In the wake of the punditariat’s latest game of deconstructing each parliamentary interjection by The Great Pretender and wistfully wishing his incoherent comedy lines on the public, it’s worth taking a step back and asking whether – even if you think Peter Costello’s schtick is remotely worthwhile – it matters.
Andrew Bartlett points out:
I remain to be convinced that being the best performer at ‘throwing the switch to vaudeville’ does much on its own to attract public support.
Kevin Rudd didn’t defeat John Howard because he had a lot of witty putdowns in parliament. Nor did John Howard win against Paul Keating in 1996 for this reason. Indeed, one could argue that this fixation with Keating’s apparently unchallenged ability to dominate the arena during Question Time was a key reason why so many commentators argued he still had a chance of winning in 1996, well after the electorate had already decided they’d had enough.
Exactly.

Recent comments
Casey, skepticlawyer, BilB, durutticolumn, Roger Jones, BilB [...]
Paul Burns, Saint Furious of Ikea, Saint Furious of Ikea, Zorronsky, Lefty E, Sam [...]
Caroline Church, Nickws, joe2, joe2, Mark, Mark [...]
Laura, Casey, Liam, anthony nolan, pablo, Ute Man [...]
Pavlov's Cat, Mercurius, Casey, anthony nolan, tigtog, desipis [...]
David Irving (no relation), Mark, Mark, Pavlov's Cat, Lefty E, joe2 [...]
Guido, pablo, Saint Furious of Ikea, Salient Green, Lefty E, ewe2 [...]
Ginja, Anthony, Terry, Alison, anthony nolan, joe2 [...]
BilB, OldSkeptic, anthony nolan, mitchell porter, Vanessa, Vanessa [...]
Mervyn Langford, OldSkeptic, Frankie V., armagny, sg, Robert Merkel [...]
josh, Gummo Trotsky, Wood Duck, joe2, tssk, joe2 [...]
Fran Barlow, Jacques Chester, John D, HuggyBunny, Chris, Tim Macknay [...]