Monday morning musings

Some isolated points that occur to me this morning. Feel free to riff on any or all of them:

  • Scanning this morning’s Murdoch and ABC news media, the order of stories and editorial lines are identical.
  • An opinion poll result is considered bigger news than the national broadband network.
  • Rudd’s preferred PM rating is 11 points above the ALP’s primary vote.
  • Abbott’s preferred PM rating is a few points below the Coalition’s primary vote.
  • An aggregate 1 in 4 voters are giving their primary vote to either ‘Green’ or ‘Other’
  • Labor’s 2PP trend result in the last several Newspolls is 49-50-51-52. Meanwhile the media has been going ape that this is Rudd’s leadership in terminal decline.
  • If the Murdoch press really believed that Rudd is going to lose the election, they wouldn’t be screaming for him to be replaced as Labor leader.
  • I turned on the teev to see Phil Kafcaloudes “earning” his taxpayer-funded paycheck by reading Dennis Shanahan’s opinion column live to viewers on ABC2.
  • Can’t the ABC just run some nature documentaries? My personal favourite is ‘Bugs F***ing To Mozart‘. That would represent better value for my taxes than their present second-rate Murdoch mirror site.

« profile & posts archive

This author has written 78 posts for Larvatus Prodeo.

Return to: Homepage | Blog Index

346 responses to “Monday morning musings”

  1. john

    The Australian has been predicting a liberal win since 2006.

    They have very low influence on public opinion. People make vote based on economics and policy, and Kevin Rudd dealt much better with the economy than the libs owuld have, and he actually has policy, which the Oppn. does not.

    He will in the election with an increased margin.

  2. john

    The Australian has been predicting a liberal win since 2006.

    They have very low influence on public opinion. People make vote based on economics and policy, and Kevin Rudd dealt much better with the economy than the libs owuld have, and he actually has policy, which the Oppn. does not.

    He will in the election with an increased margin.

  3. mick

    But Labor doomed!

    You know because…
    * The economy is, in fact, very strong. Certainly about a billion times stronger that the EU economies at the moment.
    * The government hasn’t really started campaigning yet.
    * The LNP hasn’t formulated a popular policy since about 2006 (except the parental leave thing, but that wasn’t a written down pre-prepared policy so it doesn’t count).
    * Oh right, Tony Abbott only speaks the truth when it’s written down for him by someone else.
    * By the time the election comes around there will be a few new board members at the ABC.
    * Barnaby Joyce is in the LNP.

  4. mick

    But Labor doomed!

    You know because…
    * The economy is, in fact, very strong. Certainly about a billion times stronger that the EU economies at the moment.
    * The government hasn’t really started campaigning yet.
    * The LNP hasn’t formulated a popular policy since about 2006 (except the parental leave thing, but that wasn’t a written down pre-prepared policy so it doesn’t count).
    * Oh right, Tony Abbott only speaks the truth when it’s written down for him by someone else.
    * By the time the election comes around there will be a few new board members at the ABC.
    * Barnaby Joyce is in the LNP.

  5. adrian

    Things to look forward to dept. Soon we’ll be treated to a 24 hours a day ‘second-rate Murdoch mirror site’.

  6. adrian

    Things to look forward to dept. Soon we’ll be treated to a 24 hours a day ‘second-rate Murdoch mirror site’.

  7. Andyc

    Your first two points are telling and depressing, Mercurius. I still wonder how Murdoch has captured the ABC so thoroughly, and like you, object to having my taxes support a Murdoch organ. Time to sell the current travesty to him and set up a new one to replace it?

  8. Andyc

    Your first two points are telling and depressing, Mercurius. I still wonder how Murdoch has captured the ABC so thoroughly, and like you, object to having my taxes support a Murdoch organ. Time to sell the current travesty to him and set up a new one to replace it?

  9. Paul Norton

    The opening post omits to mention the new theme music and faux-British stereotypically “authoritative” male voiceover which ABC News Radio has adopted to lend gravitas to its recitations of the Newscorp talking points du jour.

  10. Paul Norton

    The opening post omits to mention the new theme music and faux-British stereotypically “authoritative” male voiceover which ABC News Radio has adopted to lend gravitas to its recitations of the Newscorp talking points du jour.

  11. Lloyd

    Couldn’t agree more. I’ve complained to both the ABC and Media Watch this morning.

    It’s ridiculous when bias is so prevalent and blatant.

    After the last 2 weeks of relentless hammering by the commentariat across the board the fact that labor has maintained it’s position in the face of this onslaught is a bit of a miracle.

  12. Lloyd

    Couldn’t agree more. I’ve complained to both the ABC and Media Watch this morning.

    It’s ridiculous when bias is so prevalent and blatant.

    After the last 2 weeks of relentless hammering by the commentariat across the board the fact that labor has maintained it’s position in the face of this onslaught is a bit of a miracle.

  13. Sam

    You lot are kidding yourself if you don’t think Labor Is in real trouble. The 2PP vote in Newspoll only looks as good as it is because it assumes the Green preference flow will be like it was in 2007. But there is not a single political professional who believes that. If Labor doesn’t improve it’s primary vote, it is toast.

    Rudd can still pull this off, because the electorate has not yet warmed to Abbott. But he better pull his finger out, fast, or we’ll all be watching Cardinal Pell wandering in and out of the Lodge dispensing policy directives to his acolyte.

    God help us all.

  14. Sam

    You lot are kidding yourself if you don’t think Labor Is in real trouble. The 2PP vote in Newspoll only looks as good as it is because it assumes the Green preference flow will be like it was in 2007. But there is not a single political professional who believes that. If Labor doesn’t improve it’s primary vote, it is toast.

    Rudd can still pull this off, because the electorate has not yet warmed to Abbott. But he better pull his finger out, fast, or we’ll all be watching Cardinal Pell wandering in and out of the Lodge dispensing policy directives to his acolyte.

    God help us all.

  15. adamite

    One you missed: ‘does this mean there is more pressure on Gillard to challenge for the leadership’.

  16. adamite

    One you missed: ‘does this mean there is more pressure on Gillard to challenge for the leadership’.

  17. john

    Big Kev is an exceptional campaigner. Wait til the campaign starts.

  18. john

    Big Kev is an exceptional campaigner. Wait til the campaign starts.

  19. TerjeP

    The ABC should be taken out of government hands and given to the people.

  20. TerjeP

    The ABC should be taken out of government hands and given to the people.

  21. Agnes Mack

    According to this,

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/politics/heat-on-pm-as-beazley-backs-gillard-for-top-job/story-e6frgczf-1225882022348, Julia Gillard refused to co-operate with the ABC’s Australian Story for tonight’s program which features her using old footage.

    I wonder if anyone knows if this is the first time an Australian Story on a political figure has gone ahead without the co-operation of the subject.

    The old clips apparently include musings on leadership – in the current climate of media fuelled leadership speculation that has to be the most glaring “out of context” effort ever.

  22. Agnes Mack

    According to this,

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/politics/heat-on-pm-as-beazley-backs-gillard-for-top-job/story-e6frgczf-1225882022348, Julia Gillard refused to co-operate with the ABC’s Australian Story for tonight’s program which features her using old footage.

    I wonder if anyone knows if this is the first time an Australian Story on a political figure has gone ahead without the co-operation of the subject.

    The old clips apparently include musings on leadership – in the current climate of media fuelled leadership speculation that has to be the most glaring “out of context” effort ever.

  23. Fine

    Yep, they’re rehashing a four year old story, spiced up with a few recent interviews with God knows who. This seems a very dodgy, pushing along an agenda move.

  24. Fine

    Yep, they’re rehashing a four year old story, spiced up with a few recent interviews with God knows who. This seems a very dodgy, pushing along an agenda move.

  25. David Irving (no relation)

    On the bright side, it means Australian Story has graduated from fluff to fluff-with-an-agenda.

    Progress, if you like.

  26. David Irving (no relation)

    On the bright side, it means Australian Story has graduated from fluff to fluff-with-an-agenda.

    Progress, if you like.

  27. Ken Lovell

    Lloyd @ 6 a more mundane explanation, not requiring a resort to the supernatural, is that the influence of the media on voting intentions is consistently exaggerated.

    I suspect sometimes that the people who are most outraged at News Ltd and Our ABC don’t really believe the MSM determines election outcomes. They are simply infuriated at their powerlessness to do anything about such blatant public absence of professional competence and ethical behaviour. I used to feel the same way, but found that switching the MSM off was very liberating.

    Of course writing about 839 blog posts every month complaining about the MSM also tends to affirm their role as pre-eminent opinion-shapers. Many people are disappointed, and rightly so, that the MSM spends so much time reporting what people said about an issue, instead of investigating the facts about the issue itself. Apart from anything else it makes for tediously uninteresting reading. I venture to suggest similar observations could be made about media that repetitively report how the MSM is covering issues instead of exploring the issues themselves.

  28. Ken Lovell

    Lloyd @ 6 a more mundane explanation, not requiring a resort to the supernatural, is that the influence of the media on voting intentions is consistently exaggerated.

    I suspect sometimes that the people who are most outraged at News Ltd and Our ABC don’t really believe the MSM determines election outcomes. They are simply infuriated at their powerlessness to do anything about such blatant public absence of professional competence and ethical behaviour. I used to feel the same way, but found that switching the MSM off was very liberating.

    Of course writing about 839 blog posts every month complaining about the MSM also tends to affirm their role as pre-eminent opinion-shapers. Many people are disappointed, and rightly so, that the MSM spends so much time reporting what people said about an issue, instead of investigating the facts about the issue itself. Apart from anything else it makes for tediously uninteresting reading. I venture to suggest similar observations could be made about media that repetitively report how the MSM is covering issues instead of exploring the issues themselves.

  29. Paul Norton

    On Sam’s point #5, the OO reports that:

    Based on preference flows at the last election, calculated on an 80 per cent flow of Greens preferences to Labor, the government is ahead on the two-party-preferred figure of 52 to 48 per cent. This is based on a Greens primary vote of 15 per cent, down one point in three weeks.

    In other words the 2PP estimate assume that the 15 per cent vot for the Greens will eventually add 12 per cent to Labor’s vote and 3 per cent to the Coalition’s.

    As Possum noted on 8 June, the most recent Neilsen poll suggested that Greens preferences are now running 68-32 to Labor. If we plug this ratio into today’s Newpoll figures, we get an estimate of the Greens preferences adding rouchly 10 per cent to Labor’s vote and 5 per cent to the Coalition’s, giving a 2PP (all else being equal) of 50-50. Not out of the woods by any means, but by no means hopeless.

  30. Paul Norton

    On Sam’s point #5, the OO reports that:

    Based on preference flows at the last election, calculated on an 80 per cent flow of Greens preferences to Labor, the government is ahead on the two-party-preferred figure of 52 to 48 per cent. This is based on a Greens primary vote of 15 per cent, down one point in three weeks.

    In other words the 2PP estimate assume that the 15 per cent vot for the Greens will eventually add 12 per cent to Labor’s vote and 3 per cent to the Coalition’s.

    As Possum noted on 8 June, the most recent Neilsen poll suggested that Greens preferences are now running 68-32 to Labor. If we plug this ratio into today’s Newpoll figures, we get an estimate of the Greens preferences adding rouchly 10 per cent to Labor’s vote and 5 per cent to the Coalition’s, giving a 2PP (all else being equal) of 50-50. Not out of the woods by any means, but by no means hopeless.

  31. Paul Burns

    I reckon I’d go gor “Bugs Fucking To Mozart” over the pap that’s served out any day on ABC Breakfast Tv. Shanahan is some=one to be taken seriously. Doesn’t Castanedes read his stuuf. Turned off the TV, rolled over and got nearly an extra 2 hours sleep.

  32. Paul Burns

    I reckon I’d go gor “Bugs Fucking To Mozart” over the pap that’s served out any day on ABC Breakfast Tv. Shanahan is some=one to be taken seriously. Doesn’t Castanedes read his stuuf. Turned off the TV, rolled over and got nearly an extra 2 hours sleep.

  33. Sam

    Paul 15, that is a hugely risky way to try win an election. It’s never happened before.

  34. Sam

    Paul 15, that is a hugely risky way to try win an election. It’s never happened before.

  35. Paul Norton

    Sam, I wasn’t suggesting that Labor try to win the election that way, I was just trying to provide an estimate of 2PP which takes account of a more fine-grained estimate of Green preferences.

  36. Paul Norton

    Sam, I wasn’t suggesting that Labor try to win the election that way, I was just trying to provide an estimate of 2PP which takes account of a more fine-grained estimate of Green preferences.

  37. Fine

    I’m surprised they’re not blaming Rudd got the missing mining executives in Africa.

  38. Fine

    I’m surprised they’re not blaming Rudd got the missing mining executives in Africa.

  39. adrian

    “Time to sell the current travesty to him and set up a new one to replace it?”

    Yes, but why would he buy it? He’s got all the influence he needs without the expenditure.

  40. adrian

    “Time to sell the current travesty to him and set up a new one to replace it?”

    Yes, but why would he buy it? He’s got all the influence he needs without the expenditure.

  41. Mark

    @15 – I’d be surprised anyway if Labor could win based on a 35% primary, when you consider that this would be the total of national primary votes, including those in safe Labor seats. If Labor’s primary is in the low 30s in the marginals, they’d be toast on the basis of this poll.

  42. Mark

    @15 – I’d be surprised anyway if Labor could win based on a 35% primary, when you consider that this would be the total of national primary votes, including those in safe Labor seats. If Labor’s primary is in the low 30s in the marginals, they’d be toast on the basis of this poll.

  43. Bigbob

    Fine,

    Iron Bar, sort of, kinda, not really saying that but yes he did say that this morning.

  44. Bigbob

    Fine,

    Iron Bar, sort of, kinda, not really saying that but yes he did say that this morning.

  45. Chris

    An opinion poll result is considered bigger news than the national broadband network.

    I wonder if the government is happy that they aren’t looking at the Telstra deal too closely. From the minister’s press release:

    USO Co will assume responsibility for most of Telstra’s Universal Service Obligations for the delivery of standard telephone services, payphones and emergency call handling from 1 July 2012. This will ensure that essential communications services are protected and assist the structural reform of the industry.

    Provide $100 million to Telstra to assist in the retraining and redeployment of Telstra staff that will be affected by this very significant reform to the structure of the telecommunications industry; and

    There’s going to be some very happy Telstra shareholders, especially over the first change. No more blaming Telstra for poor services in remote areas which are expensive for Telstra to provide, it’ll back in government hands again.

  46. Chris

    An opinion poll result is considered bigger news than the national broadband network.

    I wonder if the government is happy that they aren’t looking at the Telstra deal too closely. From the minister’s press release:

    USO Co will assume responsibility for most of Telstra’s Universal Service Obligations for the delivery of standard telephone services, payphones and emergency call handling from 1 July 2012. This will ensure that essential communications services are protected and assist the structural reform of the industry.

    Provide $100 million to Telstra to assist in the retraining and redeployment of Telstra staff that will be affected by this very significant reform to the structure of the telecommunications industry; and

    There’s going to be some very happy Telstra shareholders, especially over the first change. No more blaming Telstra for poor services in remote areas which are expensive for Telstra to provide, it’ll back in government hands again.

  47. tssk

    I’m still under the deluded view that Rudd is one of the best PM’s ever. The current media narrative was making me wonder how much power Murdoch has but I’m starting to shift to the following thoughs.

    1. Is this how Howard supporters felt? If so does this mean that Howard was being unfairly vilified by the media?

    2. If so many people are saying Rudd’s a dud why can’t I see it?

    3. If I’m so deluded…maybe I should vote informal.

    It might be that the true outlier was Rudd being elected. Abbott will be the next PM and we can look forward to Workchoices mark 2. And why not? If I was Abbott I’d be claiming a mandate on everything once he got in.

  48. tssk

    I’m still under the deluded view that Rudd is one of the best PM’s ever. The current media narrative was making me wonder how much power Murdoch has but I’m starting to shift to the following thoughs.

    1. Is this how Howard supporters felt? If so does this mean that Howard was being unfairly vilified by the media?

    2. If so many people are saying Rudd’s a dud why can’t I see it?

    3. If I’m so deluded…maybe I should vote informal.

    It might be that the true outlier was Rudd being elected. Abbott will be the next PM and we can look forward to Workchoices mark 2. And why not? If I was Abbott I’d be claiming a mandate on everything once he got in.

  49. Paul Norton

    In some respects these poll figures take us into uncharted psephological waters. The nearest benchmark for comparison is the 1990 Federal election which Labor won with 39.4 per cent of the primary vote to the Coalition’s 43.3 per cent. Today’s Newspoll has Labor roughly 4 per cent down, and the Coalition roughly 3 per cent down, on the 1990 figures.

  50. Paul Norton

    In some respects these poll figures take us into uncharted psephological waters. The nearest benchmark for comparison is the 1990 Federal election which Labor won with 39.4 per cent of the primary vote to the Coalition’s 43.3 per cent. Today’s Newspoll has Labor roughly 4 per cent down, and the Coalition roughly 3 per cent down, on the 1990 figures.

  51. tssk

    The difference Paul is if the ALP won like that this time there would be a massive call for a revote. It would not be seen as a legitimate electoral win. There would be massive pressure for them to handover to the Coalition.

  52. tssk

    The difference Paul is if the ALP won like that this time there would be a massive call for a revote. It would not be seen as a legitimate electoral win. There would be massive pressure for them to handover to the Coalition.

  53. Steve at the Pub

    Tssk, #24: Without control of the senate Abbott is unable to “bring back” Workchoices. This is assuming he hasn’t absorbed the reality that the population doesn’t want it.

    Except of course that Workchoices hasn’t been repealed. It has had a name change, and quite a deal of the conditions have been changed, but the framework is still in place, still being used, and gaining in momentum. Workchoices ahem “Fairwork Australia” after July the 1st will become a bigger part of our lives than it ever was when it was known as “Workchoices”.

  54. Steve at the Pub

    Tssk, #24: Without control of the senate Abbott is unable to “bring back” Workchoices. This is assuming he hasn’t absorbed the reality that the population doesn’t want it.

    Except of course that Workchoices hasn’t been repealed. It has had a name change, and quite a deal of the conditions have been changed, but the framework is still in place, still being used, and gaining in momentum. Workchoices ahem “Fairwork Australia” after July the 1st will become a bigger part of our lives than it ever was when it was known as “Workchoices”.

  55. skepticlawyer

    Can’t the ABC just run some nature documentaries? My personal favourite is ‘Bugs F***ing To Mozart‘.

    Now there’s an image I’m not going to forget easily.

  56. skepticlawyer

    Can’t the ABC just run some nature documentaries? My personal favourite is ‘Bugs F***ing To Mozart‘.

    Now there’s an image I’m not going to forget easily.

  57. tssk

    Oh don’t get me wrong. I have the wrong end of the stick with Workchoices. I’m judging it on my personal experience when in the early days my friends and I were working insane hours for no paid overtime. But that isn’t the experience of the greater Australian public.

    When Abbott wins he should have no shame in declaring the mandate.

  58. tssk

    Oh don’t get me wrong. I have the wrong end of the stick with Workchoices. I’m judging it on my personal experience when in the early days my friends and I were working insane hours for no paid overtime. But that isn’t the experience of the greater Australian public.

    When Abbott wins he should have no shame in declaring the mandate.

  59. adrian

    tssk..
    1. No and no.
    2. Because most of the people saying it are journalists or coalition supporters.
    3. You are not deluded, but who you vote for is your business.

    Also Labor always has a more difficult time of it, as the Liberals and the cheer squads believe that they are the natural party of government, and any Labor government is but a temporary abberation. Doesn’t mean that you or anyone else has to believe it as well.

  60. adrian

    tssk..
    1. No and no.
    2. Because most of the people saying it are journalists or coalition supporters.
    3. You are not deluded, but who you vote for is your business.

    Also Labor always has a more difficult time of it, as the Liberals and the cheer squads believe that they are the natural party of government, and any Labor government is but a temporary abberation. Doesn’t mean that you or anyone else has to believe it as well.

  61. tssk

    adrian. Do you remember the last scene of Invasion of the Body Snatchers? I’m feeling a lot like that lone man right now.

  62. tssk

    adrian. Do you remember the last scene of Invasion of the Body Snatchers? I’m feeling a lot like that lone man right now.

  63. Paul Norton

    tssk #26, whilst Labor would obviously prefer to win under different circumstances and with a much higher primary vote, if they did win a Lower House majority under those circumstances it would be as legitimate as any other Lower House majority won with compulsory preferential voting, which in our country is how governments are elected.

  64. Paul Norton

    tssk #26, whilst Labor would obviously prefer to win under different circumstances and with a much higher primary vote, if they did win a Lower House majority under those circumstances it would be as legitimate as any other Lower House majority won with compulsory preferential voting, which in our country is how governments are elected.

  65. Howard Cunningham

    I was astounded by the reporting in the Oz this morning. No defence from me on this, or the ABC seeming to report it verbatim (didn’t read the story on the ABC website, but saw the headline).

