are the Transvestite-type asides which he injects into his Schoolkid-Reading-a-Book style monologues about himself -- when he inserts what he appears to believe is Bruce Willis type 'menace' .... as in his lowered voice as he hissed, 'It's not going to happen' --- accompanied by a glare like a bitter old auntie who's cake got second-prize at the fete

* All the posturing
* the monologues about himself -- always about him
* the Bates Motel type voices and facial tics
* the self-pity -- invariably when he's caused the problem himself
* the blaming of others - when he's to blame
* the attempts to sound like fifty different people simultaneously
* the venom
* the anger
* the weirdness
* the petulance
* the temper tantrums, like a spoiled brat
* his utter self-absorption to the exclusion of everyone, everything else
* his self-promotion - which isn't matched by reality
* his vengefulness
* his spitefulness
* his unfettered, massive, beyond belief size ego
* his conceit
* his impotence
* his self-serving disloyalty



Just the sight -- let alone the sound -- of Rudd blathering on endlessly about himself ... is enough to cause me to switch off the tv

He seems to believe he is a combination of Churchill, Menzies, JFK, Caesar, Einstein, John Wayne and an entire battalion of Rhodes Scholars, plus

He seems to believe it his destiny to be the ultimate, entire-world's Grand Statesman

To me, Rudd is an impotent, gender-confused little twat who spent (and spends) WAY too much time with himself, envisioning himself as an acknowledged mental and political Giant.  In other words, it's my belief he's delusional -- is extremely fantasy-prone -- is literally IN LOVE WITH HIMSELF.  To the point I suspect he probably kisses his own reflection in mirrors and hogs the bathroom in order to do so constantly

I think he's mad as a hatter and I'm glad he's been shot down, hopefully for good and in time for an army of psychiatrists to put him in a padded cell for the duration

So I don't know why others hate him

but above are my opinions of him

I think he's nuts -- flat out nuts

Maqqa wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2013 at 10:52pm:

Yesterday - despite urgings from people who voted against him previously Rudd selfishly sacrificed them

After the FIRST spill ( ... and BIG LOSS) he made an UNEQUIVICAL commitment NOT to challenge Gillard again - for the life of the Parliament


How many languages did he need to SAY it in ?


There never WAS a Rudd/Crean ticket
Only Crean knew what Crean was thinking
But I THINK he may have sacrificed his cabinet post to end the MEDIA HYSTERIA - once and for all - for what he thought was for "the good of the party"

buzzanddidj wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 4:36pm:

Maqqa wrote on Mar 22nd, 2013 at 10:52pm: Yesterday - despite urgings from people who voted against him previously Rudd selfishly sacrificed them After the FIRST spill ( ... and BIG LOSS) he made an UNEQUIVICAL commitment NOT to challenge Gillard again - for the life of the Parliament How many languages did he need to SAY it in ? There never WAS a Rudd/Crean ticket Only Crean knew what Crean was thinking But I THINK he may have sacrificed his cabinet post to end the MEDIA HYSTERIA - once and for all - for what he thought was for "the good of the party"

Go back to what he said then

Go back to what he said before the ballot on Thursday

Then compare it to what you said above

PZ547 wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 1:20pm:

I don't 'hate' him.  Hate is way too personal a term.  I don't personally know him However, I do detest him It's my personal opinion that Rudd is mentally unstable The way he speaks, for one: that 'Schoolkid reading a book to the class' voice he uses. It's not normal.  It's not manly.  It's affected.  He sounds like a precocious ten-year old who's in love with himself Then there are the Transvestite-type asides which he injects into his Schoolkid-Reading-a-Book style monologues about himself -- when he inserts what he appears to believe is Bruce Willis type 'menace' .... as in his lowered voice as he hissed, 'It's not going to happen' --- accompanied by a glare like a bitter old auntie who's cake got second-prize at the fete * All the posturing * the monologues about himself -- always about him * the Bates Motel type voices and facial tics * the self-pity -- invariably when he's caused the problem himself * the blaming of others - when he's to blame * the attempts to sound like fifty different people simultaneously * the venom * the anger * the weirdness * the petulance * the temper tantrums, like a spoiled brat * his utter self-absorption to the exclusion of everyone, everything else * his self-promotion - which isn't matched by reality * his vengefulness * his spitefulness * his unfettered, massive, beyond belief size ego * his conceit * his impotence * his self-serving disloyalty Just the sight -- let alone the sound -- of Rudd blathering on endlessly about himself ... is enough to cause me to switch off the tv He seems to believe he is a combination of Churchill, Menzies, JFK, Caesar, Einstein, John Wayne and an entire battalion of Rhodes Scholars, plus He seems to believe it his destiny to be the ultimate, entire-world's Grand Statesman To me, Rudd is an impotent, gender-confused little twat who spent (and spends) WAY too much time with himself, envisioning himself as an acknowledged mental and political Giant.  In other words, it's my belief he's delusional -- is extremely fantasy-prone -- is literally IN LOVE WITH HIMSELF.  To the point I suspect he probably kisses his own reflection in mirrors and hogs the bathroom in order to do so constantly I think he's mad as a hatter and I'm glad he's been shot down, hopefully for good and in time for an army of psychiatrists to put him in a padded cell for the duration So I don't know why others hate him but above are my opinions of him I think he's nuts -- flat out nuts

ditto - but replace the word Rudd with Gillard

PZ547 wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 1:20pm:

