November 18, 2007

Is Kevin Rudd real?

Interesting little letter in The Age yesterday:
"For all those people out there who plan to vote for Kevin Rudd, don't bother. He doesn't exist, he is a hologram. How do I know? I have written to him every month since he became leader of the Labor Party about various issues that interest me and I have not had one reply from him. If he is not a hologram, then he is obviously going to be an up-yours PM.

R.A.Marks, Drouin"
Meanwhile, five weeks and counting down: Julia Gillard is still the invisible Deputy Prime Minister in waiting.

I'm not aware of any MSM outlet raising questions about the missing Gillard.

Is the ALP ashamed of her?

Is she ashamed of herself?

Where has she been campaigning?

What about?

To whom?

Not a peep.

20 comments:

  1. Anonymous8:08 PM

    Rudd's no fool, that's for sure.
    Locked her in a cage that whining boor!
    He's gonna let her out,
    There is no doubt.
    When he's won the race...
    We'll soon be sick of her face!

    Alright, alright! I know.. I'm no Arthur Rimbaud.. Sigh.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I find it all so blatantly deceptive, sneaky, sleazy, underhanded.

    Aussie voters don't mind though.

    Jeez they're going to be in for a big surprise.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Photo shoot and all in the Sunday Herald. And this as well - and she's right.

    I too would keep the voice off air. Would it work to have her on screen and silent?

    Relentlessly Partisan

    ReplyDelete
  4. She appeared on Insiders as well. Or, is in Onsiders?

    About which Anabel Crabb has a witty little piece. A snippet:

    Can you imagine the rallies she'd organise these days? Fearless and bloodcurdling marches on the administration block, demanding an incremental correction of past funding injustices.

    You can almost hear their ragged cries.

    "What do we want? GRADUAL CHANGE! When do we want it? IN DUE COURSE!"

    Or a contemporary reworking perhaps of that durable old favourite: "Two! Four! Six! Eight! Yes, we are prepared to wait!"

    In 1871 the American writer Oliver Wendell Holmes remarked that "revolutions are not made by men in spectacles".

    Prescient of him, considering that he spoke 86 years before Kevin Rudd was even born.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous8:39 PM

    Hmm, Caz. Think W.A. could decide the election mate.
    The coalition's stocks have slowly been rising over here.
    Would'nt surprise me if they picked up Swan and Brand.
    That's why Howard is over here this week, I reckon. He knows the score.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Oooh, I wasn't suggesting they put her, or her voice, in any of the ads Father. Besides, neither party is making use of their front-benchers in advertising.

    Gillard asserts that IR is the biggest issue in this election: where are all her quotes and announcements about IR? Haven't heard more than a peep in the last five weeks. They made their core IR announcements prior to the campaign, but then shut up once the real campaign started.

    I am talking about "campaigning", not "advertising". Different beasts.

    She's playing the back-handed feminist card too Father, just like Hillary.

    "I am woman. I am big. I am clever. I am strong. I can run a country."

    Interspersed with:

    "Oh, poor little me, the boys are ganging up."

    When you get to these heights, you can't have both, it's one or the other ladies. Suck it up.

    It's not as though we're all so stupid that we're not aware of the intransigent patriarchal structures.

    You'd never hear Condi talking like that, despite her political career having been prematurely ruined. (She runs rings around Hillary and Gillard in terms of being a high achieving women, so does Madeline Albright.)

    ReplyDelete
  7. Kath

    I'm not tipping anything 'til around 8.00 pm Saturday night. ;-P

    Someone has to save the day, and it may as well be you folk out west.

    Of course, it might be all over by the time your booths even close.

    On the other hand, it would be a humdinger rescue if the west comes up from the rear and turns it around!

    ReplyDelete
  8. And Father, I don't read the Herald Sun, except on Sunday's, ('cause they include a better weekly teevee guide than the other papers).

    ReplyDelete
  9. Sydney's Sunday Herald Caz....or was it the Saturday Herald???

    Niether front bench has really campaigned. Costello took to the fray today and made something of a dill of himself asserting - in answer to a question about Coalition "splits" - that voters need to weigh up throwing away the constitutional checks and balances by electing the federal ALP producing same at "all levels" of government.

    And Tony Powers accuses me of hyperbole.

    When it was pointed out that the ALP did not "control" local government it became the lack of constitutional checks at state and federal. Blah, blah.

    Don't vote ALP and alter the constitution!

    He avoided the question though.

    Given the way those front benchers (from both sides) have performed, one can understand their being sat out. Haven't heard much more than diddly-squat from Swan since the Treasurers' debate.