    On the actual poll, the preference distribution is an issue. I think it’s pretty clear that no one actually has much idea what is going to happen in the election.

  66. Howard Cunningham

    I was astounded by the reporting in the Oz this morning. No defence from me on this, or the ABC seeming to report it verbatim (didn’t read the story on the ABC website, but saw the headline).

    On the actual poll, the preference distribution is an issue. I think it’s pretty clear that no one actually has much idea what is going to happen in the election.

  67. pablo

    Chris @ 23. Interesting stuff and probably the only chance of seeing some analysis will be Paul Budde or similar expert. I’m still wrankling over the $11 billion to be paid to Telstra for infrastructure that my taxes would have contributed to prior to privatisation. Someone’s double dipped on me.

  68. pablo

    Chris @ 23. Interesting stuff and probably the only chance of seeing some analysis will be Paul Budde or similar expert. I’m still wrankling over the $11 billion to be paid to Telstra for infrastructure that my taxes would have contributed to prior to privatisation. Someone’s double dipped on me.

  69. tssk

    Paul. I don’t think the Murdoch newspapers would see it that way. (Unlike Howard vs Beazley where Howard claimed mandate under the principle “a win is a win.”)

  70. tssk

    Paul. I don’t think the Murdoch newspapers would see it that way. (Unlike Howard vs Beazley where Howard claimed mandate under the principle “a win is a win.”)

  71. Chris

    pablo @ 34 – sounds like it is actually $9bn in cash, $2bn in-kind (eg taking over the USO among other things). Presumably the government got paid for the infrastructure when it privatised Telstra and its just buying some rights to it back again. I don’t know if it was more or less expensive this way – I don’t think the government will own the conduits again, just have the right to use them.

    I’ll also be interested to see what the comparisons are of this deal versus what was earlier offered to Telstra. Did they gain or lose by holding out for so long?

  72. Chris

    pablo @ 34 – sounds like it is actually $9bn in cash, $2bn in-kind (eg taking over the USO among other things). Presumably the government got paid for the infrastructure when it privatised Telstra and its just buying some rights to it back again. I don’t know if it was more or less expensive this way – I don’t think the government will own the conduits again, just have the right to use them.

    I’ll also be interested to see what the comparisons are of this deal versus what was earlier offered to Telstra. Did they gain or lose by holding out for so long?

  73. CMMC

    I hope Rudd postpones the election as long as possible, the Murdoch/ABC anti-Labor hysteria will become incandescent and visible to all.

  74. CMMC

    I hope Rudd postpones the election as long as possible, the Murdoch/ABC anti-Labor hysteria will become incandescent and visible to all.

  75. tssk

    I don’t know. I know a few people who hate Abbott who have decided with all the sound and fury that they will vote informal this time. If the electorate disengages this will play well for the Libs.

  76. tssk

    I don’t know. I know a few people who hate Abbott who have decided with all the sound and fury that they will vote informal this time. If the electorate disengages this will play well for the Libs.

  77. Patrickb

    I would have thought that to seriously be considered a contender in the coming election the LNP need to have a substantial 2PP lead over the govt as the gap will narrow after the election is declared. At least that’s been the case in the past (even Howard picked up a bit last time but he was to far gone). There is nothing extraordinary about this election save the extreme quirkiness of the opposition (Abbott, Joyce, Bishop et al).

  78. Patrickb

    I would have thought that to seriously be considered a contender in the coming election the LNP need to have a substantial 2PP lead over the govt as the gap will narrow after the election is declared. At least that’s been the case in the past (even Howard picked up a bit last time but he was to far gone). There is nothing extraordinary about this election save the extreme quirkiness of the opposition (Abbott, Joyce, Bishop et al).

  79. Fran Barlow

    Actually, I think the 2PP gap (currently 52-48 ALP) will widen when the election is declared. I believe the final 2PP will see the ALP get 54-46 and increase its majority.

    Nowhere near enough of the people who voted ALP in 2007 are unhappy in ways that would incline them to vote Liberal/National to see the Liberals creep closer. Additionally, by the time of the election there will possibly be another 100,000 young voters on the rolls, who, overwhelmingly, vote Green-ALP.

  80. Fran Barlow

    Actually, I think the 2PP gap (currently 52-48 ALP) will widen when the election is declared. I believe the final 2PP will see the ALP get 54-46 and increase its majority.

    Nowhere near enough of the people who voted ALP in 2007 are unhappy in ways that would incline them to vote Liberal/National to see the Liberals creep closer. Additionally, by the time of the election there will possibly be another 100,000 young voters on the rolls, who, overwhelmingly, vote Green-ALP.

  81. tssk

    Speaking of which did Rudd repeal the tighter cut off for getting on the electoral role or did he leave it the way Howard did?

  82. tssk

    Speaking of which did Rudd repeal the tighter cut off for getting on the electoral role or did he leave it the way Howard did?

  83. Patrickb

    @40
    Agreed. The nut of it is that the Libs don’t have a gap to narrow so it’s probably all downhill for them from here.

  84. Patrickb

    @40
    Agreed. The nut of it is that the Libs don’t have a gap to narrow so it’s probably all downhill for them from here.

  85. Chris

    Patrickb @ 40 – and a close looking contest in the polls with uncertainty about preference flows is in Labor’s favor as it will reduce the number of protest votes against Labor. There seems to be a whole lot of panic about very little at the moment, though magnifying their vulnerability is probably a deliberate tactic.

  86. Chris

    Patrickb @ 40 – and a close looking contest in the polls with uncertainty about preference flows is in Labor’s favor as it will reduce the number of protest votes against Labor. There seems to be a whole lot of panic about very little at the moment, though magnifying their vulnerability is probably a deliberate tactic.

  87. Chookie

    Skepticlawyer @28, you need to see the love scene in Microcosmos, though the lusty couple are not exactly bugs.

  88. Chookie

    Skepticlawyer @28, you need to see the love scene in Microcosmos, though the lusty couple are not exactly bugs.

  89. derrida derider

    In 1990 Labor retained government with a 39% primary vote, on Democrat and Independent preferences.

    Given that the Greens are going to get a higher share of the vote than the Dems did then, and given that the average Green voter is much more reliably left-wing than the average Democrat or independent voter was in 1990, I reckon it’s quite possible for the ALP to retain government with a lower primary vote than that. In fact at 39% they’d be a shoo-in.

    IOW the low ALP primary vote in opinion polls is a worry the government’s strategists need to address, but nowhere near the death sentence people here seem to think.

  90. derrida derider

    In 1990 Labor retained government with a 39% primary vote, on Democrat and Independent preferences.

    Given that the Greens are going to get a higher share of the vote than the Dems did then, and given that the average Green voter is much more reliably left-wing than the average Democrat or independent voter was in 1990, I reckon it’s quite possible for the ALP to retain government with a lower primary vote than that. In fact at 39% they’d be a shoo-in.

    IOW the low ALP primary vote in opinion polls is a worry the government’s strategists need to address, but nowhere near the death sentence people here seem to think.

  91. Mr Denmore

    The ABC is now beyond a joke. Shanahan’s reverse double pike over the Newspoll result I can understand. that’s his job, to report black as white.

    But the ABC is not doing its job. Two weeks ago, Neilsen had the Coalition in a position that pointed to a landslide victory for the conservatives at 57-43 against Labor.

    Now the poll that all the press gallery journalists (frantically reading each other’s copy) tell us is the most accurate survey of them all shows an almost exact opposite outcome.

    Forget bias. This is just stupid, stupid, lazy journalism. Having been hyped to heaven in the past week as the poll that would break Rudd’s prime ministership, it shows Labor with a modest lead. So the lead for the ABC news story should have been:

    Suggestions of a Coalition victory at the coming federal election have been thrown into doubt by the latest Newspoll.

    A recent AC Neilsen poll showed the Tony Abbott-led conservative Coalition with an easy election winning lead over Labor, but Newspoll shows the tables reversed.

    If mirrored on election day, the 52-48 two-party preferred lead woulld be enough to give Labor a second term in office.

    The Newspoll comes after an intensely negative two weeks of media coverage for Labor, with commentators focusing on the Prime Minister’s communication abilities and the mining industry’s saturation advertising campaign against the proposed resources super profits tax.

    THAT’S the story out of this and is the one I would have told the reporter to write.

  92. Mr Denmore

    The ABC is now beyond a joke. Shanahan’s reverse double pike over the Newspoll result I can understand. that’s his job, to report black as white.

    But the ABC is not doing its job. Two weeks ago, Neilsen had the Coalition in a position that pointed to a landslide victory for the conservatives at 57-43 against Labor.

    Now the poll that all the press gallery journalists (frantically reading each other’s copy) tell us is the most accurate survey of them all shows an almost exact opposite outcome.

    Forget bias. This is just stupid, stupid, lazy journalism. Having been hyped to heaven in the past week as the poll that would break Rudd’s prime ministership, it shows Labor with a modest lead. So the lead for the ABC news story should have been:

    Suggestions of a Coalition victory at the coming federal election have been thrown into doubt by the latest Newspoll.

    A recent AC Neilsen poll showed the Tony Abbott-led conservative Coalition with an easy election winning lead over Labor, but Newspoll shows the tables reversed.

    If mirrored on election day, the 52-48 two-party preferred lead woulld be enough to give Labor a second term in office.

    The Newspoll comes after an intensely negative two weeks of media coverage for Labor, with commentators focusing on the Prime Minister’s communication abilities and the mining industry’s saturation advertising campaign against the proposed resources super profits tax.

    THAT’S the story out of this and is the one I would have told the reporter to write.

  93. Tim Macknay

    Speaking of which did Rudd repeal the tighter cut off for getting on the electoral role or did he leave it the way Howard did?

    Tssk, the Electoral and Referendum Amendment (Close of Rolls and Other Measures) Bill (No. 2) 2010 was introduced into Parliament in early June included the reinstatement of the seven day window before the close of rolls. Debate of the Bill in the Senate was adjourned following its second reading on 16 June. The Senate has not yet voted on the Bill. It’s possible the Opposition will vote against the Bill, so whether it passes could depend upon the Greens, Xenophon & Fielding.

  94. Tim Macknay

    Speaking of which did Rudd repeal the tighter cut off for getting on the electoral role or did he leave it the way Howard did?

    Tssk, the Electoral and Referendum Amendment (Close of Rolls and Other Measures) Bill (No. 2) 2010 was introduced into Parliament in early June included the reinstatement of the seven day window before the close of rolls. Debate of the Bill in the Senate was adjourned following its second reading on 16 June. The Senate has not yet voted on the Bill. It’s possible the Opposition will vote against the Bill, so whether it passes could depend upon the Greens, Xenophon & Fielding.

  95. FDB

    “the lusty couple are not exactly bugs.”

    Thank you Chookie – beetles ? bugs.

    This is a rare case where etymological and entymological pedantry coincide.

  96. FDB

    “the lusty couple are not exactly bugs.”

    Thank you Chookie – beetles ? bugs.

    This is a rare case where etymological and entymological pedantry coincide.

  97. adrian

    ‘THAT’S the story out of this and is the one I would have told the reporter to write.’

    Maybe, but the question is why are they being told to write something else entirely? Or are you saying that nobody is telling them to write anything and they just copy whatever News Ltd says because it’s easier?

  98. adrian

    ‘THAT’S the story out of this and is the one I would have told the reporter to write.’

    Maybe, but the question is why are they being told to write something else entirely? Or are you saying that nobody is telling them to write anything and they just copy whatever News Ltd says because it’s easier?

  99. Mr Denmore

    Maybe, but the question is why are they being told to write something else entirely? Or are you saying that nobody is telling them to write anything and they just copy whatever News Ltd says because it’s easier?

    The latter. I highly doubt someone is actually telling them what to write. The ABC has been so cowed in recent years by balance Nazis that I suspect the reporters are sub-consciously deciding that aping the News Ltd line will ensure they have a quiet life.

    Going out on a limb and reporting the actual story (the Rudd leadership talk was a beat-up and Labor is doing well given the negative media blitzkreig) would risk them being labelled “unbalanced” by the usual suspects in the Murdoch attack machine.

    So they roll over and play the game. Pathetic really. Murdoch doesn’t even have to take over the ABC. He has done so in a de facto way, which is why it makes sense to sell the “public” broadcaster.

  100. Mr Denmore

    Maybe, but the question is why are they being told to write something else entirely? Or are you saying that nobody is telling them to write anything and they just copy whatever News Ltd says because it’s easier?

    The latter. I highly doubt someone is actually telling them what to write. The ABC has been so cowed in recent years by balance Nazis that I suspect the reporters are sub-consciously deciding that aping the News Ltd line will ensure they have a quiet life.

    Going out on a limb and reporting the actual story (the Rudd leadership talk was a beat-up and Labor is doing well given the negative media blitzkreig) would risk them being labelled “unbalanced” by the usual suspects in the Murdoch attack machine.

    So they roll over and play the game. Pathetic really. Murdoch doesn’t even have to take over the ABC. He has done so in a de facto way, which is why it makes sense to sell the “public” broadcaster.

  101. Patricia WA

    I was astounded by the reporting in the Oz this morning.

    Howard @ 33 why would you be astounded? News Ltd would find a way to write Newspoll up favorably to the Coalition no matter how the figures fell out.

    Adrian @ 49 you’ve enlarged on what I was going to say. I feel that someone is directing editorial policy in ABC News and Current Affairs, or certainly promoting to influential positions those likely to take a particular political stance. It’s too consistent to be an accident or just recent laziness in following the Oz meme for the day.

    I don’t buy the Oz any more, not even the Weekend, but I get my neighour’s copy on the way to the recycling bin. Nowadays they don’t open it much further than the immediate news and the magazine for TV programs and I grab the crossword pages before dumping it. But the Inquirer’s story on How Rudd Bet The House caught my eye and I’ve just finished reading it.

    No suggestion there that the ‘secret planning meeting’ of what is now called the ‘Gang of Four’ with Treasury Secretary, Ken Henry, was in any way reprehensible. Their actions are described as ‘extraordinarily early planning compared with other governments around the world’ and few would doubt the effectiveness of the outcomes. As well, Rudd’s instinct to follow Henry’s advice to its logical extreme suggests a capacity for sound judgement and a willingness to take risks in the national interest regardless of the political ‘shit storm’ they all knew would follow. Confirms the opinion of Rudd I share with tssk.

    What astonishes me continually as I watch the impact of Murdoch and his minions in their attack on the PM’s credibility is how they can ignore facts like these and with any conscience at all run as they do on Page 2 of the Inquirer above a continuation of the Shitstorm feature, a crappy and dishonest piece like that of Christian Kerr suggesting that Labour insiders are still sore at the PM over his non-attendance at John Button’s funeral. It’s all insinuation, speculation and rumours about leftie ‘luvvies’ still sore two years on! No names, of course, until we get to Annie O’Rourke who last week put up her hand on Crikey’s Unleashed to take responsibility for wrongly advising the PM to drop in to see Cate Blanchett that day. He seems unable to counter that either with anything except more vague undermining generalisations of the kind we see everywhere in MSM today.

    If Ruper Murdoch was ever at heart the Australian he claims to be he would be encouraging his editorial staff everywhere to celebrate Australia’s brilliant survival of the GFC, clearly not a miracle, but the result of courageous decisions by our PM and Treasurer using every economic asset it knew it already had and had the responsibility to maintain.

    PS I’ve had problems with this, as often occurs with me, on bringing up the review copy before submission. Any hints on how to deal with this in future?

  102. Patricia WA

    I was astounded by the reporting in the Oz this morning.

    Howard @ 33 why would you be astounded? News Ltd would find a way to write Newspoll up favorably to the Coalition no matter how the figures fell out.

    Adrian @ 49 you’ve enlarged on what I was going to say. I feel that someone is directing editorial policy in ABC News and Current Affairs, or certainly promoting to influential positions those likely to take a particular political stance. It’s too consistent to be an accident or just recent laziness in following the Oz meme for the day.

    I don’t buy the Oz any more, not even the Weekend, but I get my neighour’s copy on the way to the recycling bin. Nowadays they don’t open it much further than the immediate news and the magazine for TV programs and I grab the crossword pages before dumping it. But the Inquirer’s story on How Rudd Bet The House caught my eye and I’ve just finished reading it.

    No suggestion there that the ‘secret planning meeting’ of what is now called the ‘Gang of Four’ with Treasury Secretary, Ken Henry, was in any way reprehensible. Their actions are described as ‘extraordinarily early planning compared with other governments around the world’ and few would doubt the effectiveness of the outcomes. As well, Rudd’s instinct to follow Henry’s advice to its logical extreme suggests a capacity for sound judgement and a willingness to take risks in the national interest regardless of the political ‘shit storm’ they all knew would follow. Confirms the opinion of Rudd I share with tssk.

    What astonishes me continually as I watch the impact of Murdoch and his minions in their attack on the PM’s credibility is how they can ignore facts like these and with any conscience at all run as they do on Page 2 of the Inquirer above a continuation of the Shitstorm feature, a crappy and dishonest piece like that of Christian Kerr suggesting that Labour insiders are still sore at the PM over his non-attendance at John Button’s funeral. It’s all insinuation, speculation and rumours about leftie ‘luvvies’ still sore two years on! No names, of course, until we get to Annie O’Rourke who last week put up her hand on Crikey’s Unleashed to take responsibility for wrongly advising the PM to drop in to see Cate Blanchett that day. He seems unable to counter that either with anything except more vague undermining generalisations of the kind we see everywhere in MSM today.

    If Ruper Murdoch was ever at heart the Australian he claims to be he would be encouraging his editorial staff everywhere to celebrate Australia’s brilliant survival of the GFC, clearly not a miracle, but the result of courageous decisions by our PM and Treasurer using every economic asset it knew it already had and had the responsibility to maintain.

    PS I’ve had problems with this, as often occurs with me, on bringing up the review copy before submission. Any hints on how to deal with this in future?

  103. Zarquon
  104. Zarquon
  105. josh

    excellent work Merc. Your first point is a shocker (by ABC, not you obviously).

    The ability of the MSM to turn a 52-48 lead (ie. a repeat of 2007) into a problem for the ALP is quite impressive.

  106. josh

    excellent work Merc. Your first point is a shocker (by ABC, not you obviously).

    The ability of the MSM to turn a 52-48 lead (ie. a repeat of 2007) into a problem for the ALP is quite impressive.

  107. Paul Burns

    If you have a review copy, Patricia WA, do not bring it up in blogs untill after you’ve submitted the review and had it published. That done, you can link to it. Otherwise its not fair on the Newspaper/magazine/website asking you to review. (That’s what I do. I usually get sent somewhere between 6 to 8 books a year to review, mostly on-line.)

  108. Paul Burns

    If you have a review copy, Patricia WA, do not bring it up in blogs untill after you’ve submitted the review and had it published. That done, you can link to it. Otherwise its not fair on the Newspaper/magazine/website asking you to review. (That’s what I do. I usually get sent somewhere between 6 to 8 books a year to review, mostly on-line.)

  109. adrian

    I agree Patricia WA, it’s too consistent to be a coincidence, and when you listen to the usual suspects on radio or TV, they approach their task of undermining Rudd with such relish, it’s almost personal.

  110. adrian

    I agree Patricia WA, it’s too consistent to be a coincidence, and when you listen to the usual suspects on radio or TV, they approach their task of undermining Rudd with such relish, it’s almost personal.

  111. H&R

    Oooooh, could we sell the Abe’s TV arm and use the proceeds to start up a subscription channel-cum-production studio that actually makes world class Australian television? Like an Australian HBO?

    The news is a mix of duplicated Murdoch and wirefeed you can find via the aggregators; the drama is largely syndicated Britshit. The comedy and human interest material (the real strong point of ABC TV over the past few years) could migrate to SBS. Come to think of it Channel Soccer may also get a semi-permanent funding boost as a result.

    I think I can speak for all of us when I say we’d pay $40 a month for quality homegrown programming. I’ve been fed up for years getting exactly what I paid for with free-to-air.

  112. H&R

    Oooooh, could we sell the Abe’s TV arm and use the proceeds to start up a subscription channel-cum-production studio that actually makes world class Australian television? Like an Australian HBO?

    The news is a mix of duplicated Murdoch and wirefeed you can find via the aggregators; the drama is largely syndicated Britshit. The comedy and human interest material (the real strong point of ABC TV over the past few years) could migrate to SBS. Come to think of it Channel Soccer may also get a semi-permanent funding boost as a result.

    I think I can speak for all of us when I say we’d pay $40 a month for quality homegrown programming. I’ve been fed up for years getting exactly what I paid for with free-to-air.

  113. tigtog

    Can I just say that I find this relentless ABC-bashing tedious?

    They’re not perfect, but who is?

    Some people seem to relish sticking it to the ABC as much as the OO is relishing sticking it to Rudd. There’s not much nuance happening.

  114. tigtog

    Can I just say that I find this relentless ABC-bashing tedious?

    They’re not perfect, but who is?

