Comments on: The Rudd manifesto: an exercise in simplistic propaganda http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/02/04/the-rudd-manifesto-an-exercise-in-simplistic-propaganda/ now with extra source Sun, 12 Feb 2012 11:02:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: perplexed http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/02/04/the-rudd-manifesto-an-exercise-in-simplistic-propaganda/#comment-7265 perplexed Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-7265 What did Keating privatise? Telstra was privatised in Nov 1997 after John Howard became prime minister in March 1996 What did Keating privatise? Telstra was privatised in Nov 1997 after John Howard became prime minister in March 1996

]]> By: Roy Travis http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/02/04/the-rudd-manifesto-an-exercise-in-simplistic-propaganda/#comment-7266 Roy Travis Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-7266 Having read the two offerings from Bernard Kearne today, ' Turbull stimulus suicide" and "The Rudd manifesto, I can only conclude that one was written before and one after lunch Having read the two offerings from Bernard Kearne today, ’ Turbull stimulus suicide” and “The Rudd manifesto, I can only conclude that one was written before and one after lunch

]]> By: JamesK http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/02/04/the-rudd-manifesto-an-exercise-in-simplistic-propaganda/#comment-7267 JamesK Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-7267 "Rudd makes a number of monumental errors and outrageous simplifications in his article. But they’re entirely deliberate...." observes Bernard Keane correctly but euphemistically. <br /><br />What Keane is docilely admitting here and what Costello identified in today's Age newspaper is that Rudd is dishonest, divisive, uncooperative and a charlatan.<br /><br />He will say and do anything for his selfish aims.<br /><br /> At least Stephen Mayne, despite his personal political philosophy, calls it the way it is in today's Crikey.<br /><br />When are the Fourth estate in this country going to call Rudd for what he is? A dangerous and demented egotist. <br /><br />This "stimulation package" is insanity defined. <br /><br />Although Rudd with help wrote an 8000 word treatise presumably to present in Davos, it was in fact Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard who spoke from the lectern in Davos, presumably because of Rudd's sensitivity to harping criticism of its Jetset leadership. It is quite apparent, that her understanding of the global financial crisis is diametrically opposite to Rudd's. The irony is so is Rudd's! Well, that is, the Rudd of a year ago:<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQN_btzkg0U “Rudd makes a number of monumental errors and outrageous simplifications in his article. But they’re entirely deliberate….” observes Bernard Keane correctly but euphemistically.

What Keane is docilely admitting here and what Costello identified in today’s Age newspaper is that Rudd is dishonest, divisive, uncooperative and a charlatan.

He will say and do anything for his selfish aims.

At least Stephen Mayne, despite his personal political philosophy, calls it the way it is in today’s Crikey.

When are the Fourth estate in this country going to call Rudd for what he is? A dangerous and demented egotist.

This “stimulation package” is insanity defined.

Although Rudd with help wrote an 8000 word treatise presumably to present in Davos, it was in fact Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard who spoke from the lectern in Davos, presumably because of Rudd’s sensitivity to harping criticism of its Jetset leadership. It is quite apparent, that her understanding of the global financial crisis is diametrically opposite to Rudd’s. The irony is so is Rudd’s! Well, that is, the Rudd of a year ago:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQN_btzkg0U

]]> By: Tom McLoughlin http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/02/04/the-rudd-manifesto-an-exercise-in-simplistic-propaganda/#comment-7268 Tom McLoughlin Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-7268 Becoming known as a manipulator is not really a good look in a leader. It's soon evolves into 'mean and tricky'. Or smart *arse.<br /><br />There is a real problem with the described political approach of so called complete de-legitimising of your opponent in the conservatives, tories, bosses party, or whatever you want to call them. I've had 4 years at local council level sitting between the two and a one eyed view of either is quite sub optimal, but it does take real training and intellect to synthesise the best of both. If Rudd is not able to to do that then he's no Jed Bartlett. He's just a self serving ruthless b*stard, and that's what I saw in parliament - a guy committed to his own career.<br /><br />People are complex mix of good and bad intentions, expertise and experience, yin and yang as it were. It's actually quite moronic to not see value at least in part in your rivals. It might play well for dumb gotcha big media who can only do good guy bad guy simplistic narratives. But that's not reality. That's not good governance. It's just cynical tactics and cheap jack theatre.<br /><br />And when the really hard complex big challenges come along that's just not good enough. That's not how Mandela defines leadership - he said the good leader lets the most nimble go forward to find the path. The good leader makes sure the whole group stays together. <br /><br />It's stupid to dismiss the Opposition as "rank political expediency". In fact it's an impertinence of big media and big exec govt to think the public and parliament should have time to look at those Bills. Press and even govt reportage is not necessarily what is in the laws, which are enforceable in a court of law. <br /><br />Really the rah rah railroad is quite pathetic by various levels of Ist, 2nd, and 4th estate. Tony Windsor MP independent nailed it this arvo in parliament saying their should be co-operative consultation. Becoming known as a manipulator is not really a good look in a leader. It’s soon evolves into ‘mean and tricky’. Or smart *arse.

