What really annoys me about these politicians (Turnbull and Howard, but I bet there are others) is that they parade around the public schools in their electorates, telling stories about when they went to their local public school, trying to look like ordinary folks - but did they send their own kids to public schools? No way.

I have made a series of speculations about the psychological basis behind yours and others criticisms of MT’s wealth and success. These speculations relate to puritanism, envy, righteous indignation, prejudiced assumptions and projecting a lot of reverse-snobbery on one MT, MP.

I set out the reasoning for my speculations in detail in the article. Considering that you and others have been a little off-beam in some of your assumptions about MT such as being self-made and all, and you based some pretty strident criticisms on those wobbly assumptions, I think that lends some validity to my earlier speculations.

Take your phrase ‘forgetting where he comes from’. Classic reverse-snobbery. Mark Latham is a fantastic example of a person who hasn’t forgotten where he came from, just as John Howard is a fantastic example of a person who knows what it’s like to be ‘poor, friendless, with little talent, looks or a genius for people management’. These “virtues” you want in a leader have given us some very peculiar leaders.

I don’t think these insinuations qualify as insults, but I’m sorry if they make you uncomfortable. That’s often a sign that there’s some substance to the critique.

I never want to be ruled by a member of those social groups who are brought up to view themselves as the natural ruling class.

Fair enough. A shorter version of my article would simply state that I don’t think MT is one of those people, so you’ve got nothing to worry about in his case. I don’t think he’s a “bunyip aristocrat”. Obviously we disagree on this point. I don’t mean to insult you for disagreeing. The purpose of the article was to invite you to consider the basis of your disagreement.

Or, as I admitted in the article, I might be seeing things in Mr Turnbull that aren’t there. Some of the other commenters have pointed out some of those failings, but your comments only typify the exact kind of criticisms I had already addressed in the original article.

Going to private schools on scholarship puts you in a completely different social class, especially the people who you make friendship networks with. I simply see no evidence that MT is the sort of person who reaches out across classes.

I’ll know about the low income upbringing, but he seems to have done a bloody good job of forgetting where he comes from (apart from “My Humble Beginnings” stories).

I never want to be ruled by a member of those social groups who are brought up to view themselves as the natural ruling class. You can call me envious, I say I’m part of the great Australian tradition of egalitarianism and disrespect for those with too high an opinion of themselves.

are you sure it was him?

“we’ve been told that you actively sought Labor pre-selection in the past, is there any truth to the rumour?”

“it’s completely untrue. i’ve never been a member of the labor party. i think there is nothing wrong with being a member of the labor party. it’s just one of life’s mistakes that many people make. as it happens, i haven’t been a member of the labor party and i haven’t sought labor pre-selection”

re: the private education thang, it certainly corresponds with what Kate from Q said up the thread:

I have real problems with an MP who gets up at a P&C meeting and lets everyone know that the only reason why people send their children to public schools is because they would rather buy a new house or car than pay for the kids to go private. At that moment, he lost me - and pretty much everyone else at the meeting.

like howard and his anti-union hatred supposedly ingrained by his dad, (but discounted by his older brother) malcolm certainly has taken on the ‘private education is the most important thing you can pass onto to your kiddies’ schtick c/o of his old man.

like i said, i ain’t voting for the man, and didn’t last time, and wont be in 2010, if he is re-elected, which i expect he will be….

the margins they are quoting in wentworth are fcuked up from the king split lib vote in the 2004 election - but the reality is that the ALP only polled 26.3% primary vote in 2004. the greens polled 11.2% that’s umm. 37.5% - the ALP 2pp ended up being 44.5% and libs 55.5 (the combined king/turnbull primary vote was 59%.)

in 2001, King got 52% primary, ALP got 29.52%, greens 9.77% dems 6.15%..- the 2PP was 57.86% for King and the ALP got 42.14%.

taking into account the re-distribution of apparently 3%, that’s still nearly 5% to make up in liberal heartland….i’d be ecstatic to be proved wrong.

And fear not, Zebbidie, Sean did OK out of the deal. Your bitter assumptions are mistaken, prejudiced and inexplicable.

And if I’m not mistaken, I think you’ll find the education of young Malcolm was done on scholarship - you know, the ‘magnanimous’ private schools that say “we’ll let these people with no money study here for free because they’re brighter than our chinless wonders and they single-handedly improve our average grades,” or sumfink.

But don’t let me stand in the way of your righteous indignation. It’s most instructive.

…but I truly do feel that he has no understanding of what it is like to be poor and friendless and not be blessed with talent, looks and a genius for people management.

And if a childhood of being poor, friendless, with little talent, looks or a genius for people management is what you seek in a PM, then I suggest you vote for the incumbent.

Ozemail, was a well known Turnbull company.