    Some people seem to relish sticking it to the ABC as much as the OO is relishing sticking it to Rudd. There’s not much nuance happening.

  115. Fran Barlow

    tigtog said:

    Can I just say that I find this relentless ABC-bashing tedious?

    Of course you can. This is a blog and you are a moderator.

    They’re not perfect, but who is?

    They are not merely not perfect — but at least in terms of current affairs programming, they are unprofessional and indolent, at best, most of the time. It is important that those ofus who grew up with the ABC, who recall Andrew Olle and Bill Peach and who saw it as having professional standards — not like the others — leave no space for people to mistake what is going on now for their past glories and give no comfort to those on the right who assert that it is some hot bed of lefty propagandists.

  116. Fran Barlow

    tigtog said:

    Can I just say that I find this relentless ABC-bashing tedious?

    Of course you can. This is a blog and you are a moderator.

    They’re not perfect, but who is?

    They are not merely not perfect — but at least in terms of current affairs programming, they are unprofessional and indolent, at best, most of the time. It is important that those ofus who grew up with the ABC, who recall Andrew Olle and Bill Peach and who saw it as having professional standards — not like the others — leave no space for people to mistake what is going on now for their past glories and give no comfort to those on the right who assert that it is some hot bed of lefty propagandists.

  117. adrian

    I think that’s part of the point, Fran. For those of us old enough to remember what the ABC used to be, it’s particularly disappointing to see what it’s become.

    And tigtog, nothing’s perfect, so what? Let me fix up your post for you:

    Can I just say that I find this relentless ABC Abbott-bashing tedious?

    They’re He’s not perfect, but who is?

    Some people seem to relish sticking it to the ABC Abbott as much as the OO is relishing sticking it to Rudd. There’s not much nuance happening.

  118. adrian

    I think that’s part of the point, Fran. For those of us old enough to remember what the ABC used to be, it’s particularly disappointing to see what it’s become.

    And tigtog, nothing’s perfect, so what? Let me fix up your post for you:

    Can I just say that I find this relentless ABC Abbott-bashing tedious?

    They’re He’s not perfect, but who is?

    Some people seem to relish sticking it to the ABC Abbott as much as the OO is relishing sticking it to Rudd. There’s not much nuance happening.

  119. Fran Barlow

    And speaking of going negative …

    Kevin O’Lemon

    The 32-second ad superimposes a cartoon impression of the prime minister’s face on to a weeping citrus fruit.

    It looked good, it sounded good but it’s all gone sour, a female voiceover says.

    It’s a lemon, Kevin O’Lemon.

    The “07″ in Labor’s Kevin07 campaign is turned upside down at the end of the ad to represent the “L” in lemon.

    The Liberal Party’s federal director Brian Loughnane said the ad would run on television.

    Apparently this is going to be what the Liberal Party is running … How deep is that? About as deep as most actual or prospective coalition voters are, in their opinion.

  120. Fran Barlow

    And speaking of going negative …

    Kevin O’Lemon

    The 32-second ad superimposes a cartoon impression of the prime minister’s face on to a weeping citrus fruit.

    It looked good, it sounded good but it’s all gone sour, a female voiceover says.

    It’s a lemon, Kevin O’Lemon.

    The “07″ in Labor’s Kevin07 campaign is turned upside down at the end of the ad to represent the “L” in lemon.

    The Liberal Party’s federal director Brian Loughnane said the ad would run on television.

    Apparently this is going to be what the Liberal Party is running … How deep is that? About as deep as most actual or prospective coalition voters are, in their opinion.

  121. tssk

    I go with Mr Denmore’s theory. After all, when they are trashing the ABC are they subject to the stopwatch test for bias and balance?

    I bet not.

    As I’ve said before they’ve worked it out. Rudd won’t touch them (I’m hoping it’s because he has principles about not bullying the media.)

    The Lib’s though will clear house again once they win the next election. It’s like evil Santa. They’re making a list and checking it twice.

  122. tssk

    I go with Mr Denmore’s theory. After all, when they are trashing the ABC are they subject to the stopwatch test for bias and balance?

    I bet not.

    As I’ve said before they’ve worked it out. Rudd won’t touch them (I’m hoping it’s because he has principles about not bullying the media.)

    The Lib’s though will clear house again once they win the next election. It’s like evil Santa. They’re making a list and checking it twice.

  123. Patricia WA

    Sorry, Paul, I wasn’t clear – I mean here, below, on the LP comment space where the review copy comes up in the pink case so one can revise and edit longer pieces. It isn’t appearing for me at all except as a narrow pink window. So I’ve been submitting and then finding my proofreading of the original comment is somewhat imperfect. I notice too that submitting without review results in the yellow sticker appearing telling me I have to wait for moderation before appearing on site which hadn’t happened to me in ages.

  124. Patricia WA

    Sorry, Paul, I wasn’t clear – I mean here, below, on the LP comment space where the review copy comes up in the pink case so one can revise and edit longer pieces. It isn’t appearing for me at all except as a narrow pink window. So I’ve been submitting and then finding my proofreading of the original comment is somewhat imperfect. I notice too that submitting without review results in the yellow sticker appearing telling me I have to wait for moderation before appearing on site which hadn’t happened to me in ages.

  125. Sam

    Fran, you’ve got to lay off the magic mushrooms. There is as much chance of the election going to Labor 54:46 as there is of Julie Bishop joining a hippy commune at Nimbin, of Wayne Swan giving up politics to become a porn star, of Joe Hockey becoming anorexic.

    First term governments always, but always, get a swing against them, and this time is shaping up as like every other time.

  126. Sam

    Fran, you’ve got to lay off the magic mushrooms. There is as much chance of the election going to Labor 54:46 as there is of Julie Bishop joining a hippy commune at Nimbin, of Wayne Swan giving up politics to become a porn star, of Joe Hockey becoming anorexic.

    First term governments always, but always, get a swing against them, and this time is shaping up as like every other time.

  127. Paul Burns

    Patricia WA,
    Mine works okay. Have no idea what’s happening on your computer, but I have noticed my computer from time to time edvelops a mind of its own within minutes of me clicking onto LP. Try going direct to LP on the short cut after you’ve typed the name in on Google homepage instead of going to Google or vice versa.

  128. Paul Burns

    Patricia WA,
    Mine works okay. Have no idea what’s happening on your computer, but I have noticed my computer from time to time edvelops a mind of its own within minutes of me clicking onto LP. Try going direct to LP on the short cut after you’ve typed the name in on Google homepage instead of going to Google or vice versa.

  129. Fran Barlow

    Sam declared:

    Fran, you’ve got to lay off the magic mushrooms. There is as much chance of the election going to Labor 54:46 as there is of Julie Bishop joining a hippy commune at Nimbin, of Wayne Swan giving up politics to become a porn star, of Joe Hockey becoming anorexic.

    Let me guess. You went bankrupt as a bookmaker and decided to become a psephologist instead?

    We will see Sam. Those new voters are going to add much more to ALP primaries than Coalition primaries, that’s for sure. A whole pile of them missed out in 2007 as well.

  130. Fran Barlow

    Sam declared:

    Fran, you’ve got to lay off the magic mushrooms. There is as much chance of the election going to Labor 54:46 as there is of Julie Bishop joining a hippy commune at Nimbin, of Wayne Swan giving up politics to become a porn star, of Joe Hockey becoming anorexic.

    Let me guess. You went bankrupt as a bookmaker and decided to become a psephologist instead?

    We will see Sam. Those new voters are going to add much more to ALP primaries than Coalition primaries, that’s for sure. A whole pile of them missed out in 2007 as well.

  131. Hal9000

    irst term governments always, but always, get a swing against them

    Not so. Beattie 2001, Bracks 2002, Fraser 1977, Curtin 1943… there are others.

  132. Hal9000

    irst term governments always, but always, get a swing against them

    Not so. Beattie 2001, Bracks 2002, Fraser 1977, Curtin 1943… there are others.

  133. Fran Barlow

    PS … sadly, I’m not sure that there are any hippie communes at Nimbin anymore. Last time I did the cruise around Byron, Bellingen, Mullumbimby, Nimbin and Lismore it seemed like the population of Double Bay and McMahons Point were having a convention and someone busking turned up his nose at anything less than $5. It was wall to wall BMWs, Mercs and UAVs.

  134. Fran Barlow

    PS … sadly, I’m not sure that there are any hippie communes at Nimbin anymore. Last time I did the cruise around Byron, Bellingen, Mullumbimby, Nimbin and Lismore it seemed like the population of Double Bay and McMahons Point were having a convention and someone busking turned up his nose at anything less than $5. It was wall to wall BMWs, Mercs and UAVs.

  135. Tyro Rex

    and UAVs

    UAVs? Was the CIA looking for Al-Quada terrorists or something?

  136. Tyro Rex

    and UAVs

    UAVs? Was the CIA looking for Al-Quada terrorists or something?

  137. Fran Barlow

    Ha … urban assault vehicles a.k.a large 4WDs typical on Sydney’s North Shore, Eastern Suburbs and the Hills District.

  138. Fran Barlow

    Ha … urban assault vehicles a.k.a large 4WDs typical on Sydney’s North Shore, Eastern Suburbs and the Hills District.

  139. Tyro Rex

    not Unmanned Aerial Vehicle?

  140. Tyro Rex

    not Unmanned Aerial Vehicle?

  141. John Atkinson

    Tssk: Speaking of which did Rudd repeal the tighter cut off for getting on the electoral role or did he leave it the way Howard did?
    Tim Macknay: The Senate has not yet voted on the Bill. [...] whether it passes could depend upon the Greens, Xenophon & Fielding.

    I heard somewhere that if it doesn’t pass, Rudd plans to announce the election date and then wait a week before going to the GG. Thus the rolls won’t be closed till then, essentially restoring the pre-Howard situation.

  142. John Atkinson

    Tssk: Speaking of which did Rudd repeal the tighter cut off for getting on the electoral role or did he leave it the way Howard did?
    Tim Macknay: The Senate has not yet voted on the Bill. [...] whether it passes could depend upon the Greens, Xenophon & Fielding.

    I heard somewhere that if it doesn’t pass, Rudd plans to announce the election date and then wait a week before going to the GG. Thus the rolls won’t be closed till then, essentially restoring the pre-Howard situation.

  143. Liam

    First term governments always, but always, get a swing against them

    Bob Carr’s first-term government got a five-seat swing in 1999.

  144. Liam

    First term governments always, but always, get a swing against them

    Bob Carr’s first-term government got a five-seat swing in 1999.

  145. Fran Barlow

    Not in this case Tyro …

  146. Fran Barlow

    Not in this case Tyro …

  147. Sam

    Hal 9000 and Liam,

    Of course I meant federal elections.

    Fraser got 55.7% in 1975 and 54.6% in 1977, a swing against.

    Curtin lost the 1940 election and became PM when two indepedentts switched their support away from Menzies, so the 1943 election hardly represents a swing to a first term government in the normal sense.

  148. Sam

    Hal 9000 and Liam,

    Of course I meant federal elections.

    Fraser got 55.7% in 1975 and 54.6% in 1977, a swing against.

    Curtin lost the 1940 election and became PM when two indepedentts switched their support away from Menzies, so the 1943 election hardly represents a swing to a first term government in the normal sense.

  149. Down and Out of Sài Gòn

    Fran: there are still a few communes and ecovillages in the Tweed river valley. The Hares have at least two places in the area. These days, most hippies would avoid Nimbin (come for the pot; stay for the heroin).

  150. Down and Out of Sài Gòn

    Fran: there are still a few communes and ecovillages in the Tweed river valley. The Hares have at least two places in the area. These days, most hippies would avoid Nimbin (come for the pot; stay for the heroin).

  151. Zorronsky

    Australian Story on Julia Gillard with voice over from the Australian Hackette whatever her name was and featuring four year old interviews just about does it for me. And Tigtog I hope you saw it because it must surely give rise to some misgiving re your earlier comment.

  152. Zorronsky

    Australian Story on Julia Gillard with voice over from the Australian Hackette whatever her name was and featuring four year old interviews just about does it for me. And Tigtog I hope you saw it because it must surely give rise to some misgiving re your earlier comment.

  153. PeterTB

    Having just seen the puff piece on Julia served up as Australian Story, I am shaking my head in disbelief at the anti ABC comments here. Don’t you people recognise that they are “on side” for you, but that the appalling performance of the Ruddster means that they have to present some moderate criticism for “balance”?

    My prediction is that Rudd will hang on until the last possible date, and be lucky to survive. Julia lacks the ticker to challenge.

  154. PeterTB

    Having just seen the puff piece on Julia served up as Australian Story, I am shaking my head in disbelief at the anti ABC comments here. Don’t you people recognise that they are “on side” for you, but that the appalling performance of the Ruddster means that they have to present some moderate criticism for “balance”?

    My prediction is that Rudd will hang on until the last possible date, and be lucky to survive. Julia lacks the ticker to challenge.

  155. David Irving (no relation)

    Fran @ 60, I’ve seen the Kevin 0Lemon ad, and I have to admit, it’s very clever – just what you’d expect from some coked-up amoral wanker in the advertising industry.

  156. David Irving (no relation)

    Fran @ 60, I’ve seen the Kevin 0Lemon ad, and I have to admit, it’s very clever – just what you’d expect from some coked-up amoral wanker in the advertising industry.

  157. Grumphy

    If we’re still musing, Alannah Hill’s lost all respect in my eyes. Like, way to give ammo to those stereotypes of fashion designers as amoral know-nothings who’ll throw any scrap of human decency on to the altar of aesthetics.

  158. Grumphy

    If we’re still musing, Alannah Hill’s lost all respect in my eyes. Like, way to give ammo to those stereotypes of fashion designers as amoral know-nothings who’ll throw any scrap of human decency on to the altar of aesthetics.

  159. Andrew

    ” For those of us old enough to remember what the ABC used to be, it’s particularly disappointing to see what it’s become”

    that’s very funny! The ABC stops being so left wing biased and you get upset!!!

    The only reason Rudd is still likely to retain power is that the quality of leadership on the other side is so poor. If Rudd was up against Howard/Costello at the next election it would be a coalition landslide!!!!

    Come back John – all is forgiven!

  160. Andrew

    ” For those of us old enough to remember what the ABC used to be, it’s particularly disappointing to see what it’s become”

    that’s very funny! The ABC stops being so left wing biased and you get upset!!!

    The only reason Rudd is still likely to retain power is that the quality of leadership on the other side is so poor. If Rudd was up against Howard/Costello at the next election it would be a coalition landslide!!!!

    Come back John – all is forgiven!

  161. Fran Barlow

    Di(NR)

    Clever? Hardly. It was clear at the beginning of the ad that we were looking at a lemon, so the idea that it would be likely to taste like anything other than a lemon was simply silly. The narrative development just wasn’t there.

    The problem they have is that the coalition can’t go beyond the cheap shot, because the people who are disappointed are disappointed that the ALP failed to do things to which the coalition objected — climate change action, refugee policy and so forth.

    This ad simply marks the coalition as vacuous hecklers. They are about as impressive as the child up the back of the classroom sledging the teacher with flatus-noises. People laugh, but nobody whose opinion is worth having thinks he’s smart.

    I also wonder how those of Irish descent will react. Not well I fancy.

  162. Fran Barlow

    Di(NR)

    Clever? Hardly. It was clear at the beginning of the ad that we were looking at a lemon, so the idea that it would be likely to taste like anything other than a lemon was simply silly. The narrative development just wasn’t there.

    The problem they have is that the coalition can’t go beyond the cheap shot, because the people who are disappointed are disappointed that the ALP failed to do things to which the coalition objected — climate change action, refugee policy and so forth.

    This ad simply marks the coalition as vacuous hecklers. They are about as impressive as the child up the back of the classroom sledging the teacher with flatus-noises. People laugh, but nobody whose opinion is worth having thinks he’s smart.

    I also wonder how those of Irish descent will react. Not well I fancy.

  163. Fran Barlow

    It was never “left-wing biased” Andrew. It simply appeared that way to reactionaries and conservatives because it failed to treat their dogma, and that of the tabloid press, as sacrosanct, but rather, as open to question. And in the manichean world of the right, who fancied that they knew the truth, that made it biased.

  164. Fran Barlow

    It was never “left-wing biased” Andrew. It simply appeared that way to reactionaries and conservatives because it failed to treat their dogma, and that of the tabloid press, as sacrosanct, but rather, as open to question. And in the manichean world of the right, who fancied that they knew the truth, that made it biased.

  165. jesterette

    PeterTB #77 – I’ve always felt that Julia does what’s best for her agendas – and if her portfolio is anything to go by, she has a lot of them. With such a deputy behind him, Rudd can only look better. If what I’ve read about the Labor party factions is correct, it’s unlikely that she’ll stand for PM. If she does, it will be partly a well earned reward for the years of loyal service she’s putting in now, and partly a recognition of the public’s admiration for her. Doesn’t have the ticker? No, she’s just not that silly. The antics of the LNP have made us think that leadership challenges are normal. For our political stability, they probably shouldn’t be.

  166. jesterette

    PeterTB #77 – I’ve always felt that Julia does what’s best for her agendas – and if her portfolio is anything to go by, she has a lot of them. With such a deputy behind him, Rudd can only look better. If what I’ve read about the Labor party factions is correct, it’s unlikely that she’ll stand for PM. If she does, it will be partly a well earned reward for the years of loyal service she’s putting in now, and partly a recognition of the public’s admiration for her. Doesn’t have the ticker? No, she’s just not that silly. The antics of the LNP have made us think that leadership challenges are normal. For our political stability, they probably shouldn’t be.

  167. tigtog

    @Andrew,

    Come back John – all is forgiven!

    Short memory? It wasn’t his choice to go – his electorate gave him the boot, remember?

  168. tigtog

    @Andrew,

    Come back John – all is forgiven!

    Short memory? It wasn’t his choice to go – his electorate gave him the boot, remember?

  169. Ron

    Greens Party and its suporters certainly more anti Labor Govt than th ABC , nothing goes far enuf etc on virtualy all Labor Reform Bills acccdong to brown and Geen bloggers here

    and this false claim Labor and Liberal Partys just so much th same , well Greens bloggers follow thru on your couragous convictions and place your 2nd preferense to Liberals in electon and stop whinging …stop trying to hav a bit each way

    Whereas ABC has changed to anti Labor , but only in some areas …on line , News , politcal “reporters” (Chis Uhlman & cronnies) I find Red Ted and Tony Martin aggressive but quite normaly fair to both Partys

    But it IS ABC “News” itself bias that sways votes , with neg commentary intro’s (vs former just a factual intro) then always followed by a Liberal or “Industry or vested interst opponent of that Labor polisy (plus Uhlmans amd online)

  170. Ron

    Greens Party and its suporters certainly more anti Labor Govt than th ABC , nothing goes far enuf etc on virtualy all Labor Reform Bills acccdong to brown and Geen bloggers here

    and this false claim Labor and Liberal Partys just so much th same , well Greens bloggers follow thru on your couragous convictions and place your 2nd preferense to Liberals in electon and stop whinging …stop trying to hav a bit each way

    Whereas ABC has changed to anti Labor , but only in some areas …on line , News , politcal “reporters” (Chis Uhlman & cronnies) I find Red Ted and Tony Martin aggressive but quite normaly fair to both Partys

    But it IS ABC “News” itself bias that sways votes , with neg commentary intro’s (vs former just a factual intro) then always followed by a Liberal or “Industry or vested interst opponent of that Labor polisy (plus Uhlmans amd online)

  171. paul walter

    Further to# 84,: In fact John Howard, DON’T come back.
    By no means is even a fraction of the mischief you did to Australian democracy forgotten yet, let alone forgiven.

  172. paul walter

    Further to# 84,: In fact John Howard, DON’T come back.
    By no means is even a fraction of the mischief you did to Australian democracy forgotten yet, let alone forgiven.

  173. Brian

    Sorry, Paul, I wasn’t clear – I mean here, below, on the LP comment space where the review copy comes up in the pink case so one can revise and edit longer pieces. It isn’t appearing for me at all except as a narrow pink window. So I’ve been submitting and then finding my proofreading of the original comment is somewhat imperfect.

    Patricia WA, that was the case for me for years. There was just a narrow slot there and nothing ever appeared in it.

    Then we upgraded to a new version of WordPress and it’s been sweet ever since.

    Blame Bill Gates!

  174. Brian

    Sorry, Paul, I wasn’t clear – I mean here, below, on the LP comment space where the review copy comes up in the pink case so one can revise and edit longer pieces. It isn’t appearing for me at all except as a narrow pink window. So I’ve been submitting and then finding my proofreading of the original comment is somewhat imperfect.

    Patricia WA, that was the case for me for years. There was just a narrow slot there and nothing ever appeared in it.

    Then we upgraded to a new version of WordPress and it’s been sweet ever since.

    Blame Bill Gates!

  175. tigtog

    @Patricia WA and @Brian,
    the issue is probably something to do with browser settings. I believe that the preview feature requires javascript enabled in order for it to work. If you are using ad-blocking software, that might also be interfering with its smooth operation.