There is a real problem with the described political approach of so called complete de-legitimising of your opponent in the conservatives, tories, bosses party, or whatever you want to call them. I’ve had 4 years at local council level sitting between the two and a one eyed view of either is quite sub optimal, but it does take real training and intellect to synthesise the best of both. If Rudd is not able to to do that then he’s no Jed Bartlett. He’s just a self serving ruthless b*stard, and that’s what I saw in parliament - a guy committed to his own career.

People are complex mix of good and bad intentions, expertise and experience, yin and yang as it were. It’s actually quite moronic to not see value at least in part in your rivals. It might play well for dumb gotcha big media who can only do good guy bad guy simplistic narratives. But that’s not reality. That’s not good governance. It’s just cynical tactics and cheap jack theatre.

And when the really hard complex big challenges come along that’s just not good enough. That’s not how Mandela defines leadership - he said the good leader lets the most nimble go forward to find the path. The good leader makes sure the whole group stays together.

It’s stupid to dismiss the Opposition as “rank political expediency”. In fact it’s an impertinence of big media and big exec govt to think the public and parliament should have time to look at those Bills. Press and even govt reportage is not necessarily what is in the laws, which are enforceable in a court of law.

Really the rah rah railroad is quite pathetic by various levels of Ist, 2nd, and 4th estate. Tony Windsor MP independent nailed it this arvo in parliament saying their should be co-operative consultation.

]]> By: John James http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/02/04/the-rudd-manifesto-an-exercise-in-simplistic-propaganda/#comment-7269 John James Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-7269 Peter Costello was quite devastating in his critque of the Rudd approach on ABC's Lateline last evening. Costello highlighted the disparity between Rudd's analysis of what is happening and how we got there and Julia Gillard's analysis of Australia's position being presented at the DAVOS forum. Gillard highlighted Australian banks lack of exposure to the Sub prime mess, and Australia's relatively strong fiscal position. All a result, as Costello correctlystated, of his oversight while Treasurer and his setting up of the regulatory body, APRA.<br />Most telling, I thought, was Costello's pointing to the dire straits of the major 'social democrat' economy amongst the G20, Great Britain, given that Rudd points to the this 'Labor' model as the antidote to the free wheeling 'neo-liberals' ( As Costello says, Rudd really means 'Liberals' , forget the 'neo' ).<br />As Costello correctly states, the model that Rudd should be championing is the 'Australian' model. But he is not going to do that, for reasons that Costello described in lucid fashion. <br />I live in Sydney, under the most appaling State Labor fiasco. I just do not believe Labor has a clue when it comes to building wealth. They're great at giving it away, even the family 'silver', but future generations have to wear the debt servicing obligations.<br />The other interesting thing to become apparent in the Lateline interview, I thought, was Costello's obvious concern for the diificulties confronting the Australian economy, his contempt for the Rudd/Swan analysis and his command of the economic data. I sensed a growing desire on his part to begin to step into this debate. Peter Costello was quite devastating in his critque of the Rudd approach on ABC’s Lateline last evening. Costello highlighted the disparity between Rudd’s analysis of what is happening and how we got there and Julia Gillard’s analysis of Australia’s position being presented at the DAVOS forum. Gillard highlighted Australian banks lack of exposure to the Sub prime mess, and Australia’s relatively strong fiscal position. All a result, as Costello correctlystated, of his oversight while Treasurer and his setting up of the regulatory body, APRA.
Most telling, I thought, was Costello’s pointing to the dire straits of the major ‘social democrat’ economy amongst the G20, Great Britain, given that Rudd points to the this ‘Labor’ model as the antidote to the free wheeling ‘neo-liberals’ ( As Costello says, Rudd really means ‘Liberals’ , forget the ‘neo’ ).
As Costello correctly states, the model that Rudd should be championing is the ‘Australian’ model. But he is not going to do that, for reasons that Costello described in lucid fashion.
I live in Sydney, under the most appaling State Labor fiasco. I just do not believe Labor has a clue when it comes to building wealth. They’re great at giving it away, even the family ‘silver’, but future generations have to wear the debt servicing obligations.
The other interesting thing to become apparent in the Lateline interview, I thought, was Costello’s obvious concern for the diificulties confronting the Australian economy, his contempt for the Rudd/Swan analysis and his command of the economic data. I sensed a growing desire on his part to begin to step into this debate.

]]>