Actually (at least according to Wiki) it was set up by Sean howard. Turnbull and Trevor Kennedy invested in 1994, 2 years before listing. So MT was an investor who also provided expertise in big financials. From which he picked up some 60mill. Howard was the entrepreneur. I certainly hope he is richer than Turnbull, but I doubt it - it never seems to work that way.

And he went (again according to Wiki) to Vaucluse Public School, continued his primary education at Sydney Grammar Prep, St Ives then went to Sydney Grammar School. When you say “single parent” I think you are implying single mum (actually his dad) surviving on a pension. It seems to be more like Prince Charles was a single parent after Di kicked it.

Again looking at his work history, it is working for others, or starting up investment banking companies which (as I said) make money by being able to master the intricacies of the modern financial system. Not exactly the man with his name on the van.

I don’t deny he is extremely bright and hard-working, but I truly do feel that he has no understanding of what it is like to be poor and friendless and not be blessed with talent, looks and a genius for people management.

Turnbull made his money by his ability to master the international corporate financial system. Now something that people who run banks do not like to hear is that they are not capitalists and not entrepreneurs, simply because they are not risking anything of their own. They are just employees who tell each other delightful “just-so� stories which allow them award themselves massive shares of profits in good conscience.

zebbidies spring, actually malcolm was a entrepreneur, not merely an employee of the 4 pillars or mac bank etc. he grew up in a single parent household in flats in the eastern suburbs, and worked his way through uni, as he says, in this month’s local low rent rag ‘The Beast” (feature on him)working as a labourer and usher, then as a freelance journalist, went to england & worked as a journo, came back, practiced law and ended up as Kerry Packer’s lawyer, then set up a law firm and then the investment bank, from which he made his mega-millions, but he also set up alot of companies - Ozemail, was a well known Turnbull company.

a self-made man whether you like him or not, (and aside from the odious policies he is now spruiking/supporting.)

as suz pointed out - he grew up in wentworth, and he says in the article “I’d rather live in a flat in Bondi, than a mansion out in the outer suburbs.” not that he’d ever have contemplate any such scenario, but like alot of born & bread eastern suburbs people, it rings true to me.

as to politics - he states in response to “Are you prepared to serve ten years in opposition if that’s what it takes get back in govt?” “I’m in politics for the long term subject to the people re-electing me and I’m 52, and touch wood, in good health…

not mentioned in the article, is that he is also quite the philanthropist, the kids hospital has a ‘turnbull wing’etc. at the end of the day, rich people don’t have to give away their money, so i spose this counts for something.

as to any choice between howard or costello or turnbull. i’d take turnbull…. but this little black duck won’t be helping him on his journey from point piper across the pond to kirribilli house ….. come whichever saturday in november, this wentworth voter will be putting the liberals last, as always.

I live in Wentworth and saw him on the bus a few months ago - he tried to attract as much attention as possible when getting off (hey, look at me!! Excuse me, that’s my umbrella under the seat two rows ahead…), probably the only bus he’s been on in his life

…you might like to call us puritanical and charmless because we fail to see the solar effulgence emerging from the nethers of MT, but we will remain unmoved by slick Mal

Ewwww. I never thought of looking there.

In future, let’s please avoid reference to ‘nethers’, being ‘unmoved’, and ’slick’ in the same sentence?

I don’t yet have a strong view on Malcolm II’s character qualities, but there seems little doubt we’d be foolish to underestimate either his determination or ability. I’d imagine as long as he is still enjoying the game and sees himself as in with a reasonable chance, he’ll persist. This political period certainly doesn’t strike me as a casual foray.

As someone else noted earlier, his would be competitors from the current leadership ranks suffer from terminal overexposure of their various inadequacies and chicanery. Even of whatever good qualities they may have. Their political capital, such as it was, has been frittered away. This does give Turnbull quite an advantage. Barring the appearance of some entirely fresh and captivating face, I’d imagine he has to be seen as the favourite.

Some of the denunciations of Turnbull highlighted issues he will need to address, others confirmed the article’s observations about envy, dogmatism and puritannical attitudes.

Mercurius - posting the equivalent of “neener, neener, neener, you’re just jealous.” dost not counteth as a response.

As more than a few people have noted in the thread, you might like to call us puritanical and charmless because we fail to see the solar effulgence emerging from the nethers of MT, but we will remain unmoved by slick Mal

Phil, we have a super-sleuth among us.

I look forward to hearing about how I managed to type responses to my article between 9-10am yesterday while walking to uni, between 10am-12pm yesterday while in a lecture with 100 other people, then while walking to and attending meetings from 2pm-4:30pm with prospective tutorial students, and while at home with my wife from 5:00pm onwards.

That leaves only the comments from 12pm-2pm yesterday, none of which could be described as a cheer squad.

However, having discerned a similarity in the linguistic style of the troll and the poster, I suspect that Nana Levu and I are the same.