  176. tigtog

    @Patricia WA and @Brian,
    the issue is probably something to do with browser settings. I believe that the preview feature requires javascript enabled in order for it to work. If you are using ad-blocking software, that might also be interfering with its smooth operation.

  177. Brian

    tigtog, I don’t block the ads, just ignore them. But it is possible I didn’t have the appropriate javascript update, or something, being a bit of a klutz with the new technology.

  178. Brian

    tigtog, I don’t block the ads, just ignore them. But it is possible I didn’t have the appropriate javascript update, or something, being a bit of a klutz with the new technology.

  179. Patricia WA

    Glad to hear someone else is, a bit of a klut, I mean! Oddly, the review panel is there now, nice and clear.

    Someone above suggested the Australian Story tonight was a puff piece on Julia. It wasn’t about Julia Gillard at all. It was a vehicle to attack Rudd yet again and underline what a dead loss he is and as well to get in a few pre-emptive barbs at Gillard just in case she does get the top job!

    It was a nasty piece of propaganda, a very carefully gathered pastiche of old and new shots and quotes, tied together with a narrative that’s all about bringing down this government. After watching that, Adrian, I have no doubt someone in the ABC is master-minding this political character assassination.

  180. Patricia WA

    Glad to hear someone else is, a bit of a klut, I mean! Oddly, the review panel is there now, nice and clear.

    Someone above suggested the Australian Story tonight was a puff piece on Julia. It wasn’t about Julia Gillard at all. It was a vehicle to attack Rudd yet again and underline what a dead loss he is and as well to get in a few pre-emptive barbs at Gillard just in case she does get the top job!

    It was a nasty piece of propaganda, a very carefully gathered pastiche of old and new shots and quotes, tied together with a narrative that’s all about bringing down this government. After watching that, Adrian, I have no doubt someone in the ABC is master-minding this political character assassination.

  181. Bingo Bango Boingo

    All this angst. You can already see how left-leaning commentators are positioning themselves in the event of a Coalition victory. There will be talk of Murdoch’s power. Of a demoncracy tainted by the unrelenting bias of the press. Of The Australian’s unholy crusade to bring down, wait for it, A DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED GOVERNMENT. We might even get a few closet fascists calling for state regulation of political journalism. There will be no mention of Murdoch and The Australian’s endorsement of Rudd in 2007.

    “[The ABC] was never “left-wing biased” Andrew. It simply appeared that way to reactionaries and conservatives because it failed to treat their dogma, and that of the tabloid press, as sacrosanct, but rather, as open to question. And in the manichean world of the right, who fancied that they knew the truth, that made it biased.”

    Well put. In response, I can only give you that great Greek aphorism: know thyself.

    BBB

  182. Bingo Bango Boingo

    All this angst. You can already see how left-leaning commentators are positioning themselves in the event of a Coalition victory. There will be talk of Murdoch’s power. Of a demoncracy tainted by the unrelenting bias of the press. Of The Australian’s unholy crusade to bring down, wait for it, A DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED GOVERNMENT. We might even get a few closet fascists calling for state regulation of political journalism. There will be no mention of Murdoch and The Australian’s endorsement of Rudd in 2007.

    “[The ABC] was never “left-wing biased” Andrew. It simply appeared that way to reactionaries and conservatives because it failed to treat their dogma, and that of the tabloid press, as sacrosanct, but rather, as open to question. And in the manichean world of the right, who fancied that they knew the truth, that made it biased.”

    Well put. In response, I can only give you that great Greek aphorism: know thyself.

    BBB

  183. Nickws

    Mercurius is right about the unusual nature of the media drumbeat against Rudd Labor. It goes further, IMO. The media filter just isn’t allowing many, if any, critical stories about Abbott’s leadership of the Coalition to get through. It’s bizarre, his team is getting nowhere near the bad publicity that either Nelson or Turnbull received. Hell, unless it’s a story about the Nats disagreeing with the size of his big government social conservative programmes, or op-ed pieces by free market types bemoaning the fact that he is a BGSC to begin with, there just is bugger all negative context for any of the Big Media reportage about the Abbott Opposition right now (and at least one story that appear negative—refugees—is exactly the kind of negative the Coalition wants as part of their electoral strategy.)

    Previously I’ve thought that the government must be a victim of the perfect storm of pinkbats and alleged school building rorts and pissed-off mining tycoons. Yet now I can’t escape feeling that the Opposition is being allowed to remain invisible for whenever they’re not spending time attacking Labor.

    This is impossible. It’s not supposed to happen like this in a liberal democracy with a free press.

    I’ve never seen this before in federal politics (and I’ve certainly never been one to see media bias in the broad news media outside a few usual suspects like Milne or Shannahan), and I don’t like it. It’s disturbing me greatly.

    Are we watching the MSN consciously deiciding they will be totally divorced from objective journalism in the new meeja? That there won’t even be ‘he-said-she-said’ narratives anymore?

    Maybe I’m just paranoid, maybe this is all normal for longserving governments, and modern journalistic ADHD has just meant this is the first 1st term government to receive what is under other circumstances a fairly normal bollocking. But damned if I don’t see the press gallery et al going up and down the country whipping up apathy/antipathy for the benefit of the Liberals.

  184. Nickws

    Mercurius is right about the unusual nature of the media drumbeat against Rudd Labor. It goes further, IMO. The media filter just isn’t allowing many, if any, critical stories about Abbott’s leadership of the Coalition to get through. It’s bizarre, his team is getting nowhere near the bad publicity that either Nelson or Turnbull received. Hell, unless it’s a story about the Nats disagreeing with the size of his big government social conservative programmes, or op-ed pieces by free market types bemoaning the fact that he is a BGSC to begin with, there just is bugger all negative context for any of the Big Media reportage about the Abbott Opposition right now (and at least one story that appear negative—refugees—is exactly the kind of negative the Coalition wants as part of their electoral strategy.)

    Previously I’ve thought that the government must be a victim of the perfect storm of pinkbats and alleged school building rorts and pissed-off mining tycoons. Yet now I can’t escape feeling that the Opposition is being allowed to remain invisible for whenever they’re not spending time attacking Labor.

    This is impossible. It’s not supposed to happen like this in a liberal democracy with a free press.

    I’ve never seen this before in federal politics (and I’ve certainly never been one to see media bias in the broad news media outside a few usual suspects like Milne or Shannahan), and I don’t like it. It’s disturbing me greatly.

    Are we watching the MSN consciously deiciding they will be totally divorced from objective journalism in the new meeja? That there won’t even be ‘he-said-she-said’ narratives anymore?

    Maybe I’m just paranoid, maybe this is all normal for longserving governments, and modern journalistic ADHD has just meant this is the first 1st term government to receive what is under other circumstances a fairly normal bollocking. But damned if I don’t see the press gallery et al going up and down the country whipping up apathy/antipathy for the benefit of the Liberals.

  185. Mercurius

    Nickws, today’s OZ runs two opinion columns saying Rudd must go NOW and Julia must knife him NOW. Based on what? Based on the results of opinion polling in three, that’s right, three, marginal seats. An opinion poll owned by their own newspaper company.

    They are just making s*** up now. Any pretense of reportage died a while back.

  186. Mercurius

    Nickws, today’s OZ runs two opinion columns saying Rudd must go NOW and Julia must knife him NOW. Based on what? Based on the results of opinion polling in three, that’s right, three, marginal seats. An opinion poll owned by their own newspaper company.

    They are just making s*** up now. Any pretense of reportage died a while back.

  187. Mercurius

    Many people are disappointed, and rightly so, that the MSM spends so much time reporting what people said about an issue, instead of investigating the facts about the issue itself. Apart from anything else it makes for tediously uninteresting reading. I venture to suggest similar observations could be made about media that repetitively report how the MSM is covering issues instead of exploring the issues themselves.

    Ken, I respect that you find it tedious, and it’s fine if you want to grizzle about it. But don’t you think that that confluence of news media and political agendae is at least as substantial an issue — and as worthy of further investigation or factual analysis — as any matter of policy or other issue of substance you care to name?

    I guess you think not – but how come?

    John Howard, for one, thought the issue to be of sufficient importance that he felt it was worth going to the trouble of stacking the Board of our major public broadcaster and eviscerating its editorial integrity. Do you sincerely believe there is no substantial issue of public importance here, that’s it’s all just meta-blog-navel-fluff we’re gazing into here?

  188. Mercurius

    Many people are disappointed, and rightly so, that the MSM spends so much time reporting what people said about an issue, instead of investigating the facts about the issue itself. Apart from anything else it makes for tediously uninteresting reading. I venture to suggest similar observations could be made about media that repetitively report how the MSM is covering issues instead of exploring the issues themselves.

    Ken, I respect that you find it tedious, and it’s fine if you want to grizzle about it. But don’t you think that that confluence of news media and political agendae is at least as substantial an issue — and as worthy of further investigation or factual analysis — as any matter of policy or other issue of substance you care to name?

    I guess you think not – but how come?

    John Howard, for one, thought the issue to be of sufficient importance that he felt it was worth going to the trouble of stacking the Board of our major public broadcaster and eviscerating its editorial integrity. Do you sincerely believe there is no substantial issue of public importance here, that’s it’s all just meta-blog-navel-fluff we’re gazing into here?

  189. PeterTB

    But damned if I don’t see the press gallery et al going up and down the country whipping up apathy/antipathy for the benefit of the Liberals.

    Give me a break. The MSM, led by your ABC belted the Coalition throughout 2006, 2007, and 2008. Various journos finally woke up to the fact that they had aided and abetted the election of a mean spirited nincompoop, and have finally turned their attention onto him. Swings and roundabouts.

    Red Kerry will never desert you, and Maxine McKew will soon be availble to resume her old pinko agenda on the pay of the Australian taxpayer.

  190. PeterTB

    But damned if I don’t see the press gallery et al going up and down the country whipping up apathy/antipathy for the benefit of the Liberals.

    Give me a break. The MSM, led by your ABC belted the Coalition throughout 2006, 2007, and 2008. Various journos finally woke up to the fact that they had aided and abetted the election of a mean spirited nincompoop, and have finally turned their attention onto him. Swings and roundabouts.

    Red Kerry will never desert you, and Maxine McKew will soon be availble to resume her old pinko agenda on the pay of the Australian taxpayer.

  191. tssk

    And it’s worth adding to PeterTB’s point by saying that no matter how unfair I’m finding the ABC coverage of Rudd it would seem that Rudd himself finds the ABC board satisfactory and fair in their dealings.

    Howard didn’t and swept the board clean and bought in timing tests for balance. Rudd has left it as is.

    Or to put it in a schoolyard way, if the nerd getting pummelled in the field isn’t whinging he can obviously hold his own.

  192. tssk

    And it’s worth adding to PeterTB’s point by saying that no matter how unfair I’m finding the ABC coverage of Rudd it would seem that Rudd himself finds the ABC board satisfactory and fair in their dealings.

    Howard didn’t and swept the board clean and bought in timing tests for balance. Rudd has left it as is.

    Or to put it in a schoolyard way, if the nerd getting pummelled in the field isn’t whinging he can obviously hold his own.

  193. Nickws

    PeterTB, some who know me would be surprised that someone who’s always thought Paul Keating brought on all his own PR troubles in his last term, who has never had time for ‘Murdoch destroyed Whitlam’ paranoid thinking, could believe what I now believe. I have never thought Victoria’s biggest selling NewsCorp papar, the ‘Herald-Sun’, or Melbourne’s leading commercial talkback station, 3AW, have ever been particurlarly unfair towards the Bracks/Brumby state Labor governments.

    In short, I have never been as reflexively pro-Labor in my criticism of the media to the extent that you are obviously refelexively pro-Liberal in your reading of these things. And I don’t make claims which I expect people to automatically agree with, about how such-and-such is biased and I don’t have to provide evidence about how such-and-such is biased because it just is, innit?

    I don’t live my life in the kind of ideological bubble you patently live yours in.

    If anything, I think I’m identifying, and responding to, a paradigm shift in the news media that is the result of twenty-plus years of “we should move beyond Left and Right, these immature labels don’t mean anything anymore” thinking by journialists and editors who are very keen to prove to rusted-on, angry conservatives audiences (i.e., you) that they are independent and responsible. It’s just that being a well educated and responsible person in this era means accepting the primacy of anti-Leftism.

    And until recently the contemporary moderate leadership of the ALP largely benefitted from this anti-Leftism, anti-socialism, even anti-unionism in the media (how else do you think Hawke and Keating were able to do what they did economically?)

    Now? Now we live in a world where the American equivalents of yourself believe that Barack Obama is a dangerous radical—and the US media says, “well, that’s a perfectly reasonable analyses, US PeterTB. There’s no reason you can’t base every single political idea you have around that.”

    We’re just seeing the same dynamics replicated here in our country, ’tis all. (And the fact that you bring up the ‘belting’ a ten-year-old Coalition ministry got when what we’re talking about here is the harsh treatment a Labor government of three years is going through, that would seem to indicate the standards are not necessarily double, no?)

    Oh, and I like that you think the Big Bad Meeja are now seeing things your way about the ‘nincompoop’.

    Nincompoop? Writing this reply so was a waste of time…

  194. Nickws

    PeterTB, some who know me would be surprised that someone who’s always thought Paul Keating brought on all his own PR troubles in his last term, who has never had time for ‘Murdoch destroyed Whitlam’ paranoid thinking, could believe what I now believe. I have never thought Victoria’s biggest selling NewsCorp papar, the ‘Herald-Sun’, or Melbourne’s leading commercial talkback station, 3AW, have ever been particurlarly unfair towards the Bracks/Brumby state Labor governments.

    In short, I have never been as reflexively pro-Labor in my criticism of the media to the extent that you are obviously refelexively pro-Liberal in your reading of these things. And I don’t make claims which I expect people to automatically agree with, about how such-and-such is biased and I don’t have to provide evidence about how such-and-such is biased because it just is, innit?

    I don’t live my life in the kind of ideological bubble you patently live yours in.

    If anything, I think I’m identifying, and responding to, a paradigm shift in the news media that is the result of twenty-plus years of “we should move beyond Left and Right, these immature labels don’t mean anything anymore” thinking by journialists and editors who are very keen to prove to rusted-on, angry conservatives audiences (i.e., you) that they are independent and responsible. It’s just that being a well educated and responsible person in this era means accepting the primacy of anti-Leftism.

    And until recently the contemporary moderate leadership of the ALP largely benefitted from this anti-Leftism, anti-socialism, even anti-unionism in the media (how else do you think Hawke and Keating were able to do what they did economically?)

    Now? Now we live in a world where the American equivalents of yourself believe that Barack Obama is a dangerous radical—and the US media says, “well, that’s a perfectly reasonable analyses, US PeterTB. There’s no reason you can’t base every single political idea you have around that.”

    We’re just seeing the same dynamics replicated here in our country, ’tis all. (And the fact that you bring up the ‘belting’ a ten-year-old Coalition ministry got when what we’re talking about here is the harsh treatment a Labor government of three years is going through, that would seem to indicate the standards are not necessarily double, no?)

    Oh, and I like that you think the Big Bad Meeja are now seeing things your way about the ‘nincompoop’.

    Nincompoop? Writing this reply so was a waste of time…

  195. CMMC

    Worth noting that our eloquent Miss Universe entrant, Jesinta Campbell, is studying journalism.

  196. CMMC

    Worth noting that our eloquent Miss Universe entrant, Jesinta Campbell, is studying journalism.

  197. tssk

    So CMMC? Is it now OK for us on the left to bash the aspirations of young women if we don’t agree with their politics?

    I thought we were supposed to be for the rights of women. Disappointing.

  198. tssk

    So CMMC? Is it now OK for us on the left to bash the aspirations of young women if we don’t agree with their politics?

    I thought we were supposed to be for the rights of women. Disappointing.

  199. adrian

    You’ve missed the point tssk. It matters not what Rudd might think or not think of the ABC board. If we have a situation where the only major ‘independent’ news organisation in the country openly becomes an outlet for the deranged editorial policies of the only significant commercial news organisation, we have a major problem.
    Obviously the ABC has an important role in the adequate functioning of our democracy. At present it is not fulfilling that role, in fact it’s subverting it.

    This problem would still exist if in some bizarre realignment of the planets this editorial policy favoured Labor.

  200. adrian

    You’ve missed the point tssk. It matters not what Rudd might think or not think of the ABC board. If we have a situation where the only major ‘independent’ news organisation in the country openly becomes an outlet for the deranged editorial policies of the only significant commercial news organisation, we have a major problem.
    Obviously the ABC has an important role in the adequate functioning of our democracy. At present it is not fulfilling that role, in fact it’s subverting it.

    This problem would still exist if in some bizarre realignment of the planets this editorial policy favoured Labor.

  201. Katz

    The MSM, led by your ABC belted the Coalition throughout 2006, 2007, and 2008.

    Does PeterTB have any data to support this assertion?

  202. Katz

    The MSM, led by your ABC belted the Coalition throughout 2006, 2007, and 2008.

    Does PeterTB have any data to support this assertion?

  203. Indi Warrior

    I’m a bit concerned about the silent tactics of our local member, Sophie Mirabella. We all know she has recently had a second child but what is keeping her out of the media besides incompetence and well more incompetence.
    Don’t tell me she is getting soft?

  204. Indi Warrior

    I’m a bit concerned about the silent tactics of our local member, Sophie Mirabella. We all know she has recently had a second child but what is keeping her out of the media besides incompetence and well more incompetence.
    Don’t tell me she is getting soft?

  205. Mercurius

    Word, NickWS.

    The “data” that PeterTB would be referring to is the shamefully biased way in which the $300 million of aid and comfort to our wartime enemy Saddam Hussein to sell wheat was actually reported, instead of hushed-up; and the extremely impertinent manner in which the media reported, despite Howard’s pretensions to being ‘small government’, that in 12 years the coalition did nothing to shrink government spending as a % of GDP. How dare these facts see the light of day — don’t the reporters know they have a job to do (ie. covering conservative backsides)?

    At least Shanahan and Milne stayed brave and true right up until the 2007 poll, swearing until the very last day that ‘the narrowing’ and Howard’s obvious indominatibility would derail the Kevin07 express.

  206. Mercurius

    Word, NickWS.

    The “data” that PeterTB would be referring to is the shamefully biased way in which the $300 million of aid and comfort to our wartime enemy Saddam Hussein to sell wheat was actually reported, instead of hushed-up; and the extremely impertinent manner in which the media reported, despite Howard’s pretensions to being ‘small government’, that in 12 years the coalition did nothing to shrink government spending as a % of GDP. How dare these facts see the light of day — don’t the reporters know they have a job to do (ie. covering conservative backsides)?

    At least Shanahan and Milne stayed brave and true right up until the 2007 poll, swearing until the very last day that ‘the narrowing’ and Howard’s obvious indominatibility would derail the Kevin07 express.

  207. Chris

    It was a nasty piece of propaganda, a very carefully gathered pastiche of old and new shots and quotes, tied together with a narrative that’s all about bringing down this government. After watching that, Adrian, I have no doubt someone in the ABC is master-minding this political character assassination.

    Kind of wonder what the motivation behind Beazley and Richardson participating though in the show were? Genuinely trying to help Gillard or wanting to cause a bit of trouble because of past internal labor party disagreements. They were right about one thing – Gillard can’t be seen to be pushing for the top job even if she wants it now. Way too early for that.

  208. Chris

    It was a nasty piece of propaganda, a very carefully gathered pastiche of old and new shots and quotes, tied together with a narrative that’s all about bringing down this government. After watching that, Adrian, I have no doubt someone in the ABC is master-minding this political character assassination.

    Kind of wonder what the motivation behind Beazley and Richardson participating though in the show were? Genuinely trying to help Gillard or wanting to cause a bit of trouble because of past internal labor party disagreements. They were right about one thing – Gillard can’t be seen to be pushing for the top job even if she wants it now. Way too early for that.

  209. Katz

    According to Liberal Party claqueurs, how should the MSM have covered the following?

    1. Nelson beats Turnbull by 3 votes, lasts 10 months as Liberal leader.
    2. Turnbull beats Nelson by 1 vote, lasts 15 months as Liberal leader.
    3. Abbott beat Turnbull by 1 vote (a Turnbull supporter absent in hospital, still survives.

    4. Godwin Grech
    5. Barnaby Joyce
    6. Julie Bishop’s appalling faux pas in defending the right of a foreign power to forge Australian documents.

    When, if ever, did the Coalition begin to look like a party fit for government?

  210. Katz

    According to Liberal Party claqueurs, how should the MSM have covered the following?

    1. Nelson beats Turnbull by 3 votes, lasts 10 months as Liberal leader.
    2. Turnbull beats Nelson by 1 vote, lasts 15 months as Liberal leader.
    3. Abbott beat Turnbull by 1 vote (a Turnbull supporter absent in hospital, still survives.

    4. Godwin Grech
    5. Barnaby Joyce
    6. Julie Bishop’s appalling faux pas in defending the right of a foreign power to forge Australian documents.