I don't 'hate' him.  Hate is way too personal a term.  I don't personally know him However, I do detest him It's my personal opinion that Rudd is mentally unstable The way he speaks, for one: that 'Schoolkid reading a book to the class' voice he uses. It's not normal.  It's not manly.  It's affected.  He sounds like a precocious ten-year old who's in love with himself Then there are the Transvestite-type asides which he injects into his Schoolkid-Reading-a-Book style monologues about himself -- when he inserts what he appears to believe is Bruce Willis type 'menace' .... as in his lowered voice as he hissed, 'It's not going to happen' --- accompanied by a glare like a bitter old auntie who's cake got second-prize at the fete * All the posturing * the monologues about himself -- always about him * the Bates Motel type voices and facial tics * the self-pity -- invariably when he's caused the problem himself * the blaming of others - when he's to blame * the attempts to sound like fifty different people simultaneously * the venom * the anger * the weirdness * the petulance * the temper tantrums, like a spoiled brat * his utter self-absorption to the exclusion of everyone, everything else * his self-promotion - which isn't matched by reality * his vengefulness * his spitefulness * his unfettered, massive, beyond belief size ego * his conceit * his impotence * his self-serving disloyalty Just the sight -- let alone the sound -- of Rudd blathering on endlessly about himself ... is enough to cause me to switch off the tv He seems to believe he is a combination of Churchill, Menzies, JFK, Caesar, Einstein, John Wayne and an entire battalion of Rhodes Scholars, plus He seems to believe it his destiny to be the ultimate, entire-world's Grand Statesman To me, Rudd is an impotent, gender-confused little twat who spent (and spends) WAY too much time with himself, envisioning himself as an acknowledged mental and political Giant.  In other words, it's my belief he's delusional -- is extremely fantasy-prone -- is literally IN LOVE WITH HIMSELF.  To the point I suspect he probably kisses his own reflection in mirrors and hogs the bathroom in order to do so constantly I think he's mad as a hatter and I'm glad he's been shot down, hopefully for good and in time for an army of psychiatrists to put him in a padded cell for the duration So I don't know why others hate him but above are my opinions of him I think he's nuts -- flat out nuts

Wow you just described john howard except you left out the lying every single sentence ever uttered.

SOB

What is it about posters who name themselves after numberplates?

That would have to be one of the most bizarre postings I have ever read.

PZ547 wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 1:20pm:

I don't 'hate' him.  Hate is way too personal a term.  I don't personally know him However, I do detest him It's my personal opinion that Rudd is mentally unstable The way he speaks, for one: that 'Schoolkid reading a book to the class' voice he uses. It's not normal.  It's not manly.  It's affected.  He sounds like a precocious ten-year old who's in love with himself Then there are the Transvestite-type asides which he injects into his Schoolkid-Reading-a-Book style monologues about himself -- when he inserts what he appears to believe is Bruce Willis type 'menace' .... as in his lowered voice as he hissed, 'It's not going to happen' --- accompanied by a glare like a bitter old auntie who's cake got second-prize at the fete * All the posturing * the monologues about himself -- always about him * the Bates Motel type voices and facial tics * the self-pity -- invariably when he's caused the problem himself * the blaming of others - when he's to blame * the attempts to sound like fifty different people simultaneously * the venom * the anger * the weirdness * the petulance * the temper tantrums, like a spoiled brat * his utter self-absorption to the exclusion of everyone, everything else * his self-promotion - which isn't matched by reality * his vengefulness * his spitefulness * his unfettered, massive, beyond belief size ego * his conceit * his impotence * his self-serving disloyalty Just the sight -- let alone the sound -- of Rudd blathering on endlessly about himself ... is enough to cause me to switch off the tv He seems to believe he is a combination of Churchill, Menzies, JFK, Caesar, Einstein, John Wayne and an entire battalion of Rhodes Scholars, plus He seems to believe it his destiny to be the ultimate, entire-world's Grand Statesman To me, Rudd is an impotent, gender-confused little twat who spent (and spends) WAY too much time with himself, envisioning himself as an acknowledged mental and political Giant.  In other words, it's my belief he's delusional -- is extremely fantasy-prone -- is literally IN LOVE WITH HIMSELF.  To the point I suspect he probably kisses his own reflection in mirrors and hogs the bathroom in order to do so constantly I think he's mad as a hatter and I'm glad he's been shot down, hopefully for good and in time for an army of psychiatrists to put him in a padded cell for the duration So I don't know why others hate him but above are my opinions of him I think he's nuts -- flat out nuts

very funny post.


accompanied by a glare like a bitter old auntie who's cake got second-prize at the fete

;D

Rudd is a fricken psychopath.

Remember how he dealt with parents of the deceased child who got electrocuted installing pink batts. Would you really want this idiot running a country again ?

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2010/s2882985.htm


Quote:

WENDY CARLISLE: Four Corners approached both Minister Garrett and Minister Combet for an interview. Both declined our invitation. WENDY CARLISLE (doorstop with Minister Garrett): Minister Wendy Carlisle, Four Corners. Why won’t you do an interview with Four Corners about the home insulation program? MINISTER GARRETT: We’ll be able to make some comments to you in the ordinary course of events that would be the appropriate way to do it. WENDY CARLISLE: The prime minister was in no mood either. WENDY CARLISLE (doorstop with Kevin Rudd): Prime Minister Wendy Carlisle, Four Corners. Why won’t you release those letters Peter Garrett wrote to you? PRIME MINISTER, KEVIN RUDD: Excuse me. (Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, walks away into the crowd) WENDY CARLISLE: Just last week the replacement scheme was also axed. The price of checking the houses that have already been insulated, could be up to a billion dollars. More than six months after the death of their son, the Fullers are still searching for answers. It’s taken them to Canberra and into what they thought was a private meeting with Greg Combet. KEVIN FULLER, MATTHEW'S FATHER: Kevin Rudd burst into the meeting after about 15 minutes and sat right next to me and he didn't, he didn't remember my name, so I shook his hand and said it's Kevin, it's not that difficult to remember type logic. Ah same as his, you'd think he'd remember that one. CHRISTINE FULLER, MATTHEW'S MOTHER: I can't even remember what he said, it was nothing important. Yeah, we we told him we held him responsible, um and that we would we and I'm sure the other families of the other young lads would like a public apology. We've never had a a public apology, an admission that they've stuffed up, you know. WENDY CARLISLE (to Kevin Fuller): Did he personally apologise to you in that meeting? KEVIN FULLER, MATTHEW'S FATHER: No. Absolutely not. WENDY CARLISLE (to Kevin Fuller): No expression of sorrow? KEVIN FULLER, MATTHEW'S FATHER: Ah there may have been, in it's an unfortunate or um you know talking around the issue and around the program, but no looking in my eyes or Christine's eyes and saying I'm sorry. Even sorry for your loss would've been good. WENDY CARLISLE: The cost of the governments home insulation program has been great. Lives lost. Houses razed. A massive clean up. And for the Fullers, there is only the government to blame. KEVIN FULLER, MATTHEW'S FATHER: We didn't even let Matt's name out for almost four months, because we stupidly trusted the system. We trusted that the minister and the prime minister and the all the departments involved would actually do something, would listen and change something. They did nothing. They just justified their existence all the way through. They allowed three other kids to get killed. CHRISTINE FULLER, MATTHEW'S MOTHER: There was no duty of care anywhere in any of this from the top down, from the government to the ministers, their aids, the guys that employed them. There was no care.

