Australia left without fearless leader

[jx2mad]

It seems that KRUDD is not in the country again. Does this mean that we are like a ship without a Rudd.......er?

[D-Fender]

good one!

[V8Ian]

Will it make a difference?:confused::angel:

[Ausfree]

Yeah, getting beyond a joke isn't it, surely his advisers must be telling him of the growing public disgust of his constant trips overseas.:mad:

[Gooner]

I wish our country was Rudd...er less.

[D-Fender]

Yeah, getting beyond a joke isn't it, surely his advisers must be telling him of the growing public disgust of his constant trips overseas.:mad:

But then they wouldn't get to go on trips and see the world. :D

[lambrover]

I like the rudd erless idea. with elections looming I reakon he will do less traverling, but to be honest I think it's worse that he took 100 plus people to the Copenhagen sumit or how ever you spell it. the cost of the trips is unbelievable how can it cost that much and stay somwhere and eat.

[maclad]

Just watch, we'll be sick of the sight of the bugger in a year or two.

[Benny_IIA]

I wish our country was Rudd...er less.


We would be heading in a better direction

[Slunnie]

Who really cares, he's obviously doing his job. Welcome to 2010 where we have things like instant communication - novel concept really. Because he is OS it doesn't mean that he's not in communication or that the country is all of a sudden without leadership.



Just watch, we'll be sick of the sight of the bugger in a year or two.

... and he will still be a PM without opposition.

[McDisco]

Nicely said Simon.

[V8Ian]

Who really cares, he's obviously doing his job. Welcome to 2010 where we have things like instant communication - novel concept really. Because he is OS it doesn't mean that he's not in communication or that the country is all of a sudden without leadership.




... and he will still be a PM without opposition.
But in this age of instant communication, why do we have to foot the bill for these overseas jaunts. If it is essential to send a body for educational purposes, why do we send a politician instead of an expert in the relivant field?

[willem]

I like the rudd erless idea. with elections looming I reakon he will do less traverling, but to be honest I think it's worse that he took 100 plus people to the Copenhagen sumit or how ever you spell it. the cost of the trips is unbelievable how can it cost that much and stay somwhere and eat.

I wonder what the carbon footprint for that was! :eek::eek::eek:

Willem

[willem]

... and he will still be a PM without opposition.



Hmmm ... we'll see.

Willem

[Slunnie]

But in this age of instant communication, why do we have to foot the bill for these overseas jaunts. If it is essential to send a body for educational purposes, why do we send a politician instead of an expert in the relivant field?

I'm assuming you're being serious here????

If whoever is leading the show needs the information to make the best decisions, then the best place to get it is from the horses mouth.

Of course he needs to travel OS, he is the one that has Australia playing on the world stage as well as the national domestic issues. I've got no doubt that he has a million other things to do rather than go on pointless junkets like people would like to believe. If he doesn't need to be there, then he wont be there, but obviously he feels that to make the best decisions that he needs to be there - thats for him to decide as the elected Prime minister.

If he was making uninofrmed decisions or not having the best information available to him, or operating in a global context or whatever, then we'd still be complaining.

[Slunnie]

Hmmm ... we'll see.

Willem
Something will have to change between now and then in that case.

[V8Ian]

I'm assuming you're being serious here????

If whoever is leading the show needs the information to make the best decisions, then the best place to get it is from the horses mouth.

Of course he needs to travel OS, he is the one that has Australia playing on the world stage as well as the national domestic issues. I've got no doubt that he has a million other things to do rather than go on pointless junkets like people would like to believe. If he doesn't need to be there, then he wont be there, but obviously he feels that to make the best decisions that he needs to be there - thats for him to decide as the elected Prime minister.

If he was making uninofrmed decisions or not having the best information available to him, or operating in a global context or whatever, then we'd still be complaining.
I'm not saying that Pollies should never go overseas, just that they seem to use any flimsy excuse for a junket. I believe the PM would have more need to travel than others. It is unrealistic to think that Brisbane City Councillers need to tour Europe and USA to see how their busses work.

[Slunnie]

I'm not saying that Pollies should never go overseas, just that they seem to use any flimsy excuse for a junket. I believe the PM would have more need to travel than others. It is unrealistic to think that Brisbane City Councillers need to tour Europe and USA to see how their busses work.
I really don't think that it's a junket, I doubt any pm has time for that. Id bet that generally they do the PC thing and be seen and then get on with it - they wont have time to stuff around with so much going on.