    When, if ever, did the Coalition begin to look like a party fit for government?

  211. tssk

    I did see the clip previewing the Gilliard piece and I was torn. Was it very clever editing to show Gilliard as wanting to knife Kevin/being driven or was it in my own head?

    One thing is for sure. Rudd wouldn’t be able to reconfigure the ABC board if he wanted to now. He’s just going to have to live with his principles on that.

    And yes Adrian. My view is that the ABC is going Rudd. But back before the board reforms I had no problem with them going Howard. And I was disappointed when the Glasshouse was cancelled. Paul McDermott was sidelined away from current affairs comedy and stuck as a compere on a dance show of all things. I can totally understand that some journo’s feeling the pressure would be going Rudd to have a quiet life or to feel like they had at least some sort of control in their career.

    But I also have enough self awareness to know I am heavily biased. I think Rudd is the best PM we’ve had in ages and I loathe Howard. Given that this is the complete opposite of the views I read by ordinary people in the media I have to constantly ask myself…do my views correspond with reality? Or is my view skewed?

    The election as always will be the ultimate test. Rudd has to win by a margin though. Otherwise the result will not be accepted.

  212. tssk

    I did see the clip previewing the Gilliard piece and I was torn. Was it very clever editing to show Gilliard as wanting to knife Kevin/being driven or was it in my own head?

    One thing is for sure. Rudd wouldn’t be able to reconfigure the ABC board if he wanted to now. He’s just going to have to live with his principles on that.

    And yes Adrian. My view is that the ABC is going Rudd. But back before the board reforms I had no problem with them going Howard. And I was disappointed when the Glasshouse was cancelled. Paul McDermott was sidelined away from current affairs comedy and stuck as a compere on a dance show of all things. I can totally understand that some journo’s feeling the pressure would be going Rudd to have a quiet life or to feel like they had at least some sort of control in their career.

    But I also have enough self awareness to know I am heavily biased. I think Rudd is the best PM we’ve had in ages and I loathe Howard. Given that this is the complete opposite of the views I read by ordinary people in the media I have to constantly ask myself…do my views correspond with reality? Or is my view skewed?

    The election as always will be the ultimate test. Rudd has to win by a margin though. Otherwise the result will not be accepted.

  213. Liam

    do my views correspond with reality?

    Not in terms of comedy, tssk. Canning the Glasshouse was a rare act of good taste and intelligence from the managers.
    Any decent programming staff would have let it run one season, drafted polite but not effusive references for the writers and crew, paid out McDermott’s leave and entitlements, then taken it to the vet’s for the big green needle.

  214. Liam

    do my views correspond with reality?

    Not in terms of comedy, tssk. Canning the Glasshouse was a rare act of good taste and intelligence from the managers.
    Any decent programming staff would have let it run one season, drafted polite but not effusive references for the writers and crew, paid out McDermott’s leave and entitlements, then taken it to the vet’s for the big green needle.

  215. tssk

    Sorry. I was unclear. I seem to have confused people with talking about THe Glasshouse and Good News Week.

    One of the great moments of Good News Week during Howard’s reign was seeing a Coalition member on the panel snap at Paul McDermott about one of his anti Howard quips that he wasn’t being very balanced.

    “I’m not” replied McDermott smiling. “But we aren’t on the ABC anymore…I don’t have to be.” The look on her face was priceless :)

  216. tssk

    Sorry. I was unclear. I seem to have confused people with talking about THe Glasshouse and Good News Week.

    One of the great moments of Good News Week during Howard’s reign was seeing a Coalition member on the panel snap at Paul McDermott about one of his anti Howard quips that he wasn’t being very balanced.

    “I’m not” replied McDermott smiling. “But we aren’t on the ABC anymore…I don’t have to be.” The look on her face was priceless :)

  217. adrian

    You’re right about canning The Glasshouse (some dared call it satire) Liam, but wasn’t it that wanker Wil Anderson, not Paul McDermott who fronted the show?

  218. adrian

    You’re right about canning The Glasshouse (some dared call it satire) Liam, but wasn’t it that wanker Wil Anderson, not Paul McDermott who fronted the show?

  219. Paul Norton

    Liam #105:

    Any decent programming staff would have let it run one season, drafted polite but not effusive references for the writers and crew, paid out McDermott’s leave and entitlements, then taken it to the vet’s for the big green needle.

    Having been present at the euthanasing of my ex’s horse, I can attest that it’s actually a big yellow needle which is used for this purpose.

  220. Paul Norton

    Liam #105:

    Any decent programming staff would have let it run one season, drafted polite but not effusive references for the writers and crew, paid out McDermott’s leave and entitlements, then taken it to the vet’s for the big green needle.

    Having been present at the euthanasing of my ex’s horse, I can attest that it’s actually a big yellow needle which is used for this purpose.

  221. Liam

    You’re right, adrian.
    In my defence I plead that I despised both programmes.

  222. Liam

    You’re right, adrian.
    In my defence I plead that I despised both programmes.

  223. tssk

    Talking of satire, I was surprised that The Chaser lasted as long as it did after it responded to allegations of bias by having a choir literally sing the praises of the Liberal party for two minutes for ‘balance’

  224. tssk

    Talking of satire, I was surprised that The Chaser lasted as long as it did after it responded to allegations of bias by having a choir literally sing the praises of the Liberal party for two minutes for ‘balance’

  225. Mark

    @92 – it’s actually five marginal seats, Mercurius.

    I agree that the conclusion that RUDD MUST GO NOW does not follow from the poll, and on my quick inspection some of the analysis is dodgy (particularly Shanahan’s assumption that the 6% swing in the 3 Queensland marginals indicates the same swing across Queensland seats), but that doesn’t mean that the poll itself isn’t meaningful.

  226. Mark

    @92 – it’s actually five marginal seats, Mercurius.

    I agree that the conclusion that RUDD MUST GO NOW does not follow from the poll, and on my quick inspection some of the analysis is dodgy (particularly Shanahan’s assumption that the 6% swing in the 3 Queensland marginals indicates the same swing across Queensland seats), but that doesn’t mean that the poll itself isn’t meaningful.

  227. Tim Macknay

    Rudd has to win by a margin though. Otherwise the result will not be accepted.

    Yeah, right and the Governor General will dismiss him, or maybe the CIA will topple him in a palace coup. Get a grip, FFS.

    paid out McDermott’s leave and entitlements

    You mean Anderson’s. McDermott’s (similar) show was revived during the writer’s strike and is still running on the Ten Network.

  228. Tim Macknay

    Rudd has to win by a margin though. Otherwise the result will not be accepted.

    Yeah, right and the Governor General will dismiss him, or maybe the CIA will topple him in a palace coup. Get a grip, FFS.

    paid out McDermott’s leave and entitlements

    You mean Anderson’s. McDermott’s (similar) show was revived during the writer’s strike and is still running on the Ten Network.

  229. josh

    From recollection, the Glasshouse rated very well.

  230. josh

    From recollection, the Glasshouse rated very well.

  231. Tim Macknay

    Sorry, my comment crossed over with adrian’s.

  232. Tim Macknay

    Sorry, my comment crossed over with adrian’s.

  233. josh

    And further to the Anderson/McDermott derail, last week’s Good News Week began with McDermott absolutely caning the Coalition asylum seeker policy. It was brutal and brilliantly funny at the same time. Could never have happened on the ABC.

  234. josh

    And further to the Anderson/McDermott derail, last week’s Good News Week began with McDermott absolutely caning the Coalition asylum seeker policy. It was brutal and brilliantly funny at the same time. Could never have happened on the ABC.

  235. Roy Orbison

    TSSK,

    “The election as always will be the ultimate test. Rudd has to win by a margin though. Otherwise the result will not be accepted”

    He won by a margin last time and it hasn’t been accepted. News have been railing violently against Rudd for nearly four years. If he wins again, they will go absolutely berserk. Stand by for calls for the army to intervene etc etc.

    As an aside, SkyNews had someone or other whining about mental health for nearly FOUR minutes this morning. I thought news broadcast minutes were precious. Not saying that mental health isn’t important – it is – but the whole point of the “news item” was to get the doc to accuse Rudd of something else. Happily for them, he did. One more strile against the dark lord.

  236. Roy Orbison

    TSSK,

    “The election as always will be the ultimate test. Rudd has to win by a margin though. Otherwise the result will not be accepted”

    He won by a margin last time and it hasn’t been accepted. News have been railing violently against Rudd for nearly four years. If he wins again, they will go absolutely berserk. Stand by for calls for the army to intervene etc etc.

    As an aside, SkyNews had someone or other whining about mental health for nearly FOUR minutes this morning. I thought news broadcast minutes were precious. Not saying that mental health isn’t important – it is – but the whole point of the “news item” was to get the doc to accuse Rudd of something else. Happily for them, he did. One more strile against the dark lord.

  237. tssk

    But Roy. The narrative has been not that Rudd stole the election, but that he somehow fooled the public with help from the left leaning all powerful media.

    If the gap is small or if Rudd loses the popular vote but wins the election in the same way Howard won against Beasley then we will see the mother of all battles to make sure Rudd ends up going Gore.

  238. tssk

    But Roy. The narrative has been not that Rudd stole the election, but that he somehow fooled the public with help from the left leaning all powerful media.

    If the gap is small or if Rudd loses the popular vote but wins the election in the same way Howard won against Beasley then we will see the mother of all battles to make sure Rudd ends up going Gore.

  239. Paul Norton

    tssk #117, if that scenario eventuates the Governor-General and the Prime Minister will follow the same Westminster convention that was followed in 1990 and 1998, and it’s hard to see a good constitutionally valid argument that they should, or even could, do otherwise.

  240. Paul Norton

    tssk #117, if that scenario eventuates the Governor-General and the Prime Minister will follow the same Westminster convention that was followed in 1990 and 1998, and it’s hard to see a good constitutionally valid argument that they should, or even could, do otherwise.

  241. Fran Barlow

    Let me repeat — I still cannot imagine that once the election campaign starts in earnest, that the government can play its cards badly enough to lose. Right now the oppositioon is getting all the adfvantages of being ‘not the government” — and is able to lob rocks from outside the tent while the giovernment is a fixed target. Once the opposition has to take responsibiluity for policy, it will look less and less viable.

    That is not to say that the ALP won’t give the business of running dead and pandering to rightwing opinion merchants a red hot go. It is very clear that they want to be as little beholden for any win to left-of-centre opinion as they dare. So keen are they on this, that they would sooner lose, if it comes to that. Their responsibility is to the welfare of the boss class after all.

    It is in this sense that the government is in trouble. They want to retain office with their footsoldiers and allies bound hand and foot. That makes it a lot harder and blurs the lines between the two parties for those who haven’t a consistent vision of the kind of polity they would like.

    In 2007, Rudd won by offering Howardism without Howard, just as Howard had won by offering the Keating regime without Keating. Howard of course squeaked home in 1998 and immediately began building up a base of hostage voters in the mortgage belts of the big cities and then got lucky with 9/11 and Tampa and Beazley being a lot like Rudd in 2007 in circumnstances where macor issues favoured the incumbent.

    The problem with Rudd in 2007 was that he beat Howard the man — who by this time people were sick of looking at and listening to, but didn’t actually defeat the rationale for his regime. I wrote on this at some length in 2008 here and in a heavily edited piece at LP in 2009.

    The advantages of this Richardson-style policy are obvious. Clearly, in the right circumstances, you can win this way. Yet here’s where the ends and means conundrum asserts itself. The process by which you attain office can make the victory pyrrhic — at least if there is some grander goal than simply winning. Nowhere near enough people are as tribally excited about their mob winning as are needed to sustain you in office. In the long run, you have to be about improving on the last mob, or people tire of you, or the opposition has to be rubbish — which was the case in NSW in 2007. Having won by saying almost nothing, they were very heavily invested in making the handful of things they did claim to be serious about bear fruit. They had to build a consituency of people who thought they had got what they wanted out of their vote in 2007. So far, as far as I can tell, there are too few who fancy that has happened for the government not to be in the polling trouble it is currently in.

    Ideally, the ALP in the latter half of 2007 would have stepped forward boldly with a much more high risk strategy — promising for example, to begin preparatory work on climate change almost immediately, perhaps remioving subsidies to fossil fuel use as a first step; promising to withdraw the troops from Iraq and Afghanistan at the earliest safe opportunity. They would abolish mandatory detention of irregular arrivals and integrate them into the community ASAP. In short, they’d have acted like people who were not going to muck about. Had this cost them the election (which it might have), we now know with hindsight, it would have been worth it. The Liberals would have messed up royally and Howardism would have been discredited.

    So when they won the election they temporised, reducing Garnaut to “input” and continuing to ape Howard on Afghanistan. They browned down the ETS and then toasted it with Malcolm over a spit, only for Minchin to turn up his nose. Then they did too. They tried to be as tough on refugees as Howard but persuaded almost nobody who would vote for them that they were and convinced those who might that they were simply inhumane and cynical. And now 61% of people — a lot more than the numbers who oppose RSPT — wonder if having the troops in Afghanistan is worth it. Were the boss class not behind this campaign, this, rather than the RSPT, would be dominating the news cycle. Following Marx, this reminds us whose ideas are the ruling ideas. Despite the fact that a majority support a price on carbon dioxide, this is not a serious issue in the public discourse because the most powerful fraction of that class in this country — extractive industry — sees it as antithetic. And despite the fact that a party dedicated to ending the Afghan intervention would have higher support for its proposal than any political party, the absence of boss class support means it barely rates a mention.

    This is why a reforming government especially needs to be about something that reformers actually want. It needs to at least try to change the rules of the game and to wedge its enemies. It can’t simply cruise along attempting to sail under the radar the whole time. You can win elections this way, if the wind is blowing in the right direction, but you are at the mercy of events well outside your control and of course, of the whims of the boss class and its hirelings and patsies in the media.

    Even now, the government could try to recapture the initiative by aggressively selling its RSPT proposal on the basis of equity. I’m not even sure why, given the GBNT meme they allowed it to go forawerd with the word “tax” in it. had I been in charge when Henry was finalised in December or so, I’d have dubbed it something like The National Resource Sharing Framework which is actually a better description of what it is. I’d have saidf, in December, that we had to start talking about how to better share the windfall benefits of our fabulous resource wealth so that the services Australians need in health, ageing, housing and of course retirement and so forth can be paid for. I’d have pointed out how far these services had been allowed to decline under the Howard years and described this as the true deficit left by Howard that this government had to repay. And then I’d have invited public comment on the elements — discussing each of the key features — the rate, the application, the uplift rate, the downside risk etc in terms of their implications for the budget bottom line, and for other programs that we could run or would have to abandon, depending on how we went.

    And in March or so I’d have said that we had consulted all we needed to and have made a clear decision and moved forward with that. Simple. I’d have announced then that an election would be held in July, so that people could vote on the basis of the government’s record and the ETS model that had been agreed.

    The government has had a habit of complicating policies that are really very simple to explain and this has been its political undoing. Had they stuck with Garnaut and offered the opposition the chance to get on board or oppose, they’d have had their policy or a DD trigger. But they decided to game it and ultimately lost badly.

    I would hate to see Abbott win, but if he does, it will be entirely the fault of this timorous and politically inept government, who failed to grasp its opportunity to lead Howard’s hostages not merely out of his grasp but out of the reach of the fear and cultural baggage of the Hawke-Keating-Howard era.

  242. Fran Barlow

    Let me repeat — I still cannot imagine that once the election campaign starts in earnest, that the government can play its cards badly enough to lose. Right now the oppositioon is getting all the adfvantages of being ‘not the government” — and is able to lob rocks from outside the tent while the giovernment is a fixed target. Once the opposition has to take responsibiluity for policy, it will look less and less viable.

    That is not to say that the ALP won’t give the business of running dead and pandering to rightwing opinion merchants a red hot go. It is very clear that they want to be as little beholden for any win to left-of-centre opinion as they dare. So keen are they on this, that they would sooner lose, if it comes to that. Their responsibility is to the welfare of the boss class after all.

    It is in this sense that the government is in trouble. They want to retain office with their footsoldiers and allies bound hand and foot. That makes it a lot harder and blurs the lines between the two parties for those who haven’t a consistent vision of the kind of polity they would like.

    In 2007, Rudd won by offering Howardism without Howard, just as Howard had won by offering the Keating regime without Keating. Howard of course squeaked home in 1998 and immediately began building up a base of hostage voters in the mortgage belts of the big cities and then got lucky with 9/11 and Tampa and Beazley being a lot like Rudd in 2007 in circumnstances where macor issues favoured the incumbent.

    The problem with Rudd in 2007 was that he beat Howard the man — who by this time people were sick of looking at and listening to, but didn’t actually defeat the rationale for his regime. I wrote on this at some length in 2008 here and in a heavily edited piece at LP in 2009.

    The advantages of this Richardson-style policy are obvious. Clearly, in the right circumstances, you can win this way. Yet here’s where the ends and means conundrum asserts itself. The process by which you attain office can make the victory pyrrhic — at least if there is some grander goal than simply winning. Nowhere near enough people are as tribally excited about their mob winning as are needed to sustain you in office. In the long run, you have to be about improving on the last mob, or people tire of you, or the opposition has to be rubbish — which was the case in NSW in 2007. Having won by saying almost nothing, they were very heavily invested in making the handful of things they did claim to be serious about bear fruit. They had to build a consituency of people who thought they had got what they wanted out of their vote in 2007. So far, as far as I can tell, there are too few who fancy that has happened for the government not to be in the polling trouble it is currently in.

    Ideally, the ALP in the latter half of 2007 would have stepped forward boldly with a much more high risk strategy — promising for example, to begin preparatory work on climate change almost immediately, perhaps remioving subsidies to fossil fuel use as a first step; promising to withdraw the troops from Iraq and Afghanistan at the earliest safe opportunity. They would abolish mandatory detention of irregular arrivals and integrate them into the community ASAP. In short, they’d have acted like people who were not going to muck about. Had this cost them the election (which it might have), we now know with hindsight, it would have been worth it. The Liberals would have messed up royally and Howardism would have been discredited.

    So when they won the election they temporised, reducing Garnaut to “input” and continuing to ape Howard on Afghanistan. They browned down the ETS and then toasted it with Malcolm over a spit, only for Minchin to turn up his nose. Then they did too. They tried to be as tough on refugees as Howard but persuaded almost nobody who would vote for them that they were and convinced those who might that they were simply inhumane and cynical. And now 61% of people — a lot more than the numbers who oppose RSPT — wonder if having the troops in Afghanistan is worth it. Were the boss class not behind this campaign, this, rather than the RSPT, would be dominating the news cycle. Following Marx, this reminds us whose ideas are the ruling ideas. Despite the fact that a majority support a price on carbon dioxide, this is not a serious issue in the public discourse because the most powerful fraction of that class in this country — extractive industry — sees it as antithetic. And despite the fact that a party dedicated to ending the Afghan intervention would have higher support for its proposal than any political party, the absence of boss class support means it barely rates a mention.

    This is why a reforming government especially needs to be about something that reformers actually want. It needs to at least try to change the rules of the game and to wedge its enemies. It can’t simply cruise along attempting to sail under the radar the whole time. You can win elections this way, if the wind is blowing in the right direction, but you are at the mercy of events well outside your control and of course, of the whims of the boss class and its hirelings and patsies in the media.

    Even now, the government could try to recapture the initiative by aggressively selling its RSPT proposal on the basis of equity. I’m not even sure why, given the GBNT meme they allowed it to go forawerd with the word “tax” in it. had I been in charge when Henry was finalised in December or so, I’d have dubbed it something like The National Resource Sharing Framework which is actually a better description of what it is. I’d have saidf, in December, that we had to start talking about how to better share the windfall benefits of our fabulous resource wealth so that the services Australians need in health, ageing, housing and of course retirement and so forth can be paid for. I’d have pointed out how far these services had been allowed to decline under the Howard years and described this as the true deficit left by Howard that this government had to repay. And then I’d have invited public comment on the elements — discussing each of the key features — the rate, the application, the uplift rate, the downside risk etc in terms of their implications for the budget bottom line, and for other programs that we could run or would have to abandon, depending on how we went.

    And in March or so I’d have said that we had consulted all we needed to and have made a clear decision and moved forward with that. Simple. I’d have announced then that an election would be held in July, so that people could vote on the basis of the government’s record and the ETS model that had been agreed.

    The government has had a habit of complicating policies that are really very simple to explain and this has been its political undoing. Had they stuck with Garnaut and offered the opposition the chance to get on board or oppose, they’d have had their policy or a DD trigger. But they decided to game it and ultimately lost badly.

    I would hate to see Abbott win, but if he does, it will be entirely the fault of this timorous and politically inept government, who failed to grasp its opportunity to lead Howard’s hostages not merely out of his grasp but out of the reach of the fear and cultural baggage of the Hawke-Keating-Howard era.