Remember the pink batts fiasco :(

http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/06/22/four-corners-we-stand-by-our-story/


Quote:

Four Corners: we stand by our story A few words on Bernard Keane’s rant against Four Corners for its coverage of the botched pink batts program “Lethal Miscalculation”. Keane accused us of “cherry picking” the facts — to whit — ignoring the findings of the  former bureaucrat Allan Hawke’s report into the home insulation scheme  so that we could make a story about government bungling, when, according to Keane, the real story was that environment minister Peter Garrett had been cleared of wrongdoing. (see his story Peter Garrett is exonerated and nobody cares) Trouble is Keane is not right, far from it. As executive producer Sue Spencer told Crikey last Friday, we thoroughly examined the Hawke report just days before we went to air. We concluded that it supported our story, so we posted it on our website. Hawke said the aims of the $2 billion program were to stimulate the economy and insulate homes, he observed:  “any objective assessment of the HIP will conclude that, despite the safety, quality and compliance concerns, there were solid achievements against the program objectives.” In other words — despite the fact that upwards of half a million homes will have to fixed at enormous cost, despite the fact that the fraud was “simply alarming” (Hawke again), and despite the fact that four young men died,  the economy was stimulated to the tune of $1.2 billion. Our whistleblower pointed out that Garrett’s department knew that turbo-charging an unregulated industry with  $2 billion and not regulating it would make an unsafe industry more unsafe. Senior bureaucrats were advised that under these circumstances fraud would be rife, that people could die. This prescient advice was ignored.  We know now that the auditing and inspection regime — despite claims by Senator Arbib that it was “robust” and minister Garrett  it was “significant” — were window dressing.  By September when more than half a million homes had been insulated, only 172 roofs had been physically inspected by a grab bag of Medicare staff, departmental bureaucrats and other “inspectors”. When Hawke noted that Garrett had responded in an appropriate and timely manner following advice from his department, once can only ask what on earth was going on in the culture of DEWHA that bullied this fearless advice coming through the ranks?  And more importantly,  why didn’t Garrett know what was going on in his own department?

Rudd is hated because, when he became P.M. on a huge tide of goodwill...he dropped the ball.

In that; he micromanaged and micromanaged and micromanaged.  No one could be trusted by him to do their job without his interference.

As a result everything had to go through him, resulting in an almighty log jam in getting things done.

When you are in a team and you are the Captain of that team, you have to trust the ability of your players to get the job done.

Rudd trusted no one and in doing so, earned the hate of those who once had him on a pedestal.

As a manager and PM he turned out bloody useless because, his meddling turned the Government into a mess. End of story.

Rudd simply didn't have the qualities to be an effective leader.

Neither does Tony Abbott.

buzzanddidj wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 4:36pm:

Maqqa wrote on Mar 22nd, 2013 at 10:52pm: Yesterday - despite urgings from people who voted against him previously Rudd selfishly sacrificed them After the FIRST spill ( ... and BIG LOSS) he made an UNEQUIVICAL commitment NOT to challenge Gillard again - for the life of the Parliament How many languages did he need to SAY it in ? There never WAS a Rudd/Crean ticket Only Crean knew what Crean was thinking But I THINK he may have sacrificed his cabinet post to end the MEDIA HYSTERIA - once and for all - for what he thought was for "the good of the party"

to think that there is someone who thinks rudd is a good as his word!!!!

Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 1:47pm:

Rudd simply didn't have the qualities to be an effective leader. Neither does Tony Abbott.

given that he has been the most effective opposition LEADER in history, that claim looks rather silly.

PZ547 wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 1:20pm:

It's my personal opinion that Rudd is mentally unstable

Well, you don't personally know him like you said, so you wouldn't know if he was.


PZ547 wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 1:20pm:

The way he speaks, for one: that 'Schoolkid reading a book to the class' voice he uses. It's not normal.  It's not manly.  It's affected.

I agree he's eccentric and not normal.


PZ547 wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 1:20pm:

He sounds like a precocious ten-year old who's in love with himself

I think he just lacks empathy, can't relate to people socially and therefore that's why he seems that way.


PZ547 wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 1:20pm:

* All the posturing * the monologues about himself -- always about him

He does speak awkwardly.


PZ547 wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 1:20pm:

* the self-pity -- invariably when he's caused the problem himself

Don't we all have a certain level of self-pity? You have to have sympathy for someone who was abruptly deposed shortly before the 2010 election. How do you think he felt? Politics is a career that takes courage and inner, emotional strength, something most of us don't have. Kevin is human. Maybe he just doesn't have the mettle for the job of PM, but to say he has more self-pity than most of us just isn't reasonable.


PZ547 wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 1:20pm:

* the blaming of others - when he's to blame

I never really saw him doing much blaming in public.


PZ547 wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 1:20pm:

* the attempts to sound like fifty different people simultaneously

don't remember that


PZ547 wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 1:20pm:

* the venom * the anger * the petulance

don't remember that in public


PZ547 wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 1:20pm:

* his vengefulness * his spitefulness * his unfettered, massive, beyond belief size ego * his conceit * his impotence

you're exaggerating


PZ547 wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 1:20pm:

* his self-serving disloyalty

do you really know him?


PZ547 wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 1:20pm:

He seems to believe he is a combination of Churchill, Menzies, JFK, Caesar, Einstein, John Wayne and an entire battalion of Rhodes Scholars, plus

not my impression


PZ547 wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 1:20pm:

He seems to believe it his destiny to be the ultimate, entire-world's Grand Statesman

He's popular among lots of people, so it's not like he's completely deluded. Much of his sense of worth was given to him by others, and it seems that that is continuing, so you can't really put the blame on him for that.

Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 1:47pm:

Rudd simply didn't have the qualities to be an effective leader. Neither does Tony Abbott.

Tony Abbott would make a better leader than Kevin Rudd. At least he's been in government before. He's got experience. I just don't trust the Coalition.

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 5:20pm:

Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 1:47pm: Rudd simply didn't have the qualities to be an effective leader. Neither does Tony Abbott. given that he has been the most effective opposition LEADER in history, that claim looks rather silly.

Far from it. The qualities required to lead a government are quite different from those effective in leading an opposition.

Abbott is a wrecker not a builder.

Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 8:36pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 5:20pm: Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 1:47pm: Rudd simply didn't have the qualities to be an effective leader. Neither does Tony Abbott. given that he has been the most effective opposition LEADER in history, that claim looks rather silly. Far from it. The qualities required to lead a government are quite different from those effective in leading an opposition. Abbott is a wrecker not a builder.

Years ago on Yahoo there was a poster from New Zealand, called himself Green something.

He was a dope too.

KJT1981 wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 9:22pm:

Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 8:36pm: longweekend58 wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 5:20pm: Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 1:47pm: Rudd simply didn't have the qualities to be an effective leader. Neither does Tony Abbott. given that he has been the most effective opposition LEADER in history, that claim looks rather silly. Far from it. The qualities required to lead a government are quite different from those effective in leading an opposition. Abbott is a wrecker not a builder. Years ago on Yahoo there was a poster from New Zealand, called himself Green something. He was a dope too.

There was a whore  from Hurstville too.

Quote:

There was a whore  from Hurstville too.

You still have my number in your mobile phone skip?

What was it you kept it under so your wife wouldn't find out......................I remember, tow truck.

Bet you would like a 'truck' with me now skip. I still have the red crotchless knickers you bought for me on your first visit.

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 5:20pm:

Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 1:47pm: Rudd simply didn't have the qualities to be an effective leader. Neither does Tony Abbott. given that he has been the most effective opposition LEADER in history, that claim looks rather silly.

Proves nothing.

My cat could lead an effective Opposition against these ass-hats.

But I wouldn't vote for my cat as PM either.

Nor will I EVER vote for an Abbott-led Con-alition.

I'll be voting either Independent, or informal.

If, as seems inevitable, the Howardians get a second bite at
the cherry, it certainly won't be down to me.

Nor will it be if Labor somehow squeaks home.

We're fecked, whoever wins.

Kat wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 10:16pm:

We're fecked, whoever wins.

It doesn't really matter anyway. This country is not undergoing a crisis. We're not having the same problems as many countries in Europe. If the only crisis is mediocre politicians then that is far better than financial and economic turmoil. We don't need reform as badly as Europe does. Our country isn't at a crossroads and nor is it at a point where it needs to make hard decisions. Maybe that's a good thing. Maybe the reason why we've got mediocre politicians is because there's nothing much for them to really do in government.

Mnemonic wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 11:40pm:

Kat wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 10:16pm: We're fecked, whoever wins. It doesn't really matter anyway. This country is not undergoing a crisis. We're not having the same problems as many countries in Europe. If the only crisis is mediocre politicians then that is far better than financial and economic turmoil. We don't need reform as badly as Europe does. Our country isn't at a crossroads and nor is it at a point where it needs to make hard decisions. Maybe that's a good thing. Maybe the reason why we've got mediocre politicians is because there's nothing much for them to really do in government.

We will be if abbott gets in

SOB

Rudd isnt hated. Some ppl dont like him just like lots of pollies. I think he has more of a "following" than most other pollies too.

SOB

Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 1:47pm:

Rudd simply didn't have the qualities to be an effective leader. Neither does Tony Abbott.

You sure? He's leading the Coalition very effectively. He destroyed Rudd and is about to do the same not only just to Gillard but Labor as a whole.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 7:01am:

He destroyed Rudd and is about to do the same not only just to Gillard but Labor as a whole.

Abbott didn't destroy Rudd. The Labor Party did when they dumped him because of his lack of management skills. Rudd was a diplomat. That's his greatest strength: doing negotiations, making deals and making proposals. Management and administration wasn't his thing. That's why Wayne Swan has always been treasurer, because he never saw himself as a PM. Out of all the people in the Federal Labor Government since 2007, which one of the prominent Labor figures has kept his job the longest? Wayne Swan of course!!!

Rudd's skill in making deals was what enabled him to win the 2007 election. He made a good deal with the Australian people, but he wasn't very good at delivering it because he wasn't very good at managing his subordinates. His Cabinet and ministers only kept him so long as he was able to keep the polls up.

Who knows what was happening behind close doors? Rudd was probably blowing up every 5 minutes, not keep his cool and not keeping his composure. It was really embarrassing. Remember that leaked video of Kevin?

By the time Labor dumped Rudd all the damage had been done. The Rudd Government was in a crisis. All Abbott did was push it over the edge. Abbott was just in the right place and in the right time. A little flick of Tony's finger and the dominoes started falling over the other, one by one. The Rudd Government facade could not be maintained. It was not sustainable and it buckled under pressure.

Rudd's demise wasn't the work of just one person. Brendan Nelson, Malcolm Turnbull and the Greens were just as responsible for his demise as Abbott.

Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 8:36pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 5:20pm: Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 1:47pm: Rudd simply didn't have the qualities to be an effective leader. Neither does Tony Abbott. given that he has been the most effective opposition LEADER in history, that claim looks rather silly. Far from it. The qualities required to lead a government are quite different from those effective in leading an opposition. Abbott is a wrecker not a builder.

since the only time you have seen him as leader is as OPPOSITION leader then your argument is rather invalid.  and the qualities you refer to are actually very similar. Leadership is just leadership. Where it is practiced is relatively immaterial.

Kat wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 10:16pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 5:20pm: Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 1:47pm: Rudd simply didn't have the qualities to be an effective leader. Neither does Tony Abbott. given that he has been the most effective opposition LEADER in history, that claim looks rather silly. Proves nothing. My cat could lead an effective Opposition against these ass-hats. But I wouldn't vote for my cat as PM either. Nor will I EVER vote for an Abbott-led Con-alition. I'll be voting either Independent, or informal. If, as seems inevitable, the Howardians get a second bite at the cherry, it certainly won't be down to me. Nor will it be if Labor somehow squeaks home. We're fecked, whoever wins.

A) abbott started with the libs 16% BEHIND - not in friont
B) some of labors troubles are the results of an effective opposition.

