And by the way, please tell whoever wrote today’s introduction (editorial), that I didn’t subscribe to Crikey to read the tabloid language he used in his second last paragraph to describe Rudd as “a loose lipped braggart”. Even The Oz ,which you delight in berating, would not use such unseemly language. If this sort of demeaning talk continues, don’t be surprised if you loose subscribers. I’m attaching my comment to your piece as I couldn’t see how to comment directly; it would be helpful if subscribers could, so that we can say what we think about some of the editorials we’re reading of late.

Most everyone I know is getting increasingly irritated at being spoken down to by Rudd/Gillard/Swan in particular but actually by most of the front bench. Some horourable exceptions, (on occasion) but most seem determined (compelled??) to hide behind plastic sound-bites.

I can understand and (almost) forgive this fanatical compulsion to stay “on-message” during an election campaign but that was over a year ago and I now expect my government to give me the benefit of doubt and to communicate with me (via the media) as an intelligent adult.

Instead we are fed Orwellian phrases of little/no substance and an ongoing display of arrogant avoidance of legitimate questioning which even the former PM couldn’t match.

If you want to keep my vote Mr Rudd I suggest you have your government earn it by treating me with some respect!

B. Crooks: If you had read the whole post, including comments, you would realize I acknowledged that very point! Olé.

SHOULD READ: Why should we be funding a committee, or ten, to discuss it in the first place?

BTW: Why can’t you email Crikey if you want to get in touch with them?

I can’t help wondering if ‘working families’ have dropped of the radar since the revelations that working for the Rudd ministry is inimical to not only working family life, but to general human welfare. When staffers and advisers are being worked such stupidly long hours they may as well be drunk on the job - the effect is the same and it could well explain the rash of silly, knee-jerk decisions that are coming out of the the Ruddster’s office. He reminds me of a hamster in a wheel, going flat out, day in day out, and getting nowhere.

Venise Alstergren, I don’t feel Rudd is talking down to me at all. I guess we all have different perceptions. And I don’t mind issues being referred to committees, although not to as many as you mention. So long as the situation is not urgent, I would sooner have the job done thoroughly with as much expert input as possible, than it be rushed.

Counter-intuitive, I know.

My main gripe is he has brought his bureaucratic mind to mandate all these committees; thereby conning the public into believing they are necessary: for the good of the country, which is more waffle. Anyone who has the most elementary of political knowledge knows the formation of committees is merely a way to find
something to occupy the time of the endless bureaucrats who infest Canberra.

I’m happy for your sake that you don’t mind these committees. However, for the life of me I cannot remember the last time a committee achieved anything of importance. Look at that extraordinary ‘meeting of the minds’ in Canberra he called shortly after his election. I beg you to tell me in what way the taxpayer benefited by that little ho-down? After all, it was just another committee, but a bit larger. Also, if an issue is not madly important, why should we be funding a committee or ten to discuss something irrelevant in the first place?