  243. Ron

    Fran Barlow

    “It is very clear that they (Labor) want to be as little beholden for any win to left-of-centre opinion as they dare….. Their (Labor’s) responsibility is to the welfare of the boss class after all.”

    a typical 1950′s Communist thinking statement , reprsenting th Greens Party extreme views on ideelology

    I just wish Bob Brown would publicly repeat these nutty & lying views of Labor , instead of ‘hiding’ it from th Public…who wrongly think ‘Green” for Greens Party simply means a care for environment

  244. Ron

    Fran Barlow

    “It is very clear that they (Labor) want to be as little beholden for any win to left-of-centre opinion as they dare….. Their (Labor’s) responsibility is to the welfare of the boss class after all.”

    a typical 1950′s Communist thinking statement , reprsenting th Greens Party extreme views on ideelology

    I just wish Bob Brown would publicly repeat these nutty & lying views of Labor , instead of ‘hiding’ it from th Public…who wrongly think ‘Green” for Greens Party simply means a care for environment

  245. Fine

    Just a bit of a derail on how the ABC works. ‘The Glasshouse’ and ‘Good News Week’ are both commissioned series, produced independently by Good News Week Productions. This means no-one’s entitlements get paid out. It just means that the series isn’t renewed and the cast and crew go onto the next project, or the dole. Which is another version of the big, yellow needle.

    But, seeing as there’s lot of talk about the ABC (but not SBS for some reason), it’s interesting to note that the majority of programming is produced by outside companies and commissioned by the broadcasters. This creates a really different dynamic, than occurs in-house production.

    . Meanwhile, SBS, which is in dire straits financially, is taking resources away from their news programming and directing it elsewhere, which is probably a good thing.

  246. Fine

    Just a bit of a derail on how the ABC works. ‘The Glasshouse’ and ‘Good News Week’ are both commissioned series, produced independently by Good News Week Productions. This means no-one’s entitlements get paid out. It just means that the series isn’t renewed and the cast and crew go onto the next project, or the dole. Which is another version of the big, yellow needle.

    But, seeing as there’s lot of talk about the ABC (but not SBS for some reason), it’s interesting to note that the majority of programming is produced by outside companies and commissioned by the broadcasters. This creates a really different dynamic, than occurs in-house production.

    . Meanwhile, SBS, which is in dire straits financially, is taking resources away from their news programming and directing it elsewhere, which is probably a good thing.

  247. David Irving (no relation)

    You don’t know too many Greens, do you, Ron.

    Sure, some of are watermelons, but the bulk of our members are not.

  248. David Irving (no relation)

    You don’t know too many Greens, do you, Ron.

    Sure, some of are watermelons, but the bulk of our members are not.

  249. tigtog

    @Paul Nortion

    tssk #117, if that scenario eventuates the Governor-General and the Prime Minister will follow the same Westminster convention that was followed in 1990 and 1998, and it’s hard to see a good constitutionally valid argument that they should, or even could, do otherwise.

    Absolutely. You’ve been running this going-Gore line for a while now tssk, and it’s just not a goer. Australia is not the USA, and that’s not how our constitution works.

    Given the incandescent level of outraged rhetoric from the MSM at the moment, even if they wanted to explode in such a scenario, who could perceive the difference from what we currently see?

  250. tigtog

    @Paul Nortion

    tssk #117, if that scenario eventuates the Governor-General and the Prime Minister will follow the same Westminster convention that was followed in 1990 and 1998, and it’s hard to see a good constitutionally valid argument that they should, or even could, do otherwise.

    Absolutely. You’ve been running this going-Gore line for a while now tssk, and it’s just not a goer. Australia is not the USA, and that’s not how our constitution works.

    Given the incandescent level of outraged rhetoric from the MSM at the moment, even if they wanted to explode in such a scenario, who could perceive the difference from what we currently see?

  251. tigtog

    @Fine,

    as shown on Media Watch last night, (and as I’m sure you’re well aware) there’s an even more different dynamic with productions from outside companies that are not commissioned by the public broadcasters but are picked up after production has been completed (e.g. 30 seconds). The broadcasters don’t get to set any rules before production on those shows, so they have to take those productions as is (if they take them at all).

  252. tigtog

    @Fine,

    as shown on Media Watch last night, (and as I’m sure you’re well aware) there’s an even more different dynamic with productions from outside companies that are not commissioned by the public broadcasters but are picked up after production has been completed (e.g. 30 seconds). The broadcasters don’t get to set any rules before production on those shows, so they have to take those productions as is (if they take them at all).

  253. Mr Denmore

    Fran Barlow @121, I agree with you. Labor’s timidity – its strange refusal to embrace its own mandate – is its undoing. What I can’t imagine, though, is why anyone would register a protest by voting for the other bunch – surely the most incompetent opposition in decades.

    Rudd’s supposed “sins” – a completely overblown storm over insulation accidents, a minority of management failures in the BER program,the backdown on a fatally flawed ETS and the less-than-ideal process surrounding the completely economically defensible RSPT – seem out of proportion to the pounding he is getting in the polls and the media.

    And his achievements – most notably the urgency with which the government enacted the fiscal stimulus during the GFC to make Australia the best performing developed economy in the face of the worst global downturn in decades – seem to have been completely overlooked. The health reforms made sense, the clean-up of the rorts in the financial services industry are well overdue, the move to greater clarity in school performance also welcome.

    So why aren’t people giving him any credit? He tends to pomposity to be sure. But Howard was hardly Prince Charming and his government in my opinion committed far worse sins than cost over-runs on school halls – most notably signing up Australia for an illegal war, turning a blind eye to the bribing by our monopoly wheat exporter of the regime we were fighting and condoning the locking up of distressed young refugees behind barbed wire. Where was the media outrage over these events?

    Regardless what you think of Rudd – and I don’t like him much – I don’t think you can say his government has been incompetent by any stretch of the imagination – certainly not in the sense that they warrant becoming a rare one-term administration and certainly not compared with the alternative on offer – a horde of the Howard undead led by a 1950s Papist.

    This leads me to agree with you that once the election campaign proper begins, the media might finally turn some attention at least to the putative government on the other side of the fence and apply a similar level of scrutiny to what sort of show they might run.

    If the penny doesn’t drop among the masses then, I really will despair.

  254. Mr Denmore

    Fran Barlow @121, I agree with you. Labor’s timidity – its strange refusal to embrace its own mandate – is its undoing. What I can’t imagine, though, is why anyone would register a protest by voting for the other bunch – surely the most incompetent opposition in decades.

    Rudd’s supposed “sins” – a completely overblown storm over insulation accidents, a minority of management failures in the BER program,the backdown on a fatally flawed ETS and the less-than-ideal process surrounding the completely economically defensible RSPT – seem out of proportion to the pounding he is getting in the polls and the media.

    And his achievements – most notably the urgency with which the government enacted the fiscal stimulus during the GFC to make Australia the best performing developed economy in the face of the worst global downturn in decades – seem to have been completely overlooked. The health reforms made sense, the clean-up of the rorts in the financial services industry are well overdue, the move to greater clarity in school performance also welcome.

    So why aren’t people giving him any credit? He tends to pomposity to be sure. But Howard was hardly Prince Charming and his government in my opinion committed far worse sins than cost over-runs on school halls – most notably signing up Australia for an illegal war, turning a blind eye to the bribing by our monopoly wheat exporter of the regime we were fighting and condoning the locking up of distressed young refugees behind barbed wire. Where was the media outrage over these events?

    Regardless what you think of Rudd – and I don’t like him much – I don’t think you can say his government has been incompetent by any stretch of the imagination – certainly not in the sense that they warrant becoming a rare one-term administration and certainly not compared with the alternative on offer – a horde of the Howard undead led by a 1950s Papist.

    This leads me to agree with you that once the election campaign proper begins, the media might finally turn some attention at least to the putative government on the other side of the fence and apply a similar level of scrutiny to what sort of show they might run.

    If the penny doesn’t drop among the masses then, I really will despair.

  255. tigtog

    Regardless what you think of Rudd – and I don’t like him much – I don’t think you can say his government has been incompetent by any stretch of the imagination – certainly not in the sense that they warrant becoming a rare one-term administration and certainly not compared with the alternative on offer – a horde of the Howard undead

    Hear, hear.

    “Pompous but competent” doesn’t have a lot of zing to it, but it’s a much much better motto than “shambling culture warriors”.

  256. tigtog

    Regardless what you think of Rudd – and I don’t like him much – I don’t think you can say his government has been incompetent by any stretch of the imagination – certainly not in the sense that they warrant becoming a rare one-term administration and certainly not compared with the alternative on offer – a horde of the Howard undead

    Hear, hear.

    “Pompous but competent” doesn’t have a lot of zing to it, but it’s a much much better motto than “shambling culture warriors”.

  257. Fine

    That’s right tigtog. And the economic model is very different. I don’t know what they’ve paid for ’30 seconds’, but when a broadcaster acquires a drama they’ll pay about $10,000 per hour, whereas an hour of drama costs between half a million to a million to produce with the funding coming from a mix of the broadcaster, private investment and government funding. This is why so little Oz drama has been produced by the ABC over the last few years. They simply can’t afford it. Whereas they can afford to commission the ‘cheap and cheerful’ stuff like ‘Spicks and Specks’.

  258. Fine

    That’s right tigtog. And the economic model is very different. I don’t know what they’ve paid for ’30 seconds’, but when a broadcaster acquires a drama they’ll pay about $10,000 per hour, whereas an hour of drama costs between half a million to a million to produce with the funding coming from a mix of the broadcaster, private investment and government funding. This is why so little Oz drama has been produced by the ABC over the last few years. They simply can’t afford it. Whereas they can afford to commission the ‘cheap and cheerful’ stuff like ‘Spicks and Specks’.

  259. MG

    I read this in the Essential Report website. “The real leadership story: Abbott remains unelectable”

    Why has this not received any publicity?

    http://www.theunspun.com.au/?p=32

  260. MG

    I read this in the Essential Report website. “The real leadership story: Abbott remains unelectable”

    Why has this not received any publicity?

    http://www.theunspun.com.au/?p=32

  261. jesterette

    From the Brisbane Times website (Fairfax news source), Mal Brough (former Howard minister) is on the calling the current LNP clueless and without policy. That’s some very fresh air. :)

    70% respondents on corresponding poll believe the LNP is doomed to fail.

  262. jesterette

    From the Brisbane Times website (Fairfax news source), Mal Brough (former Howard minister) is on the calling the current LNP clueless and without policy. That’s some very fresh air. :)

    70% respondents on corresponding poll believe the LNP is doomed to fail.

  263. Zorronsky

    I’m warming to Rudd. All the talk of backflips and lack of courage is just that, all talk. He wobbles me a bit, me being from a methodist boy’s home and all but I’m beginning to think there’s a lot more steel there than he’s being given credit for.
    So I agree with Mr Denmore and Tigtog.

  264. Zorronsky

    I’m warming to Rudd. All the talk of backflips and lack of courage is just that, all talk. He wobbles me a bit, me being from a methodist boy’s home and all but I’m beginning to think there’s a lot more steel there than he’s being given credit for.
    So I agree with Mr Denmore and Tigtog.

  265. Howard Cunningham

    I’m sensing some worried people out there.

    The worry is the fact that anything could happen.

  266. Howard Cunningham

    I’m sensing some worried people out there.

    The worry is the fact that anything could happen.

  267. Katz

    Be careful not to mistake your opinion about Rudd’s qualities with what the marginal voter thinks about Rudd.

    It matters a little what the chatterati may think about Rudd and whether in their opinion his ministry merits another term in government.

    It matters considerably more what the marginal voter in twenty or so marginal electorates think about Rudd.

    My guess is that Rudd’s government is held in quite low esteem by those psephologically important folk, especially as many of those electorates are in Qld, WA, and Western Sydney.

  268. Katz

    Be careful not to mistake your opinion about Rudd’s qualities with what the marginal voter thinks about Rudd.

    It matters a little what the chatterati may think about Rudd and whether in their opinion his ministry merits another term in government.

    It matters considerably more what the marginal voter in twenty or so marginal electorates think about Rudd.

    My guess is that Rudd’s government is held in quite low esteem by those psephologically important folk, especially as many of those electorates are in Qld, WA, and Western Sydney.

  269. nasking

    So why aren’t people giving him any credit? He tends to pomposity to be sure. But Howard was hardly Prince Charming and his government in my opinion committed far worse sins than cost over-runs on school halls – most notably signing up Australia for an illegal war, turning a blind eye to the bribing by our monopoly wheat exporter of the regime we were fighting and condoning the locking up of distressed young refugees behind barbed wire. Where was the media outrage over these events?

    Well said Mr. Denmore. Yes, there is a touch of the “pompous” about Ruddy sometimes…probably a bit too much for the average ocker…but Howard was a great big bloody bore w/ a snide, mocking & sneaky attitude.

    And what about Downer?…that dude coulda fit into the Queen’s closet.

    N’

  270. nasking

    So why aren’t people giving him any credit? He tends to pomposity to be sure. But Howard was hardly Prince Charming and his government in my opinion committed far worse sins than cost over-runs on school halls – most notably signing up Australia for an illegal war, turning a blind eye to the bribing by our monopoly wheat exporter of the regime we were fighting and condoning the locking up of distressed young refugees behind barbed wire. Where was the media outrage over these events?

    Well said Mr. Denmore. Yes, there is a touch of the “pompous” about Ruddy sometimes…probably a bit too much for the average ocker…but Howard was a great big bloody bore w/ a snide, mocking & sneaky attitude.

    And what about Downer?…that dude coulda fit into the Queen’s closet.

    N’

  271. nasking

    “Pompous but competent” doesn’t have a lot of zing to it, but it’s a much much better motto than “shambling culture warriors”.

    Nicely put tigtog.

    I see the “cocky crusader” Abbott was letting his sneering HYDE side out again in parliament today.

    My latest on the man of hubris:

    Abbott’s So Plain Speaking They Had To Gag Him

    http://cafewhispers.wordpress.com/2010/06/22/abbotts-so-plain-speaking-they-had-to-gag-him/

    The title inspired by my wife’s comment.

    N’

  272. nasking

    “Pompous but competent” doesn’t have a lot of zing to it, but it’s a much much better motto than “shambling culture warriors”.

    Nicely put tigtog.

    I see the “cocky crusader” Abbott was letting his sneering HYDE side out again in parliament today.

    My latest on the man of hubris:

    Abbott’s So Plain Speaking They Had To Gag Him

    http://cafewhispers.wordpress.com/2010/06/22/abbotts-so-plain-speaking-they-had-to-gag-him/

    The title inspired by my wife’s comment.

    N’

  273. Ron

    Mr Denmore
    “its strange refusal to embrace its own mandate – is its undoing. ”

    Utter rot , but typical Greens Party “spin narative”

    Rudd HAS followed LABORS mandate taken to th last election in OVER 20 key polisy areas including on Climate Change if you bothered to read it/listen to Rudd , abit of truth would do

    But what he has not done is followed Greens Party polisys , deel with it

    You lot ar as extreme at spinning anti Labor storys as th Murdoch Press , rather than arguing what counts: numerous actual core left polisy outcomes Labor has produced , although not always perfectly implamented but what Govt ever do so

  274. Ron

    Mr Denmore
    “its strange refusal to embrace its own mandate – is its undoing. ”

    Utter rot , but typical Greens Party “spin narative”

    Rudd HAS followed LABORS mandate taken to th last election in OVER 20 key polisy areas including on Climate Change if you bothered to read it/listen to Rudd , abit of truth would do

    But what he has not done is followed Greens Party polisys , deel with it

    You lot ar as extreme at spinning anti Labor storys as th Murdoch Press , rather than arguing what counts: numerous actual core left polisy outcomes Labor has produced , although not always perfectly implamented but what Govt ever do so

  275. Lloyd

    http://www.smh.com.au/national/mps-concerned-about-rudd-belinda-neal-20100622-yugm.html?autostart=1

    A world exclusive at our SMH!!!!

    Joining the Oz in aa race to the bottom.

    FFS!

  276. Lloyd

    http://www.smh.com.au/national/mps-concerned-about-rudd-belinda-neal-20100622-yugm.html?autostart=1

    A world exclusive at our SMH!!!!

    Joining the Oz in aa race to the bottom.

    FFS!

  277. Fran Barlow

    Mr Denmore …

    There are a number of problems with Rudd as brand. Most obviously, his strength is his weakness.

    He is clearly someone who mulls over things, and his impulse is to share his mulling over with others. This would be a strength in a community that was as engaged with policy as he is, but sadly, most aren’t, and it really doesn’t compress down into a 5 second soundbyte. Even worse, on every occasion that he is forced to accept this feature of life, he adopts a world weary tone, and goes into a reflexive “must stay on message” response, often totally ignoring the interviewer and making it seem as if he thinks he or she is beneath him and wasting his time. So the people who’d like an analytic response are cheesed off at hearing predigested pap and nearly everyone feels insulted or threatened or both. Abbott seems so facile that even if he insults you, you don’t feel as if he’s talking down to you. How could he? And of course, he mainly insults the half of the population that vote ALP and Green. Rudd gives almost everyone a reason to dislike him that is nearly as strong as the reasons for liking him.

    I regard Rudd as a very clever guy who should not be put in charge of anything because he doesn’t get how other people see him, and therefore how they will evaluate what he is trying to do. Realistically, they should have dumped him on November 25 2007 and installed a better salesperson, but of course, that would have been unthinkable.

    So what he does is get advice from spinmeisters who doubtless fancy they klnow how to game the populace but are really no better at it than he would be himself. They take the past as a given. They conclude that because what Howard or Keating did worked, then mapping the same thing to your policy will work again. They forget that Howard and Keating also worked with a context, and the world and the community it worked on is not static. The past is like an outdated travellers’ guide book — not completely useless, and perhaps, for banalities — very useful –but potentially misleading wherever subtlety is involved.

    Rudd (or his advisers) probably thought that wedging the opposition on climate change — inviting Turnbull to go to the mattresses on a policy for which Rudd would get most of the credit and Turnbull most of the dissent was clever. One can easily imagine how it could have been. A party in open revolt against its leader andf the leader forced to disown them to support the other side. Beautiful, the mates would have been thinking. If they roll him, even better — another leader destroyed. Why in the name of Richardson would the ALP have cared what The Greens or Garnaut or anyone who cared about climate change have thought? Political advantage was the main point and there was nothing to be had in getting a deal with The Greens except, possibly, a risk of being wedged on the left.

    So off they went, overlooking the fact that most people actually wanted a deal that would make us look like we were serious. That got totally lost, asnd even worse, when Turnbull was rolled and Copenhagen failed the opposition was united in opposition to Rudd’s GBNT, which was only as big as it was because he was paying off — the pals of the opposition. The ALP and Rudd were too clever by half — they wedged themselves. They have been blaming The Greens ever since, but it was classic ALP-right nonsense.

    I was watching a movie with Nicolas Cage the other night — Matchstick Men — which had a fairly thinly disguised Brechtian narrative arc, but was fun nevertheless. At one point the (fake) long lost daughter leans through the window and says to Cage — I don’t think you’re a really bad man. You’re just not very good. If I met Rudd and only had 10 seconds, this is what I would want to say to him.

  278. Fran Barlow

    Mr Denmore …

    There are a number of problems with Rudd as brand. Most obviously, his strength is his weakness.

    He is clearly someone who mulls over things, and his impulse is to share his mulling over with others. This would be a strength in a community that was as engaged with policy as he is, but sadly, most aren’t, and it really doesn’t compress down into a 5 second soundbyte. Even worse, on every occasion that he is forced to accept this feature of life, he adopts a world weary tone, and goes into a reflexive “must stay on message” response, often totally ignoring the interviewer and making it seem as if he thinks he or she is beneath him and wasting his time. So the people who’d like an analytic response are cheesed off at hearing predigested pap and nearly everyone feels insulted or threatened or both. Abbott seems so facile that even if he insults you, you don’t feel as if he’s talking down to you. How could he? And of course, he mainly insults the half of the population that vote ALP and Green. Rudd gives almost everyone a reason to dislike him that is nearly as strong as the reasons for liking him.

    I regard Rudd as a very clever guy who should not be put in charge of anything because he doesn’t get how other people see him, and therefore how they will evaluate what he is trying to do. Realistically, they should have dumped him on November 25 2007 and installed a better salesperson, but of course, that would have been unthinkable.

    So what he does is get advice from spinmeisters who doubtless fancy they klnow how to game the populace but are really no better at it than he would be himself. They take the past as a given. They conclude that because what Howard or Keating did worked, then mapping the same thing to your policy will work again. They forget that Howard and Keating also worked with a context, and the world and the community it worked on is not static. The past is like an outdated travellers’ guide book — not completely useless, and perhaps, for banalities — very useful –but potentially misleading wherever subtlety is involved.

    Rudd (or his advisers) probably thought that wedging the opposition on climate change — inviting Turnbull to go to the mattresses on a policy for which Rudd would get most of the credit and Turnbull most of the dissent was clever. One can easily imagine how it could have been. A party in open revolt against its leader andf the leader forced to disown them to support the other side. Beautiful, the mates would have been thinking. If they roll him, even better — another leader destroyed. Why in the name of Richardson would the ALP have cared what The Greens or Garnaut or anyone who cared about climate change have thought? Political advantage was the main point and there was nothing to be had in getting a deal with The Greens except, possibly, a risk of being wedged on the left.