Mnemonic wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 7:53am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 7:01am: He destroyed Rudd and is about to do the same not only just to Gillard but Labor as a whole. Abbott didn't destroy Rudd. The Labor Party did when they dumped him because of his lack of management skills. Rudd was a diplomat. That's his greatest strength: doing negotiations, making deals and making proposals. Management and administration wasn't his thing. That's why Wayne Swan has always been treasurer, because he never saw himself as a PM. Out of all the people in the Federal Labor Government since 2007, which one of the prominent Labor figures has kept his job the longest? Wayne Swan of course!!! Rudd's skill in making deals was what enabled him to win the 2007 election. He made a good deal with the Australian people, but he wasn't very good at delivering it because he wasn't very good at managing his subordinates. His Cabinet and ministers only kept him so long as he was able to keep the polls up. Who knows what was happening behind close doors? Rudd was probably blowing up every 5 minutes, not keep his cool and not keeping his composure. It was really embarrassing. Remember that leaked video of Kevin? By the time Labor dumped Rudd all the damage had been done. The Rudd Government was in a crisis. All Abbott did was push it over the edge. Abbott was just in the right place and in the right time. A little flick of Tony's finger and the dominoes started falling over the other, one by one. The Rudd Government facade could not be maintained. It was not sustainable and it buckled under pressure. Rudd's demise wasn't the work of just one person. Brendan Nelson, Malcolm Turnbull and the Greens were just as responsible for his demise as Abbott.

Rudds lead was unassailable until Abbott came along. you can argue the reasons all you like but it remains true that rudds slide and demise happened only when Abbott came along.

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 7:56am:

Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 8:36pm: longweekend58 wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 5:20pm: Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 1:47pm: Rudd simply didn't have the qualities to be an effective leader. Neither does Tony Abbott. given that he has been the most effective opposition LEADER in history, that claim looks rather silly. Far from it. The qualities required to lead a government are quite different from those effective in leading an opposition. Abbott is a wrecker not a builder. since the only time you have seen him as leader is as OPPOSITION leader then your argument is rather invalid.  and the qualities you refer to are actually very similar. Leadership is just leadership. Where it is practiced is relatively immaterial.

Abbotts most effective act in Government was to wreck One Nation. Abbotts reputationas an effective attack dog - wrecker was built over his 20 years in Parliament and not just his term as opposition leader. It is in fact a reliable indication.

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 24^th, 2013 at 5:20pm:

Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 1:47pm: Rudd simply didn't have the qualities to be an effective leader. Neither does Tony Abbott. given that he has been the most effective opposition LEADER in history, that claim looks rather silly.

Most effective in the polls based on 100% negativity but in reality probably the worst opposition leader ever in every reguard based on substance where the problem is that he has none.

Dnarever wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 8:04am:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 5:20pm: Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 1:47pm: Rudd simply didn't have the qualities to be an effective leader. Neither does Tony Abbott. given that he has been the most effective opposition LEADER in history, that claim looks rather silly. Most effective in the polls based on 100% negativity but in reality probably the worst opposition leader ever in every regard based on substance where the problem is that he has none.

the role of opposition leader is to oppose the govt of the day and force better policy and behaviour. What seems to rankle you is that he has done exactly that with more effectiveness than any opposition leader before him. Can you think of an opposition leader that took his party from well behind to well in front? Rudd didnt? Howard was already behind. Howard didnt, Keating was already behind. Hawke didnt either although he was in the job literally and hour before the election was called. Fraser was probably the last opposition leader to actually change the course of power.  and then there is abbot. from 16% behind to 12% in front.  BEST PERFORMANCE EVER.

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 10:35am:

Dnarever wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 8:04am: longweekend58 wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 5:20pm: Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 1:47pm: Rudd simply didn't have the qualities to be an effective leader. Neither does Tony Abbott. given that he has been the most effective opposition LEADER in history, that claim looks rather silly. Most effective in the polls based on 100% negativity but in reality probably the worst opposition leader ever in every regard based on substance where the problem is that he has none. the role of opposition leader is to oppose the govt of the day and force better policy and behaviour. What seems to rankle you is that he has done exactly that with more effectiveness than any opposition leader before him. Can you think of an opposition leader that took his party from well behind to well in front? Rudd didnt? Howard was already behind. Howard didnt, Keating was already behind. Hawke didnt either although he was in the job literally and hour before the election was called. Fraser was probably the last opposition leader to actually change the course of power.  and then there is abbot. from 16% behind to 12% in front.  BEST PERFORMANCE EVER.

So you agree he has no substance. You are still fixated on polls and negativity.

the role of opposition leader is to oppose

It was his best skill even when in government - he was the attack dog, His biggest achievment while in government was to put down One Nation.

Abbott is clearly a one trick pony and you can't teach an old attack dog new tricks.

Re: Why is Rudd hated?

I see him a lot like Abbott - there are plenty of good people who would make a terrible PM these are just two of them.

Dnarever wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 11:42am:

Re: Why is Rudd hated? I see him a lot like Abbott - there are plenty of good people who would make a terrible PM these are just two of them.

Gough Whitlam also springs to mind.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 11:43am:

Dnarever wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 11:42am: Re: Why is Rudd hated? I see him a lot like Abbott - there are plenty of good people who would make a terrible PM these are just two of them. Gough Whitlam also springs to mind.

Silly comment - Gough was a reformer - he achieved a lot in a short space of time, one of the very best leaders we had, his big problem was that his team let him down and his mistake was to allow the Fraser opposition to bully the government.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 4:15am:

Amadd wrote on Mar 23rd, 2013 at 12:05am: I'd be more inclined to trust Crean's word than Rudd's, and going by what Crean was saying on the radio today, Rudd is far more interested in himself than the party. It seems that Rudd was prepared to put the heads of others on the line just to have a peek at the numbers that he may have, and then decline to stand when he realised that the numbers weren't there, falling back on his bs "won't challenge the leadership" comment. Abbott commented that "It's time for the adults to take charge". I think that he was correct in saying that because we need the best people available doing the job for the country, not constant reshuffling of positions based on who supports who within a political party. Contrary to popular belief, we vote for a team, not a PM. Obviously you prefer to listen to those say what you want to hear according to the agenda. Abbott of course is going to trash him - abbott trashes anybody that might be a threat to him. SOB

Abbott usually trashes policies, not those who introduce them (because of union pressure). He has commented about Gillard side-stepping the truth - it is so hard to see anything good in her.

Is she good to her pet dog? (I wasn't talking about Tim).

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 10:35am:

Dnarever wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 8:04am: longweekend58 wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 5:20pm: Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 1:47pm: Rudd simply didn't have the qualities to be an effective leader. Neither does Tony Abbott. given that he has been the most effective opposition LEADER in history, that claim looks rather silly. Most effective in the polls based on 100% negativity but in reality probably the worst opposition leader ever in every regard based on substance where the problem is that he has none. the role of opposition leader is to oppose the govt of the day and force better policy and behaviour. What seems to rankle you is that he has done exactly that with more effectiveness than any opposition leader before him. Can you think of an opposition leader that took his party from well behind to well in front? Rudd didnt? Howard was already behind. Howard didnt, Keating was already behind. Hawke didnt either although he was in the job literally and hour before the election was called. Fraser was probably the last opposition leader to actually change the course of power.  and then there is abbot. from 16% behind to 12% in front.  BEST PERFORMANCE EVER.