I don't know what the BCC people are doing, but that sounds like it would be the most logical thing to do if they are looking to spend millions on vehicles or to revise a system that affects probably thousands and thousands of people - they will want to make sure everything is suitable.... or then they cop if for not being thorough in such basic but critical research- its their heads on the block, a lot of money wasted and a lot of ****ed people if they get it wrong.

Look at what business people travel OS for - a lot lot less than this because they know the value of being there in person.

[numpty]

Hmmm ... we'll see.

Willem

I believe that the country had had it's fill of ultra right wing conservatism when Little Johnny was voted out. Or are you suggesting there is another change coming in the ranks of would be Liberal leaders.

[V8Ian]

I believe that the country had had it's fill of ultra right wing conservatism when Little Johnny was voted out. Or are you suggesting there is another change coming in the ranks of would be Liberal leaders.
They can't find one Numpty, what's with the plural?;):D

[JamesH]

I believe that the country had had it's fill of ultra right wing conservatism when Little Johnny was voted out.

Crikey! I hope not. :p

Anyway it seems the Liberal Party has had its fill of moderate me too trendies even if the country hasn't. I call it leading the community.:angel:

I get the feeling that as an electorate we are growing fond of the idea of giving people two terms to have a go and then if we like what they've done (or if the opposition hasn't got it together) then another term if not then out they go. Four terms we flush them irrespective of how good they are.

[abaddonxi]

I get the impression that it generally isn't the quality of the opposition leader than tumbles the incumbent so much as how ****ed the community is with the government of the day.

[dmdigital]

Don't worry Krudd will reappear as soon as he finds a camera he hasn't stood in front of;)


Why is voting compulsory in Australia? Would you vote for any of them if you didn't have to?

[BMKal]

I get the impression that it generally isn't the quality of the opposition leader than tumbles the incumbent so much as how ****ed the community is with the government of the day.

Would have to agree with this statement ;)

Rudd didn't win the last election - Howard lost it.

Similarly in WA State politics - Colin Barnett certainly didn't win the last election - Carpenter lost it.

If we see a change of government at the next federal election, it is unlikely to be because the Liberals will win the election - much more likely to be because Rudd and Dullard will lose it.

[Bush65]

What a relief, for a few seconds after seeing the heading I thought something had happened to Ricky Ponting!

[lardy]

blimey you guys calm down, are you suggesting there actually is any difference between conservative labour and conservative Liberals ??
If Rudd wasn't "getting a fair shake of the sauce bottle mate" we would probably have some other self serving pollie giving it his/her all to improve thier own existance at the expense of the country.
Who ever you vote for government wins!

[Disco_owner]

I understand nothing of Politics , Tis why I don't get involved in these sorts debates on the Interweb:angel:
However I still fail to see what little difference it makes if KRudd was here or overseas.
can't stand him anyway.:mad:

[willem]

I believe that the country had had it's fill of ultra right wing conservatism when Little Johnny was voted out. Or are you suggesting there is another change coming in the ranks of would be Liberal leaders.

Hmmm ... some here think Howard and Rudd are just variations on a conservative theme, others think that Howard was ultra right wing conservative!? I reckon Howard was a moderate conservative who did a good job for his country.

I have a relative who is a lobbyist with strong labor leanings who had a lot of opportunity to observe Howard at close quarters. and he too reckons Howard did a good job. Even if you don't agree with Howard's politics you would have to say that he gave his heart and soul to the country in his job.

As for the current Liberal leader ... don't write him off too quick! There's a lot of ability and determination there.

Willem

[hoadie72]

The current Liberal leader? I wonder if he'll still be in that position come the next election.

My view is that John Howard was the right leader for the wrong century / decade. He was 30-40 years too late with the policy he tried to implement and was completely out of touch with what most Australians wanted. Unfortunately it took 2, maybe 3, elections for the Australian public on a whole to realise this.

His heart might've been in the right place but it still didn't make him a good or great leader.

[WhiteD3]

There is a difference between the two parties and it's born out through our recent history with both Fed and State Govt.

Labour in, lots of spending on health, education, etc, unions slowly run rampant, economy goes to the dogs, major deficit and basically after some years we're buggered.

The voters crack it, bring in the Libs. Money crunch time, spending wound back, unions bought to heal, economy comes good, pollies go mad with reform programs, lose sight of the "people", everyone cracks it and votes in Labour on a reform policy.

....and away we go again. Pitcure the ABC logo, you'll get the picture.

The above is at the Fed level. Just to complicate things the states do exactly the opposite (timing wise) so we are in a perpetual state of state vs fed squabbling.

............and with those happy thoughts, I'm off to have a beer:angel:

[rockyroad]

Eventually we are going to need a conservative government to to get us out of debt post "economic stimulus".