    So off they went, overlooking the fact that most people actually wanted a deal that would make us look like we were serious. That got totally lost, asnd even worse, when Turnbull was rolled and Copenhagen failed the opposition was united in opposition to Rudd’s GBNT, which was only as big as it was because he was paying off — the pals of the opposition. The ALP and Rudd were too clever by half — they wedged themselves. They have been blaming The Greens ever since, but it was classic ALP-right nonsense.

    I was watching a movie with Nicolas Cage the other night — Matchstick Men — which had a fairly thinly disguised Brechtian narrative arc, but was fun nevertheless. At one point the (fake) long lost daughter leans through the window and says to Cage — I don’t think you’re a really bad man. You’re just not very good. If I met Rudd and only had 10 seconds, this is what I would want to say to him.

  279. jo

    Fran, I don’t think most peeps in the marginals would know the difference between the ETS and carbon price policy if their roof was on fire. Oops.

    It *was* good politics until Minchin did a Bin Laden on Talc and changed everything. Ended up just like the Repulican ref. with Monarchists on one side and the direct election on the other and the further from the GPO just say no.

    Putting the ETS on the never-never, just looked like ‘black knight with no arms’ stuff out there.

    And Macquarie and News ‘have been out there’ for more than two years inserting all the choice memes about this Govt., the problem is Rudd never bothered to challenge them.

    And they finally found the weak link in Garrett and went for it, like they did in the election campaign too. Burning down the house – they haven’t recovered from. This was the beginning of the slide.

    I knew there were going to be messaging issues when they didn’t defend their first budget and Emo Man got his “we got stuff back for the pensioners off Rudd etc”. And the Govt left it fly.

    Howard otoh, never let anything fly if he could help/dissemble etc. On the fourth step most arvos working up Opposition talking points so the MSM could go & beat Beazley up (and etc), before talking up his own shtick.

    Janette on the hooter by lunch, John on the step by four.

    I hope the ALP have a freaking great TV campaign being developed for the up-coming election. If they pick a dud outfit and/are too slow with counter adverts, and rely too much on facts/figures over straight forward messages/anecdotes and emotion…a few members won’t be returning.

    Also, one expects Newscorp and Singo’s mob to be a pile of bollocks, however, while the ABC has been a major disappointment for some years as per Mr Denmore’s postings, if the Govt can talk through Newscorp etc. then they should be able to do the same with whatever the ABC is going with. It’s just they can’t do the former…. let alone the latter.

    In terms of Newscorp, I think we too often forget that the worst person on the planet is an Australian.

  280. jo

    Fran, I don’t think most peeps in the marginals would know the difference between the ETS and carbon price policy if their roof was on fire. Oops.

    It *was* good politics until Minchin did a Bin Laden on Talc and changed everything. Ended up just like the Repulican ref. with Monarchists on one side and the direct election on the other and the further from the GPO just say no.

    Putting the ETS on the never-never, just looked like ‘black knight with no arms’ stuff out there.

    And Macquarie and News ‘have been out there’ for more than two years inserting all the choice memes about this Govt., the problem is Rudd never bothered to challenge them.

    And they finally found the weak link in Garrett and went for it, like they did in the election campaign too. Burning down the house – they haven’t recovered from. This was the beginning of the slide.

    I knew there were going to be messaging issues when they didn’t defend their first budget and Emo Man got his “we got stuff back for the pensioners off Rudd etc”. And the Govt left it fly.

    Howard otoh, never let anything fly if he could help/dissemble etc. On the fourth step most arvos working up Opposition talking points so the MSM could go & beat Beazley up (and etc), before talking up his own shtick.

    Janette on the hooter by lunch, John on the step by four.

    I hope the ALP have a freaking great TV campaign being developed for the up-coming election. If they pick a dud outfit and/are too slow with counter adverts, and rely too much on facts/figures over straight forward messages/anecdotes and emotion…a few members won’t be returning.

    Also, one expects Newscorp and Singo’s mob to be a pile of bollocks, however, while the ABC has been a major disappointment for some years as per Mr Denmore’s postings, if the Govt can talk through Newscorp etc. then they should be able to do the same with whatever the ABC is going with. It’s just they can’t do the former…. let alone the latter.

    In terms of Newscorp, I think we too often forget that the worst person on the planet is an Australian.

  281. nasking

    As for Rudd in parliament today, I do think he needs to keep his answers short, down-to-earth & to the point. He really waffled on…was boring as batsh*t.

    I really think the Opposition are calling on him so much because they know he’ll waffle sometimes & start reading from statistics & such.

    And he fails to alter his tone of voice much.

    I’m positive that Hockey & such bellow out right from the moment Rudd gets up to speak in order to force the Speaker to start yelling back which in turn forces Rudd to speak louder & more shrill.

    It’s harder then for him to vary his tone, pitch, volume etc. to hammer certain points home.

    And Rudd’s constant referral to “Mr. Speaker” becomes really irritating.

    Less pomp, more down-to-earth, shorter, sharper replies would help him.

    His present style is allowing him to be mocked & bullied by the mocking men & Luddite ladies of the Coalition.

    And considering how freakin’ toff & boring that lot are they shouldn’t be allowed to get away w/ it.

    N’

  282. nasking

    As for Rudd in parliament today, I do think he needs to keep his answers short, down-to-earth & to the point. He really waffled on…was boring as batsh*t.

    I really think the Opposition are calling on him so much because they know he’ll waffle sometimes & start reading from statistics & such.

    And he fails to alter his tone of voice much.

    I’m positive that Hockey & such bellow out right from the moment Rudd gets up to speak in order to force the Speaker to start yelling back which in turn forces Rudd to speak louder & more shrill.

    It’s harder then for him to vary his tone, pitch, volume etc. to hammer certain points home.

    And Rudd’s constant referral to “Mr. Speaker” becomes really irritating.

    Less pomp, more down-to-earth, shorter, sharper replies would help him.

    His present style is allowing him to be mocked & bullied by the mocking men & Luddite ladies of the Coalition.

    And considering how freakin’ toff & boring that lot are they shouldn’t be allowed to get away w/ it.

    N’

  283. Ron

    Fran Barlow

    Do you not tire of blogging false Green Party talking points about Rudd’s ETS

    Green Party publicly REFUSED to negotiate on there non negotaible 25% co2 cut ETS demands , a demand that was econamicly iresponsible and stupid

    Irespective of whatever else was in Rudds CPRS Bill , Greens said they’d reject it if it was NOT a 25% cut , depite Garnaut recomending a 5% cut and Rudd adopting Garnaut’s 5% figure

    So th blame belongs to th NON negotiable all or nothing foolish 25% demanding Greens Party for no 5% c02 mitigation polisy being passed in oz (seeing 2 Liberal Senators DID vote FOR that 2nd ETS Bill

    you lot can not even take reponsibility for your own Greens Party 25% non negotaible demands actions …..thatwreckng an ETS 5% Climate Bill , despite Senate voting records proving your untruthful talking points As said youse as bad as Murdoch Press

  284. Ron

    Fran Barlow

    Do you not tire of blogging false Green Party talking points about Rudd’s ETS

    Green Party publicly REFUSED to negotiate on there non negotaible 25% co2 cut ETS demands , a demand that was econamicly iresponsible and stupid

    Irespective of whatever else was in Rudds CPRS Bill , Greens said they’d reject it if it was NOT a 25% cut , depite Garnaut recomending a 5% cut and Rudd adopting Garnaut’s 5% figure

    So th blame belongs to th NON negotiable all or nothing foolish 25% demanding Greens Party for no 5% c02 mitigation polisy being passed in oz (seeing 2 Liberal Senators DID vote FOR that 2nd ETS Bill

    you lot can not even take reponsibility for your own Greens Party 25% non negotaible demands actions …..thatwreckng an ETS 5% Climate Bill , despite Senate voting records proving your untruthful talking points As said youse as bad as Murdoch Press

  285. Down and Out of Sài Gòn

    Green Party publicly REFUSED to negotiate on there non negotaible 25% co2 cut ETS demands , a demand that was econamicly iresponsible and stupid

    Sorry, Ron. But you’re wrong. As in “2 + 2 = 5″ wrong. “Roses are snot green” wrong. “Radium is good for you” wrong. It was Labor that refused to negotiate with the Greens, not vice versa. This fact has already been leaked to the SMH.

    It is true that the Greens voted against the government’s emissions trading scheme legislation on the grounds that they believed its low greenhouse reduction targets squandered an opportunity to achieve more ambitious cuts. Yet it should be remembered that the government refused to negotiate with them at all.

    It was determined, instead, to win passage of its emissions legislation with the support of Malcolm Turnbull’s Liberals. Remember the timing? Rudd was insisting on having the legislated ETS bill in his pocket when he went to the United Nations climate change conference in Copenhagen late last year. To take any other path, he said at the time, would be an act of political cowardice.

    Rudd, his deputy Julia Gillard and the Minister for Climate Change, Penny Wong, did not foresee (although plenty of signs were afoot) the possibility that Turnbull would be rolled and the Liberals would change their position with their leader before the Senate vote. Regardless, they have continued to blame the Liberals and to a lesser extent the Greens, for what has, effectively, been the death of the emissions trading scheme.

    It has been about a year since Rudd has had a long face-to-face meeting with Greens leader, Senator Bob Brown. Why so long? The Greens – together with one or two recalcitrant Liberal senators and perhaps independent Nick Xenophon – might have co-operated, in the right circumstances, to pass the government’s ETS bill.

    Even today, with Rudd’s environmental credentials under a cloud in the face of what promises to be a tight election, his government has been unwilling to enter good faith negotiations with the Greens over an interim carbon tax.

    Kevin was crystal clear from the start – the Greens couldn’t be allowed any sort of ownership of the [emissions] trading scheme and the Liberals would have to support it so that they’d wear the [associated increased] costs to voters,” a Labor source said.

    This time, I’m going to credit you with ignorance. But it’s hard to do this twice. If you bring this “IT WOZ TEH GREENS WOT DONE IT” nonsense up again, would you prefer me to address you as a liar or a fool? Your call.

  286. Down and Out of Sài Gòn

    Green Party publicly REFUSED to negotiate on there non negotaible 25% co2 cut ETS demands , a demand that was econamicly iresponsible and stupid

    Sorry, Ron. But you’re wrong. As in “2 + 2 = 5″ wrong. “Roses are snot green” wrong. “Radium is good for you” wrong. It was Labor that refused to negotiate with the Greens, not vice versa. This fact has already been leaked to the SMH.

    It is true that the Greens voted against the government’s emissions trading scheme legislation on the grounds that they believed its low greenhouse reduction targets squandered an opportunity to achieve more ambitious cuts. Yet it should be remembered that the government refused to negotiate with them at all.

    It was determined, instead, to win passage of its emissions legislation with the support of Malcolm Turnbull’s Liberals. Remember the timing? Rudd was insisting on having the legislated ETS bill in his pocket when he went to the United Nations climate change conference in Copenhagen late last year. To take any other path, he said at the time, would be an act of political cowardice.

    Rudd, his deputy Julia Gillard and the Minister for Climate Change, Penny Wong, did not foresee (although plenty of signs were afoot) the possibility that Turnbull would be rolled and the Liberals would change their position with their leader before the Senate vote. Regardless, they have continued to blame the Liberals and to a lesser extent the Greens, for what has, effectively, been the death of the emissions trading scheme.

    It has been about a year since Rudd has had a long face-to-face meeting with Greens leader, Senator Bob Brown. Why so long? The Greens – together with one or two recalcitrant Liberal senators and perhaps independent Nick Xenophon – might have co-operated, in the right circumstances, to pass the government’s ETS bill.

    Even today, with Rudd’s environmental credentials under a cloud in the face of what promises to be a tight election, his government has been unwilling to enter good faith negotiations with the Greens over an interim carbon tax.

    Kevin was crystal clear from the start – the Greens couldn’t be allowed any sort of ownership of the [emissions] trading scheme and the Liberals would have to support it so that they’d wear the [associated increased] costs to voters,” a Labor source said.

    This time, I’m going to credit you with ignorance. But it’s hard to do this twice. If you bring this “IT WOZ TEH GREENS WOT DONE IT” nonsense up again, would you prefer me to address you as a liar or a fool? Your call.

  287. Zorronsky

    “The Greens – together with one or two recalcitrant Liberal senators and perhaps independent Nick Xenophon – might have co-operated, in the right circumstances, to pass the government’s ETS bill.”
    Well that never happened did it. And from that point on can anyone point out where continuing to flog that dead horse is going to get it over the line? Further defeats were assured if the Government tried even with Green Senators. And losing a DD would make loads of sense wouldn’t it. As it is the only hope for positive CC action will be after the election of a government in favour of that action. Does anyone really believe the denialists, in the pay now of the big emitters, are going to listen to Green Senators should the worst possible result occur? Of course it’s easy to find the disgruntled when so many things were left to rot for a dozen years. Everyone wants their pet area to be fixed tomorrow but it was never going to be that easy. So everybody screams at once and guess what..nobody is listening..they’re all too busy screaming. But don’t think for one moment an LNP coalition is going to hear you, they’re the mob who left you the mess.

  288. Zorronsky

    “The Greens – together with one or two recalcitrant Liberal senators and perhaps independent Nick Xenophon – might have co-operated, in the right circumstances, to pass the government’s ETS bill.”
    Well that never happened did it. And from that point on can anyone point out where continuing to flog that dead horse is going to get it over the line? Further defeats were assured if the Government tried even with Green Senators. And losing a DD would make loads of sense wouldn’t it. As it is the only hope for positive CC action will be after the election of a government in favour of that action. Does anyone really believe the denialists, in the pay now of the big emitters, are going to listen to Green Senators should the worst possible result occur? Of course it’s easy to find the disgruntled when so many things were left to rot for a dozen years. Everyone wants their pet area to be fixed tomorrow but it was never going to be that easy. So everybody screams at once and guess what..nobody is listening..they’re all too busy screaming. But don’t think for one moment an LNP coalition is going to hear you, they’re the mob who left you the mess.

  289. PeterTB

    Katz:“Does PeterTB have any data to support this assertion?”
    You lot pretend to be political scientists, but no evidence of conservative ABC bias has been presented here – and yet you think I should present evidence for what is obvious?

    How many ABC presenters have to stand for Labor, or be married to Labor identities before you start to see a pattern? How many ex/Labor staffers have to get high profile ABC jobs before you start to see a pattern?

    Why am I even surprised though when you can’t seem to join the dots between crooked Labor councils and endemic Labor corruption. Ditto for kiddy fiddlers. Ditto for detestable school teachers pushing a Labor agenda. How can you support a party that takes pride in hating?

    Wake up and smell the roses people. This is not the Labor party that was.

    Editor: I’m letting this potentially libellous comment stand, not as a sign of editorial approval, but as evidence of PeterTB’s tendentious and outrageous statements in case anybody ever needs to refer to them.

    Peter, here is the list of ABC reporters who have worked for the Liberal/National Coalition either before or after their period of employment with the ABC. It’s a long list and includes more than handful of real luminaries on the non-progressive side of politics: http://preview.tinyurl.com/2ueskac

    In case you hadn’t noticed Peter, teachers around Australia are in the middle of an almighty fight with Julia Gillard over NAPLAN and the MySchool website. It was only reported in all national news media for about six solid weeks, so that might not have been enough time to get through your tinfoil.

    Your comments about “kiddy fiddlers” are beneath contempt. And as for corruption, I hope that the weekend by-election in Penrith gives you confidence that our democratic system is quite capable of dealing with corrupt politicians in the manner they deserve.

    As for “a party that takes pride in hating”, look in the mirror.

  290. PeterTB

    Katz:“Does PeterTB have any data to support this assertion?”
    You lot pretend to be political scientists, but no evidence of conservative ABC bias has been presented here – and yet you think I should present evidence for what is obvious?

    How many ABC presenters have to stand for Labor, or be married to Labor identities before you start to see a pattern? How many ex/Labor staffers have to get high profile ABC jobs before you start to see a pattern?

    Why am I even surprised though when you can’t seem to join the dots between crooked Labor councils and endemic Labor corruption. Ditto for kiddy fiddlers. Ditto for detestable school teachers pushing a Labor agenda. How can you support a party that takes pride in hating?

    Wake up and smell the roses people. This is not the Labor party that was.

    Editor: I’m letting this potentially libellous comment stand, not as a sign of editorial approval, but as evidence of PeterTB’s tendentious and outrageous statements in case anybody ever needs to refer to them.

    Peter, here is the list of ABC reporters who have worked for the Liberal/National Coalition either before or after their period of employment with the ABC. It’s a long list and includes more than handful of real luminaries on the non-progressive side of politics: http://preview.tinyurl.com/2ueskac

    In case you hadn’t noticed Peter, teachers around Australia are in the middle of an almighty fight with Julia Gillard over NAPLAN and the MySchool website. It was only reported in all national news media for about six solid weeks, so that might not have been enough time to get through your tinfoil.

    Your comments about “kiddy fiddlers” are beneath contempt. And as for corruption, I hope that the weekend by-election in Penrith gives you confidence that our democratic system is quite capable of dealing with corrupt politicians in the manner they deserve.

    As for “a party that takes pride in hating”, look in the mirror.

  291. Mark

    @144 and previous – the most tedious argument on the intertubes at the moment has to be the whodunnit over the ETS between Labor and Greens supporters. Do we really need to thrash this out once more?

  292. Mark

    @144 and previous – the most tedious argument on the intertubes at the moment has to be the whodunnit over the ETS between Labor and Greens supporters. Do we really need to thrash this out once more?

  293. Down and Out of Sài Gòn

    And from that point on can anyone point out where continuing to flog that dead horse is going to get it over the line? Further defeats were assured if the Government tried even with Green Senators. And losing a DD would make loads of sense wouldn’t it. As it is the only hope for positive CC action will be after the election of a government in favour of that action?

    Would you be too surprised to learn that I agree with this passage?

  294. Down and Out of Sài Gòn

    And from that point on can anyone point out where continuing to flog that dead horse is going to get it over the line? Further defeats were assured if the Government tried even with Green Senators. And losing a DD would make loads of sense wouldn’t it. As it is the only hope for positive CC action will be after the election of a government in favour of that action?

    Would you be too surprised to learn that I agree with this passage?

  295. Tyro Rex

    “And Rudd’s constant referral to “Mr. Speaker” becomes really irritating.”

    Mister Speaker, let me start by saying it is a long-stang convention of the Westminster tradition that when you address the House you are required to address your comments to the presiding officer and not to other people. It is not acceptable to directly address other Members, Mister Speaker, except in the third person. That is why when I am answering the Member for Nasking’s question about the Honorable The Prime Minister’s mode of address in the Parliament, Mister Speaker, I am required to answer the question to the Speaker of the Parliament or his or her deputy, rather than directly to the Member who asked the question.

  296. Tyro Rex

    “And Rudd’s constant referral to “Mr. Speaker” becomes really irritating.”

    Mister Speaker, let me start by saying it is a long-stang convention of the Westminster tradition that when you address the House you are required to address your comments to the presiding officer and not to other people. It is not acceptable to directly address other Members, Mister Speaker, except in the third person. That is why when I am answering the Member for Nasking’s question about the Honorable The Prime Minister’s mode of address in the Parliament, Mister Speaker, I am required to answer the question to the Speaker of the Parliament or his or her deputy, rather than directly to the Member who asked the question.

  297. Tyro Rex

    long-stang == long-standing, but I’m sure Hansard will realise that and fix it up in due course.

  298. Tyro Rex

    long-stang == long-standing, but I’m sure Hansard will realise that and fix it up in due course.