Good comment and that is why the Labor retards keep chanting about Abbott and thrusting carbon-tax- Turnbull to the front.

Turnbull would have been good except for some mistakes the biggest of which was siding with Labor over this fraudulent tax.

Maqqa wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2013 at 5:43pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Mar 23rd, 2013 at 4:36pm: Maqqa wrote on Mar 22nd, 2013 at 10:52pm: Yesterday - despite urgings from people who voted against him previously Rudd selfishly sacrificed them After the FIRST spill ( ... and BIG LOSS) he made an UNEQUIVICAL commitment NOT to challenge Gillard again - for the life of the Parliament How many languages did he need to SAY it in ? There never WAS a Rudd/Crean ticket Only Crean knew what Crean was thinking But I THINK he may have sacrificed his cabinet post to end the MEDIA HYSTERIA - once and for all - for what he thought was for "the good of the party" Go back to what he said before the ballot on Thursday Then compare it to what you said above

Maqqa wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 10:10am:

http://au.news.yahoo.com/election/a/-/article/16437095/crean-missed-crucial-rudd-text/ Former cabinet minister Simon Crean, whose press conference set off Labor’s bungled leadership spill last Thursday, admits he missed a text message from former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd which could have avoided the whole ordeal. Speaking to Alan Jones on 2GB this morning, Mr Crean admitted he didn't see a text message from Mr Rudd which urged Mr Crean to hold off on any move against the PM. "Gidday Simon. I'm told you saw the PM last night. If that's so and if it in anyway touches the leadership, and if you are making any public comments, please give me a call beforehand. My position is as before. All the best. Kevin," the text read.

If you don’t think Rudd was still counting the numbers then your brains are in your arse.

They were trying to get Gillard to jump – no need to challenge then….

;)

Dnarever wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 11:40am:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 10:35am: Dnarever wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 8:04am: longweekend58 wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 5:20pm: Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 1:47pm: Rudd simply didn't have the qualities to be an effective leader. Neither does Tony Abbott. given that he has been the most effective opposition LEADER in history, that claim looks rather silly. Most effective in the polls based on 100% negativity but in reality probably the worst opposition leader ever in every regard based on substance where the problem is that he has none. the role of opposition leader is to oppose the govt of the day and force better policy and behaviour. What seems to rankle you is that he has done exactly that with more effectiveness than any opposition leader before him. Can you think of an opposition leader that took his party from well behind to well in front? Rudd didnt? Howard was already behind. Howard didnt, Keating was already behind. Hawke didnt either although he was in the job literally and hour before the election was called. Fraser was probably the last opposition leader to actually change the course of power.  and then there is abbot. from 16% behind to 12% in front.  BEST PERFORMANCE EVER. So you agree he has no substance. You are still fixated on polls and negativity. the role of opposition leader is to oppose It was his best skill even when in government - he was the attack dog, His biggest achievment while in government was to put down One Nation. Abbott is clearly a one trick pony and you can't teach an old attack dog new tricks.

you might understand the argument if you EVER had a labor opposition leader last long enough to be effective. The ones you have had that won govt were in the job less than a year and in one case, less than an hour. the rest were abject failures.

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 8:00am:

Rudds lead was unassailable until Abbott came along. you can argue the reasons all you like but it remains true that rudds slide and demise happened only when Abbott came along.

That doesn't mean Abbott was solely responsible for Rudd's demise. Rudd's popularity fell as a result of him giving up on the emissions trading scheme. This was what caused his popularity to fall, not Tony Abbott.

Dnarever wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 11:50am:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 11:43am: Dnarever wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 11:42am: Re: Why is Rudd hated? I see him a lot like Abbott - there are plenty of good people who would make a terrible PM these are just two of them. Gough Whitlam also springs to mind. Silly comment - Gough was a reformer - he achieved a lot in a short space of time, one of the very best leaders we had, his big problem was that his team let him down and his mistake was to allow the Fraser opposition to bully the government.

Couldn't agree more.

Getting rid of the Whitlam govt REEKED of 'cutting off your nose to
spite your face' and the 'cure' was much worse than the disease.

The whole thing was driven by deliberately misrepresenting the true
facts, much as the current Con-alition is doing. The talking-down of
a (good) economy, deliberately but falsely maligning govt ministers
and blatantly marginalising and demonising those on welfare. This
was the genesis of the 'dole bludger' lie.

It all seems so depressingly familiar, a sense of deja vu is in the air.

So, having learned NOTHING in the intervening 38 years, a deliberately
misinformed electorate is planning to make EXACTLY the same mistake
in September that it made 38 years ago.

I'm finding it very hard to have any sympathy for the electorate, for it
will once again have failed to see the truth behind the Con-alition lies
and a deceitful, manipulative, bought-and-paid-for media.

It will richly deserve everything it gets (except the inevitable vote-
buying wealthfare bribes).

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 3:54pm:

Dnarever wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 11:40am: longweekend58 wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 10:35am: Dnarever wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 8:04am: longweekend58 wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 5:20pm: Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 1:47pm: Rudd simply didn't have the qualities to be an effective leader. Neither does Tony Abbott. given that he has been the most effective opposition LEADER in history, that claim looks rather silly. Most effective in the polls based on 100% negativity but in reality probably the worst opposition leader ever in every regard based on substance where the problem is that he has none. the role of opposition leader is to oppose the govt of the day and force better policy and behaviour. What seems to rankle you is that he has done exactly that with more effectiveness than any opposition leader before him. Can you think of an opposition leader that took his party from well behind to well in front? Rudd didnt? Howard was already behind. Howard didnt, Keating was already behind. Hawke didnt either although he was in the job literally and hour before the election was called. Fraser was probably the last opposition leader to actually change the course of power.  and then there is abbot. from 16% behind to 12% in front.  BEST PERFORMANCE EVER. So you agree he has no substance. You are still fixated on polls and negativity. the role of opposition leader is to oppose It was his best skill even when in government - he was the attack dog, His biggest achievment while in government was to put down One Nation. Abbott is clearly a one trick pony and you can't teach an old attack dog new tricks. you might understand the argument if you EVER had a labor opposition leader last long enough to be effective. The ones you have had that won govt were in the job less than a year and in one case, less than an hour. the rest were abject failures.

you might understand the argument if you EVER had a labor opposition leader last long enough to be effective.