    Just what was that reality show on Seven tonight featuring Howard and Costello? I caught a couple of snippets on the 7:30 Report. Has their campaign come to this - The Ozzie and Harriet show of Australian politics?

    Ozzie Howard: "There are things in every relationship that create tensions...

    Harriet Costello: "I'm a Holden man, he's a Ford man."


    Ozzie: "He's a bright bloke...quite bright and funny..."

    Harriet Costello: "He doesn't close the top on the toothpaste..."

    The campaign of the twosome - The Partnership - has descended to farce methinks.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I'm not so certain that things are that rosy in the West Kathy. The Coalition trails its 2004 vote 46 to 48.5; the ALP leads its 2004 vote 44 to 34.7.

    Two party preferred that's 50 to 55.6 (govn't); 50 to 44.6 (ALP).

    If that is reflected on Saturday the ALP must, in some measure, do better than 2004. The primary vote is up some 9% on 2004. The uniformity will be the thing.

    I'd suggest, though, that the numbers might be up for Ozzie and Harriet, on the tally room wall, by the time meaningful figures come through from the west.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Disgraceful that both front benches are too embarrassing to be let out in public until after the election Father.

    Worse when you consider this means that the leaders are the only faces of the campaign: Beige I and Beige 2.

    Jeez louise!

    Oh, shame on me, shame on me, I totally forgot to congratulate you on your brilliant protest chant:

    "What do we want? GRADUAL CHANGE! When do we want it? IN DUE COURSE!"

    Indeed, indeed.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous10:08 PM

    I actually thought, that the Howard and Costello interview was quite revealing.
    It certainly proved that they were quite comfortable with one another. No obvious hatred or dilike for one each other there.

    And, as was mentioned, it would certainly have been very hard to work together for eleven years, had there not been some mutual respect between the two.
    As you say Mike, a bit like Ozzie and Harriet.
    None of the supposed animosity on display between the two.


    Now, can anyone imagine Rudd and Gillard could possibly have such a relaxed and convivial relationship?

    No siree!

    Think Gladys and Abner.. You'd be closer to the mark..

    ReplyDelete
  13. Annabel Crabb's chant. From today's Herald.

    Did I fail to make that plain? Bad me.

    Yes it's quite amusing. She is quite amusing as a journo.

    I wrote my bit - over at Jacob's - that I'd thought of lobbing as a hand grenade elsewhere. Last night - all tired and emotional. Just altered a few errors of syntax...

    ReplyDelete
  14. I don't know about that Kath.

    Gillard has done a pretty beaut job of saying nothing, nodding, smiling and gazing adoringly at Rudd.

    Oh, alright, and throwing in the odd bit of a girly giggle and making little jokes. Tee hee, tee hee.

    It's what she does when she knows she's going to put her foot in it and lose the entire election if she says something truthful.

    ReplyDelete
  15. No, no, nooo Kathy. Ma and Pa Kettle.

    Can't you just see Julia ringin' the Caucus bell: VICTUALS!! Come get 'em!!"

    All the party-room boys and gals come chargin' in...

    ReplyDelete
  16. No, my fault Father, bit tired and emotional myself - sick & tired in literal sense though.

    Damn! Have not had a chance to check your post at Jacob's, and running out of steam. Will have to when I get home tomorrow!!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Yes, I too am heading for the fart sack. Long day today and same tomorrow.

    Night you all...

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anonymous10:23 PM

    And Gladys Cravats(not sure of the spelling) has always run off to good old Abner when the going gets tough!
    She shrieks and carries on like a mad woman, with that horrible grating voice!
    Nobody takes her in the least bit seriously..
    Dig?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Perhaps she's Mr Ed's mare Julia Ed?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Oh dear. David Bradbury, ALP candidate for Lindsay (Jackie Kelly's seat) seems to be suffering a Rove attack similar to Karl's celebrated destruction of John McCain in 1999:

    THE Liberal Party was flailing last night after a senior NSW party official and the husband of outgoing MP Jackie Kelly were implicated in a dirty tricks campaign involving race hate in Ms Kelly's former western suburbs seat of Lindsay.

    The ALP has written to the Australian Electoral Commission demanding action be taken after Ms Kelly's husband, Gary Clark, and NSW Liberal Party state executive member Jeff Egan were caught distributing bogus pamphlets in Lindsay portraying Labor as sympathisers of Islamic terrorists.


    Bradbury now only needs to have fathered an Islamic "Love-child". Perhaps that will be found in Rudd's past?

    ReplyDelete