  299. Ron

    Zorronsky #144

    accurate post on Rudds ETS

    Mark
    #146

    Misleading posts by Greens suporters about Rudds ETS factualy CONTRADICORY to actual Green Party Senate speeches and Senate voting records is simply being exposed

    This is quite diferent to a legit debate on th MERITS of Rudds 5% CPRS vs Greens non negotaible requirement for a 25% cut CPRS

    What we do know factualy is
    Mr X (was 50/50 about voting for CPRS) and Fielding (was against passing a CPRS) , meaning th 5 Green votes were totally irelevant to getting a CPRS passed Therefore Greens claims that Rudd should hav negotiated with Greens Party is foolish even on politcal grounds (Only th Liberals could provide Senate numbers to pass CPRS)

    Further we also know from Senate records that Greens demanded a non negotiable 25% CPRS cut (down from there original 40%) , a % level at 25% that only econamic illterates would suggest with oz standing alone against our 4 Major Trading partys , so of couse rudd would never hav accepted Greens stupid stanse anyway

    Furthermore we also know that irespective of whatever was in Rudds 5% CPRS Bill , that Greens said publicly they would (and did) opose Rudds Bill BECAUSE it was not a 25% cut

    Why Greens bloggers ar now so embarrased to defend there own Partys non negotiable 25% polisy…is because having demanded “all or nothing” on CC legilaton and got nothing , they look pretty foolish now , and worse so as each milligram of co2 is today being emitted into oz air space that they hav allowed to occur

  300. Ron

    Zorronsky #144

    accurate post on Rudds ETS

    Mark
    #146

    Misleading posts by Greens suporters about Rudds ETS factualy CONTRADICORY to actual Green Party Senate speeches and Senate voting records is simply being exposed

    This is quite diferent to a legit debate on th MERITS of Rudds 5% CPRS vs Greens non negotaible requirement for a 25% cut CPRS

    What we do know factualy is
    Mr X (was 50/50 about voting for CPRS) and Fielding (was against passing a CPRS) , meaning th 5 Green votes were totally irelevant to getting a CPRS passed Therefore Greens claims that Rudd should hav negotiated with Greens Party is foolish even on politcal grounds (Only th Liberals could provide Senate numbers to pass CPRS)

    Further we also know from Senate records that Greens demanded a non negotiable 25% CPRS cut (down from there original 40%) , a % level at 25% that only econamic illterates would suggest with oz standing alone against our 4 Major Trading partys , so of couse rudd would never hav accepted Greens stupid stanse anyway

    Furthermore we also know that irespective of whatever was in Rudds 5% CPRS Bill , that Greens said publicly they would (and did) opose Rudds Bill BECAUSE it was not a 25% cut

    Why Greens bloggers ar now so embarrased to defend there own Partys non negotiable 25% polisy…is because having demanded “all or nothing” on CC legilaton and got nothing , they look pretty foolish now , and worse so as each milligram of co2 is today being emitted into oz air space that they hav allowed to occur

  301. Ron

    that was preventabl by Greens Party later voting with 2 Lib Senators on turnbull agreed CPRS , that would hav made a CPRS law

  302. Ron

    that was preventabl by Greens Party later voting with 2 Lib Senators on turnbull agreed CPRS , that would hav made a CPRS law

  303. David Irving (no relation)

    Ron, you’re really giving me the shits, you know.

    Have you ever bothered to look at the Greens’ policies? Have you ever even spoken to a Green?

    Down and Out asked you if you’d rather be thought of as a liar or a fool, but I’d remind him (and you) that the categories are not mutually exclusive. I reckon you’ve pulled off the daily double.

  304. David Irving (no relation)

    Ron, you’re really giving me the shits, you know.

    Have you ever bothered to look at the Greens’ policies? Have you ever even spoken to a Green?

    Down and Out asked you if you’d rather be thought of as a liar or a fool, but I’d remind him (and you) that the categories are not mutually exclusive. I reckon you’ve pulled off the daily double.

  305. zoot

    DI @152: Seconded.

  306. zoot

    DI @152: Seconded.

  307. Mercurius

    @154 thirdededed. Why do Ron’s missives appear to be written with the online equivalent of “a thumbnail dipped in tar”, as the poet sung?

  308. Mercurius

    @154 thirdededed. Why do Ron’s missives appear to be written with the online equivalent of “a thumbnail dipped in tar”, as the poet sung?

  309. PeterTB

    As for “a party that takes pride in hating”, look in the mirror.

    Is that you mercurius? Don’t mistake me for a hater – that’s simply not true. My comments stem from frustration – because while ever Labor gets the second preference of the self proclained progressives, it will never have to face its problems in any meaningful way.

    Penrith was a step in the right direction, but unlikely to be repeated in the poll that matters.

  310. PeterTB

    As for “a party that takes pride in hating”, look in the mirror.

    Is that you mercurius? Don’t mistake me for a hater – that’s simply not true. My comments stem from frustration – because while ever Labor gets the second preference of the self proclained progressives, it will never have to face its problems in any meaningful way.

    Penrith was a step in the right direction, but unlikely to be repeated in the poll that matters.

  311. PeterTB

    Morning mercurius – I hope it finds you well!

  312. PeterTB

    Morning mercurius – I hope it finds you well!

  313. Nickws

    Pursuant to what I wrote 24 hrs ago about not being one to normally see anti-Labor (as opposed to anti-socialist or anti-`extremist’) bias in the media, I have to say that the ABC radio news bulletin I heard late last night about Abbott’s “we’re on the brink of an historic victory” remark struck me as being strangely neutral, lacking even the basic formulation I would have expected: ala “{insert controversial leader’s name here} has been accused of making yet another gaffe.” Nothing, nada. It was like they were reporting the world cup scores, not a political knife fight. I wonder if they’ve changed the tone for this morning’s AM?

    It’s bad enough that Aunty’s news division is breathlessly going with ‘Abbott: Winning Winner or Underdog Winner?’ in its coverage. Now Michelle Grattan is busy proving she too can exhibit born-yesterday traits with the best of our ADHD media.

    I can’t believe there is an orchestrated campaign on behalf of the Abbott Coalition, so I have to suppose that what we’re watching is some fairly intense middle-class-progressive self-hate from our fourth estate, plus the triumph of amoral neoliberal centrism, all mixed in with the end of the old professional standards of the AJA. The devolving business model just… devolved. To its logical nadir.

    Of course the deathly cynicism has always been there. The likes of young Keith Murdoch and old Alan Reid were nothing but prostitutes masquerading as journos, for instance. But it could never have infected the entire forms of meeja the public consumes, not like now (Coke Bottle Glasses Grattan? Even her?)

    For this reason alone I’m confident it will be turned on Abbott when the election is finally called. I can’t imagine them letting such opportunity for drama slip through their fingers.

    It’s just I’d prefer a political news media that worked at being consistent and wanted to be just a little self-critical, that’s all.

    @ 145

    Editor: I’m letting this potentially libellous comment stand, not as a sign of editorial approval, but as evidence of PeterTB’s tendentious and outrageous statements in case anybody ever needs to refer to them… Your comments about “kiddy fiddlers” are beneath contempt

    Hmmm, perhaps I should have directed my comments from yesterday morning to one of the ostensibly sane conservative commenters here.

  314. Nickws

    Pursuant to what I wrote 24 hrs ago about not being one to normally see anti-Labor (as opposed to anti-socialist or anti-`extremist’) bias in the media, I have to say that the ABC radio news bulletin I heard late last night about Abbott’s “we’re on the brink of an historic victory” remark struck me as being strangely neutral, lacking even the basic formulation I would have expected: ala “{insert controversial leader’s name here} has been accused of making yet another gaffe.” Nothing, nada. It was like they were reporting the world cup scores, not a political knife fight. I wonder if they’ve changed the tone for this morning’s AM?

    It’s bad enough that Aunty’s news division is breathlessly going with ‘Abbott: Winning Winner or Underdog Winner?’ in its coverage. Now Michelle Grattan is busy proving she too can exhibit born-yesterday traits with the best of our ADHD media.

    I can’t believe there is an orchestrated campaign on behalf of the Abbott Coalition, so I have to suppose that what we’re watching is some fairly intense middle-class-progressive self-hate from our fourth estate, plus the triumph of amoral neoliberal centrism, all mixed in with the end of the old professional standards of the AJA. The devolving business model just… devolved. To its logical nadir.

    Of course the deathly cynicism has always been there. The likes of young Keith Murdoch and old Alan Reid were nothing but prostitutes masquerading as journos, for instance. But it could never have infected the entire forms of meeja the public consumes, not like now (Coke Bottle Glasses Grattan? Even her?)

    For this reason alone I’m confident it will be turned on Abbott when the election is finally called. I can’t imagine them letting such opportunity for drama slip through their fingers.

    It’s just I’d prefer a political news media that worked at being consistent and wanted to be just a little self-critical, that’s all.

    @ 145

    Editor: I’m letting this potentially libellous comment stand, not as a sign of editorial approval, but as evidence of PeterTB’s tendentious and outrageous statements in case anybody ever needs to refer to them… Your comments about “kiddy fiddlers” are beneath contempt

    Hmmm, perhaps I should have directed my comments from yesterday morning to one of the ostensibly sane conservative commenters here.

  315. Katz

    PeterTB

    You lot pretend to be political scientists, but no evidence of conservative ABC bias has been presented here – and yet you think I should present evidence for what is obvious?

    PeterTB, that is a very long-winded and pompous way of admitting that you have no data.

    But the data do exist that disprove your tendentious assertion.

    The relevant finding of this research:

    ABC television news was significantly slanted towards the Coalition.

  316. Katz

    PeterTB

    You lot pretend to be political scientists, but no evidence of conservative ABC bias has been presented here – and yet you think I should present evidence for what is obvious?

    PeterTB, that is a very long-winded and pompous way of admitting that you have no data.

    But the data do exist that disprove your tendentious assertion.

    The relevant finding of this research:

    ABC television news was significantly slanted towards the Coalition.

  317. Fran Barlow

    PeterTB said:

    because while ever Labor gets the second preference of the self proclaimed progressives, it will never have to face its problems in any meaningful way.

    And yet you refer to “kiddy fiddlers” in the same breath, as if this is an institutional problem with the ALP? Hmmm One doesn’t deploy that if one is pitching for reform.

    The substantive problem though is that if “self-proclaimed progressives” give their effective preferences to avowed reactionaries, it will merely entrench the problems self-proclaimed progressives see in the ALP. It will be a sign that people are deserting the ALP to the right and that of course is exactly what the parts of the ALP that are most bent use to keep control.

    The self-proclaimed progressives have to find a way of making the ALP more dependent on the support of self-proclaimed progressives and less dependent on the support of avowed reactionaries by denying them the ability to pitch at both and by incereasing the number of people who are self-proclaimed progressives.

  318. Fran Barlow

    PeterTB said:

    because while ever Labor gets the second preference of the self proclaimed progressives, it will never have to face its problems in any meaningful way.

    And yet you refer to “kiddy fiddlers” in the same breath, as if this is an institutional problem with the ALP? Hmmm One doesn’t deploy that if one is pitching for reform.

    The substantive problem though is that if “self-proclaimed progressives” give their effective preferences to avowed reactionaries, it will merely entrench the problems self-proclaimed progressives see in the ALP. It will be a sign that people are deserting the ALP to the right and that of course is exactly what the parts of the ALP that are most bent use to keep control.

    The self-proclaimed progressives have to find a way of making the ALP more dependent on the support of self-proclaimed progressives and less dependent on the support of avowed reactionaries by denying them the ability to pitch at both and by incereasing the number of people who are self-proclaimed progressives.

  319. Zorronsky

    Is there any data for the period after 2007? Seems to me that bias has grown to all arms of the media in one direction and it sure aint left.

  320. Zorronsky

    Is there any data for the period after 2007? Seems to me that bias has grown to all arms of the media in one direction and it sure aint left.

  321. josh

    Ron, please quit while you are behind.

  322. josh

    Ron, please quit while you are behind.

  323. Ron

    Clearly Greens suporters here can not handle truth eg on CPRS Bills , and there moronic polisys simply show them as fools and extremists

    increasing numbers of Labor suporters as they learn more about this Greens Party fringe set in Society , tell me they will place th Greens Party last with there preferenses , and I am not surprised

    Greens seem to be a Party of haters , frustrated at there irelevance that they will never govern

  324. Ron

    Clearly Greens suporters here can not handle truth eg on CPRS Bills , and there moronic polisys simply show them as fools and extremists

    increasing numbers of Labor suporters as they learn more about this Greens Party fringe set in Society , tell me they will place th Greens Party last with there preferenses , and I am not surprised

    Greens seem to be a Party of haters , frustrated at there irelevance that they will never govern

  325. Peter Mc

    What to do about the terrible state of the ABC and news journalism? Well get active is my suggestion. There is the facility to comment on the news stories on the ABC site so I think everyone should complain, harangue and question the veracity of the reporting on a regular basis (but don’t get bogged down with the conservative troll machine). Its not the only thing that can be done but if enough people do it, it will give the journalists pause for thought. After all no-one wants to looks stupid (or at least too stupid). So instead of endlessly whining about how bad the ABC has got we could do something about it instead. Just a thought…….

  326. Peter Mc

    What to do about the terrible state of the ABC and news journalism? Well get active is my suggestion. There is the facility to comment on the news stories on the ABC site so I think everyone should complain, harangue and question the veracity of the reporting on a regular basis (but don’t get bogged down with the conservative troll machine). Its not the only thing that can be done but if enough people do it, it will give the journalists pause for thought. After all no-one wants to looks stupid (or at least too stupid). So instead of endlessly whining about how bad the ABC has got we could do something about it instead. Just a thought…….

  327. Paul Burns

    Don’t be stupid, Ron. The Greens are probably the one party about that is not a party of haters. Its just, as Hanson-Young demonstrated the other night on Q&A,they’ve yet to realise you need to have a very long spoon if you’re going to sup with the devil.

  328. Paul Burns

    Don’t be stupid, Ron. The Greens are probably the one party about that is not a party of haters. Its just, as Hanson-Young demonstrated the other night on Q&A,they’ve yet to realise you need to have a very long spoon if you’re going to sup with the devil.

  329. josh

    Okay Ron, if you won’t quit about a topic that’s been done to death and has no relevance to current discussions, despite repeated requests, could you please for the love of God use a spell check???

  330. josh

    Okay Ron, if you won’t quit about a topic that’s been done to death and has no relevance to current discussions, despite repeated requests, could you please for the love of God use a spell check???

  331. Don Wigan

    I’ve followed this thread with considerable interest, being very much in accord with Mercurius’s theme. It has been distracted at times to whether the media is showing Lab or Lib bias and the prospects and/or performance of the Rudd Government.

    But my reading has been the concern about the emasculation of an independent ABC news service. I think that is in evidence from the consistent way that Murdoch-New Ltd stories (which DO have a political agenda) are echoed and taken as “news”. The problem is compounded by the only other semi-independent news sources, Fairfax, and the Press Gallery TV reporters joining in the echo chamber, and often going to each other for comments on what is political news.

    It reminds me a lot what used to get a run (and still occasionally does) as Royal Family reporting. They cross to the tv correspondent who interviews a Royal Family correspondent who gives their own opinion on how Her Majesty might feel about the latest Fergie Gaffe. It may or may not be based on ‘inside’ contact with a Palace PR person. All sorts of interpretations are beaten up.

    Maybe it’s a trend in the media generally, and partly as Mr Denmore has implied to do with cost-cutting and lack of scope for real reporting. But it worries us who can remember the ABC as an independent news source.

    Howard has copped a lot of the blame, with some justification as he sought to change the culture, sometimes unsuccessfully, but more recently with the appointment of the culture warriors to the ABC Board. It might have had some influence, but I suspect the appointment of Scott and the new type of managerialism has been more of the problem. There seems to be a misunderstanding of what balance is about. It is not simply the percentage of time given to competing views.

    Perhaps the best example is Climate Change. The science is not conclusive on everything, but the evidence is pretty compelling that it is occurring and that the increase in CO2 while not the only factor is very clearly the most significant variable in contributing factors to the warming that has occurred over the last 150 years. There is no credible alternative scientific explanation. Yet we will still see the ABC turn to some quack to offer an alternative in the name of balance. There was even an ABC chief who made an unprovable claim that there was a credible scientific body of alternative explanation.

    I suspect that this has happened with political reporting. Some twat wants a ‘balanced’ coverage and there’s only the Labor Government feeding any news. So what do they do? Come up with some Lib spokesman claiming Labor’s home insulation scheme is still killing people. It’s garbage but it’s meeting the requirements. And as we have seen, it can become a whirlpool once they’re sucked in to Shanahan’s shams.

    Solutions? Dunno. But I rather wish Conroy was looking at that rather than net censorship. On second thoughts, maybe someone a bit sharper than him.

  332. Don Wigan

    I’ve followed this thread with considerable interest, being very much in accord with Mercurius’s theme. It has been distracted at times to whether the media is showing Lab or Lib bias and the prospects and/or performance of the Rudd Government.

    But my reading has been the concern about the emasculation of an independent ABC news service. I think that is in evidence from the consistent way that Murdoch-New Ltd stories (which DO have a political agenda) are echoed and taken as “news”. The problem is compounded by the only other semi-independent news sources, Fairfax, and the Press Gallery TV reporters joining in the echo chamber, and often going to each other for comments on what is political news.

    It reminds me a lot what used to get a run (and still occasionally does) as Royal Family reporting. They cross to the tv correspondent who interviews a Royal Family correspondent who gives their own opinion on how Her Majesty might feel about the latest Fergie Gaffe. It may or may not be based on ‘inside’ contact with a Palace PR person. All sorts of interpretations are beaten up.

    Maybe it’s a trend in the media generally, and partly as Mr Denmore has implied to do with cost-cutting and lack of scope for real reporting. But it worries us who can remember the ABC as an independent news source.

    Howard has copped a lot of the blame, with some justification as he sought to change the culture, sometimes unsuccessfully, but more recently with the appointment of the culture warriors to the ABC Board. It might have had some influence, but I suspect the appointment of Scott and the new type of managerialism has been more of the problem. There seems to be a misunderstanding of what balance is about. It is not simply the percentage of time given to competing views.

    Perhaps the best example is Climate Change. The science is not conclusive on everything, but the evidence is pretty compelling that it is occurring and that the increase in CO2 while not the only factor is very clearly the most significant variable in contributing factors to the warming that has occurred over the last 150 years. There is no credible alternative scientific explanation. Yet we will still see the ABC turn to some quack to offer an alternative in the name of balance. There was even an ABC chief who made an unprovable claim that there was a credible scientific body of alternative explanation.

    I suspect that this has happened with political reporting. Some twat wants a ‘balanced’ coverage and there’s only the Labor Government feeding any news. So what do they do? Come up with some Lib spokesman claiming Labor’s home insulation scheme is still killing people. It’s garbage but it’s meeting the requirements. And as we have seen, it can become a whirlpool once they’re sucked in to Shanahan’s shams.

    Solutions? Dunno. But I rather wish Conroy was looking at that rather than net censorship. On second thoughts, maybe someone a bit sharper than him.

  333. PeterTB

    mercurius, here’s an article with a more complete list:

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/cut-paste-what-next-labor-preselection-for-bananas-in-pyjama/story-e6frg6zo-1111113591328

    Katz, that’s one study. From the same article An ABC-backed inquiry last year into bias in the public broadcaster assessed a sample of TV news stories as impartial. Will you at least concede that suggestions of pro-conservative bias at the ABC are nonsense?

  334. PeterTB

    mercurius, here’s an article with a more complete list:

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/cut-paste-what-next-labor-preselection-for-bananas-in-pyjama/story-e6frg6zo-1111113591328

    Katz, that’s one study. From the same article An ABC-backed inquiry last year into bias in the public broadcaster assessed a sample of TV news stories as impartial. Will you at least concede that suggestions of pro-conservative bias at the ABC are nonsense?

  335. Katz

    Will you at least concede that suggestions of pro-conservative bias at the ABC are nonsense?

    They are not “suggestions”. They are conclusions.

  336. Katz

    Will you at least concede that suggestions of pro-conservative bias at the ABC are nonsense?

    They are not “suggestions”. They are conclusions.

  337. David Irving (no relation)

    Shorter Don Wigan (no offence intended): Journalists are just making shit up.

    PeterTB, if you regard The Australian as a neutral, unbiased source (on anything), your bullshit filter needs to be returned to the manufacturer. I hope it’s still under warrantee.

  338. David Irving (no relation)

    Shorter Don Wigan (no offence intended): Journalists are just making shit up.

    PeterTB, if you regard The Australian as a neutral, unbiased source (on anything), your bullshit filter needs to be returned to the manufacturer. I hope it’s still under warrantee.

  339. PeterTB

    David, the article lists names. Are any of those named mis-categorised?

  340. PeterTB

    David, the article lists names. Are any of those named mis-categorised?

  341. David Irving (no relation)

    Dunno, PeterTB. I don’t read The Australian on principle. (I prefer facts.) I still reckon your bullshit filter needs recalibrating.

  342. David Irving (no relation)

    Dunno, PeterTB. I don’t read The Australian on principle. (I prefer facts.) I still reckon your bullshit filter needs recalibrating.

  343. Ken Lovell

    PeterTB thanks for trying in your usual fashion to bring some balanced objective perspective to the discussion, but for once you seem to have been a bit biased.

  344. Ken Lovell

    PeterTB thanks for trying in your usual fashion to bring some balanced objective perspective to the discussion, but for once you seem to have been a bit biased.

  345. PeterTB

    Thanks Ken – already linked by mercurius above. Sixteen names including one or two that I even recognise. Follow the link I have provided @167 above. There you will find 16 names with strong Labor affiliations – and not many of these are strangers.

    There is nothing in these two links to support the assertions made throughout this thread that there is a conservative bias over at the ABC.

  346. PeterTB

    Thanks Ken – already linked by mercurius above. Sixteen names including one or two that I even recognise. Follow the link I have provided @167 above. There you will find 16 names with strong Labor affiliations – and not many of these are strangers.

    There is nothing in these two links to support the assertions made throughout this thread that there is a conservative bias over at the ABC.