http://education.qld.gov.au/learningplace/stories/articles/art-edviews-mar05-2.html

It’s a shame that it took “what iz name” to give this initiative the recognition it deserved and not the enlightened ALP. Maybe there is just so might light arcing from the ALP caucus that they cannot see the soft glow of individual genius from the community all around. From my observation people who learn to ask questions with a passion not only find answers, but they learn to teach themselves.

I am thinking about this in a hotel room in Qingdao. What an eye opener this city is.

Also in Australia it is a very narrow band of voters who ‘matter’. The Labor ads in 2007 were spot on, angry Jenny and traddie Dave. My guess is if they worry about jobs, cost of living and buying a house. They’ll go to the party that offers this. Recent elections have all been very close except 96 and 07 (and may be 04?). 2010 may well be another blowout but those people will decide. I would suggest so, who knows ….. that would be historic. I can’t see the Libs being smashed in 2016 though, politicians learn and governments age. 2016 is only 6 years away …..

Yep, leave the Moncktons for the Monbiots. No scientist should get in the same room with him. If only that it immediately signals to the audience that Monckton is debating science.

Elise, I remember Erich von Däniken. He sold 63 million copies and is still at it, which says something.

dk:au:

A good understanding of the science is secondary to the authoritative presentation of talking points.

Roger said:

Coming back to the debates, there is a quality we may call truthiness and another that we may call falsity. Neither of these relate to the content of a speaker’s utterances, but its how they come across in relaying highly contested information.

I’m reminded of the famous television debate between Nixon and Kennedy. At the time most reckoned Nixon won the actual debate but Kennedy’s relaxed style and youthful optimism won over the audience. Plus Nixon’s heavily made up face melted under the TV lights and his 5 o’clock shadow made him look like a gangster.

A female friend and colleague of mine was often infuriated at meetings when something she said at would be repeated a little later by a male, with deep voice and slow deliberation, whereupon people listened.

So how you say things is more important for persuasion than what you say.

Governments have to manage immigration, education, environment, economy, health etc. Each of those core responsibilities comes with a vision or direction inherent in the political stance of the party in power. Who has time for an off-topic Vision?

And who’s asking them for one? What would be an eg of a Vision that anybody would vote for? And how would said vision be legislated?

Howard or Keating or the rest never did 60 mins live broadast, unscripted, take all comers – Rudd went out on a limb – survived – didn’t talk down – didn’t pal up – took it seriously – good effort Ruddy.

CraigMc @ 23 there’s no need to wait; Howard is on record years ago as wanting Australia to become like the USA, with every worker a little entrepreneurial risk-taker. To my knowledge he never explained why he thought this was a good thing; he seemed to become infatuated with the USA following September 11 2001 and has been an uncritical admirer of the Bush/Cheney version of America ever since.

I agree LO – in the sense than any minor party facing the responsibility of sole BOP must go through that difficult process.

As a member, however, I strongly suspect that anyone thinking this would be *especially* difficult for the Greens – imagining them more “doctrinaire” than other minors – will be proved very wrong, very quickly.

Its got a very broad membership – and mostly people just want something progressive happen on climate change. I suspect people outside will be more shocked at the pragmatic dealing, than those in.

The problem arises because your vision of what is ncessary to ensure the survival of humanity is not shared by the average voter. I’d also note that the Greens platform is full of policies that have nothing to with the survival of humanity and simply reflect your vision of a good society. Nothing wrong with that of course but again you’d have to be a tad blinkered if you thought that vision was widely shared.

So, I stand by my point that you guys will face your fair share of challenges and problems as you decide which principles to give ground on and which not when exercising the balance of power.

Just think of the consultative work done by Gillard and her team in rationalising awards and setting up the Fair Work arbitration system. It wasn’t just a slash and burn job on Work Choices. There was restructuring at both state and federal levels. If Rudd needs to take over the hospitals as he promised he will seek a mandate for it at the election and then set about what he sees as necessary and due process of consultation on how best to administer a federal system.

sg also wrote “I get a general impression that Rudd is a bit of a disappointment.”
It might be more accurate to say that many people are feeling disappointed. The problem for Rudd, as on a different scale for Obama, is not that he has broken promises but many people’s unrealistic expectations have not been met and they feel that promises have been broken. Add to that the unscrupulous and dishonest sloganeering of the Opposition about broken promises and untrustworthiness and you get that pervasive feeling of disappointment inflated further by the MSM.

What an ungrateful lot we must seem to Rudd. It’s astonishing how he maintains his cool as he did the other evening with those petulant adolescents having a go at him for being so untrustworthy and breaking so many promises! He defended his record quite well though and I thought his vision for Australia as he expressed it to them was pretty solid too. A sound economy, jobs, good infrastructure, health and education system and the rest will be up to us. A bit like a good mum and dad, really. Here, we’ve fed and clothed you, straightened your teeth and educated you. Now, off you go and have a good life!

And it is already not half bad!

PS DI(nr) please stop talking yourself into premature old age. Fifty-nine is not reasonably old. It is still reasonably young!

I suggest it’s ‘don’t let the Liberal party find stable ground’. How has Mark described it? ‘The accumulation of political capital for its own sake’?

d

I read the 19-25 year old voter and picked up that as parody but not yours.

Maybe I need a tune up in my sense of humour.

I am not most people.

I speak for everyone in my demographic except insofar as I don’t.

My comments on Rudd’s cybernetic communications style can be read at length in this thread.