You do understand that in the Last two terms that Labor has had 2 leaders, in the same time frame the Liberals have had 3 leaders.

You seem to enjoy shooting yourself in the foot - you could be a Liberal party leader.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 7:01am:

Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 1:47pm: Rudd simply didn't have the qualities to be an effective leader. Neither does Tony Abbott. You sure? He's leading the Coalition very effectively. He destroyed Rudd and is about to do the same not only just to Gillard but Labor as a whole.

So you want a Prime Minister who destroys people?

What a strange outlook.

Why is Rudd hated?

Who hates Rudd????

I would think that if you hate everyone you do not want for PM then there are about 22 Million of us to hate.

Mnemonic wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 5:32pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 8:00am: Rudds lead was unassailable until Abbott came along. you can argue the reasons all you like but it remains true that rudds slide and demise happened only when Abbott came along. That doesn't mean Abbott was solely responsible for Rudd's demise. Rudd's popularity fell as a result of him giving up on the emissions trading scheme. This was what caused his popularity to fall, not Tony Abbott.

seems a bit simplistic. if it was the ETS that caused his demise then Abbotts total opposition to an ETS shoudl ahve harmed his chances. Instead, he zoomed ahead in the polls.

Kat wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 7:00pm:

Dnarever wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 11:50am: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 11:43am: Dnarever wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 11:42am: Re: Why is Rudd hated? I see him a lot like Abbott - there are plenty of good people who would make a terrible PM these are just two of them. Gough Whitlam also springs to mind. Silly comment - Gough was a reformer - he achieved a lot in a short space of time, one of the very best leaders we had, his big problem was that his team let him down and his mistake was to allow the Fraser opposition to bully the government. Couldn't agree more. Getting rid of the Whitlam govt REEKED of 'cutting off your nose to spite your face' and the 'cure' was much worse than the disease. The whole thing was driven by deliberately misrepresenting the true facts, much as the current Con-alition is doing. The talking-down of a (good) economy, deliberately but falsely maligning govt ministers and blatantly marginalising and demonising those on welfare. This was the genesis of the 'dole bludger' lie. It all seems so depressingly familiar, a sense of deja vu is in the air. So, having learned NOTHING in the intervening 38 years, a deliberately misinformed electorate is planning to make EXACTLY the same mistake in September that it made 38 years ago. I'm finding it very hard to have any sympathy for the electorate, for it will once again have failed to see the truth behind the Con-alition lies and a deceitful, manipulative, bought-and-paid-for media. It will richly deserve everything it gets (except the inevitable vote- buying wealthfare bribes).

wow... supporting Whitlam and describing it as a great govt. Is there any better way to shred your credibility?

Dnarever wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 7:05pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 3:54pm: Dnarever wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 11:40am: longweekend58 wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 10:35am: Dnarever wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 8:04am: longweekend58 wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 5:20pm: Peter Freedman wrote on Mar 24th, 2013 at 1:47pm: Rudd simply didn't have the qualities to be an effective leader. Neither does Tony Abbott. given that he has been the most effective opposition LEADER in history, that claim looks rather silly. Most effective in the polls based on 100% negativity but in reality probably the worst opposition leader ever in every regard based on substance where the problem is that he has none. the role of opposition leader is to oppose the govt of the day and force better policy and behaviour. What seems to rankle you is that he has done exactly that with more effectiveness than any opposition leader before him. Can you think of an opposition leader that took his party from well behind to well in front? Rudd didnt? Howard was already behind. Howard didnt, Keating was already behind. Hawke didnt either although he was in the job literally and hour before the election was called. Fraser was probably the last opposition leader to actually change the course of power.  and then there is abbot. from 16% behind to 12% in front.  BEST PERFORMANCE EVER. So you agree he has no substance. You are still fixated on polls and negativity. the role of opposition leader is to oppose It was his best skill even when in government - he was the attack dog, His biggest achievment while in government was to put down One Nation. Abbott is clearly a one trick pony and you can't teach an old attack dog new tricks. you might understand the argument if you EVER had a labor opposition leader last long enough to be effective. The ones you have had that won govt were in the job less than a year and in one case, less than an hour. the rest were abject failures. you might understand the argument if you EVER had a labor opposition leader last long enough to be effective. You do understand that in the Last two terms that Labor has had 2 leaders, in the same time frame the Liberals have had 3 leaders. You seem to enjoy shooting yourself in the foot - you could be a Liberal party leader.

try reading the highlighted bit again and ask yourself just how you managed to miss the point so badly.

Dnarever wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 11:49pm:

Why is Rudd hated? Who hates Rudd???? I would think that if you hate everyone you do not want for PM then there are about 22 Million of us to hate.

who hates RUDD?????

try the entire ALP. even his supporters are now sick of him.

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 8:11am:

Kat wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 7:00pm: Dnarever wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 11:50am: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 11:43am: Dnarever wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 11:42am: Re: Why is Rudd hated? I see him a lot like Abbott - there are plenty of good people who would make a terrible PM these are just two of them. Gough Whitlam also springs to mind. Silly comment - Gough was a reformer - he achieved a lot in a short space of time, one of the very best leaders we had, his big problem was that his team let him down and his mistake was to allow the Fraser opposition to bully the government. Couldn't agree more. Getting rid of the Whitlam govt REEKED of 'cutting off your nose to spite your face' and the 'cure' was much worse than the disease. The whole thing was driven by deliberately misrepresenting the true facts, much as the current Con-alition is doing. The talking-down of a (good) economy, deliberately but falsely maligning govt ministers and blatantly marginalising and demonising those on welfare. This was the genesis of the 'dole bludger' lie. It all seems so depressingly familiar, a sense of deja vu is in the air. So, having learned NOTHING in the intervening 38 years, a deliberately misinformed electorate is planning to make EXACTLY the same mistake in September that it made 38 years ago. I'm finding it very hard to have any sympathy for the electorate, for it will once again have failed to see the truth behind the Con-alition lies and a deceitful, manipulative, bought-and-paid-for media. It will richly deserve everything it gets (except the inevitable vote- buying wealthfare bribes). wow... supporting Whitlam and describing it as a great govt. Is there any better way to shred your credibility?

