David Arthur writes: Re. “Killing KRudd’s UN dreams the sign of a wounded leader” Oh Crikey you so regularly disappoint me lately on issues where I would expect more insight and a grown-up grasp of the machinations of current affairs and politics.
I have detected over many, many months now your intense dislike of Kevin Rudd. And true to form when an issue jumps up, such as Malcolm Turnbull’s pathetic handling of Rudd’s UN leadership aspirations, you just can’t help yourself but go in with hammer and tong.
Yesterday’s editorial aptly demonstrated your mindset: “And on the face of it, there is little to fault Turnbull’s judgment. Kevin Rudd is a toxic egomaniac …”
Being a Melbourne-centric journal, you’ve been clearly in the Julia Gillard camp. But you’re also in bed with the likes of Paul Howes, Mark Arbib, Don Farrell, David Feeney and yes, Bill Shorten. It was these “shining light” union leaders and politicians who pushed the Rudd’s in crisis button and succeeded in for ever more tarnishing his image. If there are faults with Rudd, and I am sure there are a few — it was that he hired a novice as his first chief of staff and more importantly, he has never fought to protect his heritage.
Of course Kevin Rudd is a highly commendable and eminently qualified candidate for UN Secretary Generalship. The majority of Australians would feel proud if he was elected (could the same be said of Howard or even Gillard?). Turnbull’s handling of it this last week and his denial of earlier communications with Rudd speaks volumes and shows him to be a weak and rather pathetic “leader”. The “cherry on top of a compost heap”, as Keating so masterfully described Turnbull and his cabinet.
Although you so regularly laugh at the News Corp’s treatment of important issues, you also increasingly sound like them. In its defense; we all know that News’ only real agenda is its own vested interests but with Crikey, it seems that you just hate Kevin Rudd.