Why am i not surprised you cant think of anything good he did?

SOB

Kevin Rudd tries and until recently when his mask has slipped (and his halo) to be a smiling pleasant man who can get on with just about everyone.

The truth is when he went on angels' wings to the Prime Minister ship his truth self came out.

Rudd is a serial micro manager who doesn't trust anyone to do their job properly, as a result of this he 'ran' every department in the Government....the result one unholy mess.

Also Rudd is a foul mouthed individual who has the capacity to make a sailor blush. He is a tyrant and gives everyone around him a really hard time.

Remember the plane incident, where he walked with spiked shoes over a hapless hostess over what meals were available, just a small example.

He is a prick first class and many pollies have said they would rather lose Government than serve under him again.

The little megalomaniac didn't even have the guts to stand and allowed his colleagues, good men all, to fall on  their swords.

red baron wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 8:51am:

Kevin Rudd tries and until recently when his mask has slipped (and his halo) to be a smiling pleasant man who can get on with just about everyone. The truth is when he went on angels' wings to the Prime Minister ship his truth self came out. Rudd is a serial micro manager who doesn't trust anyone to do their job properly, as a result of this he 'ran' every department in the Government....the result one unholy mess. Also Rudd is a foul mouthed individual who has the capacity to make a sailor blush. He is a tyrant and gives everyone around him a really hard time. Remember the plane incident, where he walked with spiked shoes over a hapless hostess over what meals were available, just a small example. He is a prick first class and many pollies have said they would rather lose Government than serve under him again. The little megalomaniac didn't even have the guts to stand and allowed his colleagues, good men all, to fall on  their swords.

I don't disagree with much of this, but Crean was also partly author of his own misfortune.

He needed an undertaking from Rudd, written in blood, that if he (Crean) called for a spill, Rudd would stand.

This is Political Strategy 101. Make sure you've got the numbers, then launch your challenge.

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 8:11am:

Kat wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 7:00pm: Dnarever wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 11:50am: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 11:43am: Dnarever wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 11:42am: Re: Why is Rudd hated? I see him a lot like Abbott - there are plenty of good people who would make a terrible PM these are just two of them. Gough Whitlam also springs to mind. Silly comment - Gough was a reformer - he achieved a lot in a short space of time, one of the very best leaders we had, his big problem was that his team let him down and his mistake was to allow the Fraser opposition to bully the government. Couldn't agree more. Getting rid of the Whitlam govt REEKED of 'cutting off your nose to spite your face' and the 'cure' was much worse than the disease. The whole thing was driven by deliberately misrepresenting the true facts, much as the current Con-alition is doing. The talking-down of a (good) economy, deliberately but falsely maligning govt ministers and blatantly marginalising and demonising those on welfare. This was the genesis of the 'dole bludger' lie. It all seems so depressingly familiar, a sense of deja vu is in the air. So, having learned NOTHING in the intervening 38 years, a deliberately misinformed electorate is planning to make EXACTLY the same mistake in September that it made 38 years ago. I'm finding it very hard to have any sympathy for the electorate, for it will once again have failed to see the truth behind the Con-alition lies and a deceitful, manipulative, bought-and-paid-for media. It will richly deserve everything it gets (except the inevitable vote- buying wealthfare bribes). wow... supporting Whitlam and describing it as a great govt. Is there any better way to shred your credibility?

Well, yes.

Holding YOUR views on the Whitlam govt... :-)

Julia Gillard is treading a very dangerous path because whilst she has beheaded Rudd supporters left, right and centre, she has promoted Anthony ALBANESE to further Ministerial responsibilities.

It is my great belief that Albanese was at the centre if the plotting and planning. It is my belief that he was the one who talked Simon Crean, a decent, decent man into causing the spill giving him guarantees about the outcome.

The Rest is history.  It is a very, very dangerous path that Gillard is treading, she has promoted the Enemy Within, i.e Anthony Albanese for his misdeeds.  This is a path strewn with peril and I  believe it will cause her no end of angst before September comes.

For some reason Albanese is the Svengali of the Labor Party and somehow has escaped the Red Queen's wrath. She will do well to watch his every move because he moves faster than a rattlesnake.

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 8:11am:

wow... supporting Whitlam and describing it as a great govt. Is there any better way to shred your credibility?

yep ... supporting Abbott.

red baron wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 10:34am:

It is my belief

red baron wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 10:34am:

It is my great belief

anything at all to support your argument other than your belief?

red baron wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 8:51am:

Kevin Rudd tries and until recently when his mask has slipped (and his halo) to be a smiling pleasant man who can get on with just about everyone. The truth is when he went on angels' wings to the Prime Minister ship his truth self came out. Rudd is a serial micro manager who doesn't trust anyone to do their job properly, as a result of this he 'ran' every department in the Government....the result one unholy mess. Also Rudd is a foul mouthed individual who has the capacity to make a sailor blush. He is a tyrant and gives everyone around him a really hard time. Remember the plane incident, where he walked with spiked shoes over a hapless hostess over what meals were available, just a small example. He is a prick first class and many pollies have said they would rather lose Government than serve under him again. The little megalomaniac didn't even have the guts to stand and allowed his colleagues, good men all, to fall on  their swords.

bump

hit the nail on the head there baron

Like everyone else, I have an opinion John Smith, like everyone else has an opinion. And I will voice that opinion whether you like it or nor matters not a spec to me.

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 8:13am:

Dnarever wrote on Mar 25th, 2013 at 11:49pm: Why is Rudd hated? Who hates Rudd???? I would think that if you hate everyone you do not want for PM then there are about 22 Million of us to hate. who hates RUDD????? try the entire ALP. even his supporters are now sick of him.

If they all hate him how come over a third still want him as leader?

red baron wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 11:30am:

Like everyone else, I have an opinion John Smith, like everyone else has an opinion. And I will voice that opinion whether you like it or nor matters not a spec to me.

“One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got in my pajamas I'll never know.”
― Groucho Marx

OR

“Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light.”
― Groucho Marx

John Smith wrote on Mar 26^th, 2013 at 10:45am:

red baron wrote on Mar 26th, 2013 at 10:34am: It is my belief red baron wrote on Mar 26th, 2013 at 10:34am: It is my great belief anything at all to support your argument other than your belief?

“Those are my principles, and if you don't like them...well I have others.”
― Groucho Marx