Kevin Rudd

[drsmith]

Re: Does Rudd inspire confidence?

Are the leadership cracks widening ?

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...diction-rejected/story-fn59niix-1226427825685

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-new...es-leadership-speculation-20120717-227h0.html

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Chicken Kev

Kevin Rudd is a Twister Box, Original.

He has failed, and failed miserably.

Let us hope he continues to destabilise the ALP.

What an absolute tosser.

What a choker.

By not challenging he has proven that Gillard and the Unions were correct in dumping him as PM.

gg

 

[drsmith]

Re: Chicken Kev

Fairfax's Peter Hartcher has some interesting thoughts in the following video,

http://media.smh.com.au/video-national-news/national-news

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Re: Chicken Kev

Mark Latham nails the Rudd persona in this article, a transcript of a conversation between Latham and Paul Murray who I believe is a media identity.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/hes-always-inflating-his-numbers-latham-unleashes-extraordinary-diatribe-on-rudd-fitzgibbon-and-richardson-20130321-2gik7.html

"We go through this every time about the inflated Rudd numbers. Kevin Rudd put his hand up for the Labor leadership six times, and in each case he has dramatically inflated his numbers in leaks to the media.
"You had silly Kieran Gilbert on Sky News today saying: 'Oh, will it be like last time, when Rudd had the numbers and then they fell apart when the ballot was held – his numbers dissipated.'
"Well, he didn't have the numbers in the first place; I mean, I just get amazed at the gullible nature of the media where, time after time after time after time, they buy the Rudd BS.
Advertisement
"He's always inflating his numbers. He's now got [Graham] Richardson, who, more than any other person, has wrecked the modern culture of the Labor Party. Why is Richardson supporting Rudd, and in there working on the numbers? Because Gillard won't listen to him, you see.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...-richardson-20130321-2gik7.html#ixzz2OAeniBSK

gg

 

[Calliope]

Re: Chicken Kev

Fairfax's Peter Hartcher has some interesting thoughts in the following video,

http://media.smh.com.au/video-national-news/national-news

That was an excellent summation of today's events. Hartcher, who has always been a Rudd supporter, says that Rudd has hung his supporters out to dry, and they will be reluctant to to support any future Rudd challenge. The Rudd brand is stuffed

I agree with him that there has been no other occasion where the Labor party has inflicted so much damage on their leader and their alternative leader in one day.

Go Tony.

 

[MrBurns]

The next poll will be interesting, who would want Rudd as preferred PM over Gillard ? It's no longer a question anyone would bother answering.

 

[drsmith]

Re: Chicken Kev

In the Peter Hartcher interview above, at about 7min he comments that Labor has chosen to stick with it's union affiliations and lose the next election.

He also comments that Kevin Rudd couldn't credibly stand for leader again. The only thing that's left for him is whether the prospect of a wipe out brings the Caucus to his door begging.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Re: Chicken Kev

My contacts in Griffith tell me that Chicken Kev is down to a 5% margin in Griffith on internal polling.

I believe he is going to do a mail out to his supporters to get up and going to have him re-elected.

If he has dropped to 5% this would make his hold tenuous, and Griffith a marginal seat.

Feeding the chooks may not suffice for Chicken Kev.

gg

 

[MrBurns]

Re: Chicken Kev

My contacts in Griffith tell me that Chicken Kev is down to a 5% margin in Griffith on internal polling.

I believe he is going to do a mail out to his supporters to get up and going to have him re-elected.

If he has dropped to 5% this would make his hold tenuous, and Griffith a marginal seat.

Feeding the chooks may not suffice for Chicken Kev.

gg

A more pathetic sight would be hard to find
Australian ambassador in Afghanistan for Kev

 

[Julia]

Kevin couldn't stay out of the limelight for long. He's all over the media today proclaiming his epiphany on same sex marriage.

Does anyone care? I wouldn't have thought so, but it has been the lead item on ABC radio news since last night!

 

[Bintang]

Kevin couldn't stay out of the limelight for long. He's all over the media today proclaiming his epiphany on same sex marriage.

Does anyone care? I wouldn't have thought so, but it has been the lead item on ABC radio news since last night!

Is the any chance that Griffiths has a disproportionately high number of gay couples who want to tie the knot?
In case no-one has noticed I am a serial cynic when it comes to politicians (both sides). Whenever they utter anything I figure that self-interest must be close by in one form or other.

 

[Calliope]

Whenever they utter anything I figure that self-interest must be close by in one form or other.

The clown used the word "ceremoany" which as far as I am concerned destroys any credibility.

 

[Julia]

Is the any chance that Griffiths has a disproportionately high number of gay couples who want to tie the knot?
In case no-one has noticed I am a serial cynic when it comes to politicians (both sides). Whenever they utter anything I figure that self-interest must be close by in one form or other.

I think your cynicism is shared by much of the electorate. What this latest bit of grandstanding indicated to me was (a) a possibility such as you've suggested re gay couples in his electorate, or even more (b) that he has never actually given up on the notion of again leading the Labor Party.

Sure, he has said it will never happen, but we all know how much weight can be given to any statement by any politician.

 

[Some Dude]

Sure, he has said it will never happen, but we all know how much weight can be given to any statement by any politician.

I'm not suggesting this will happen but I did ponder today to what extent it may shake things up if the ALP were to propose gay marriage as part of their platform for re-election. Would that recast the electorate from a polling perspective and is that behind Kevin's epiphany.

 

[sptrawler]

I'm not suggesting this will happen but I did ponder today to what extent it may shake things up if the ALP were to propose gay marriage as part of their platform for re-election. Would that recast the electorate from a polling perspective and is that behind Kevin's epiphany.

Spot on dude, Kev doesn't need the money, just the glory.
Nothing wrong with that, if he has the interest of the nation at heart.

Last time round, it was a bull in a china shop incident.lol

There is nothing wrong with a rich person with a social agenda.
The problem is with a person using a social agenda for personal gain.
I think Kev has his heart in the right spot, however the two bullet holes in his feet seem to be a problem.

 

[Some Dude]

Last time round, it was a bull in a china shop incident.lol

Agreed.

I think Kev has his heart in the right spot, however the two bullet holes in his feet seem to be a problem.

He does seem to have a gift for it but he doesn't seem alone in that one. Regardless of other political opinions, this government has shot themselves in the foot so often they deserve to lose for that alone.

Do you think the wider Australian community is ready for such? I'm not convinced they are, regardless of my opinion on the matter. Further, even if this is some "Hannibal over the alp's" (get it.. alp.. ) maneuver to outflank and wedge the Coalition, I just can't see support crystalising behind a single issue like that that is not perceived to directly affect the individual voter.

 

[sptrawler]

Agreed.



He does seem to have a gift for it but he doesn't seem alone in that one. Regardless of other political opinions, this government has shot themselves in the foot so often they deserve to lose for that alone.

Do you think the wider Australian community is ready for such? I'm not convinced they are, regardless of my opinion on the matter. Further, even if this is some "Hannibal over the alp's" (get it.. alp.. ) maneuver to outflank and wedge the Coalition, I just can't see support crystalising behind a single issue like that that is not perceived to directly affect the individual voter.

I think Kev is no idiot, Labor party does but generally they're idiots.
He would have learnt a lot from shooting from the hip, he is Labors best hope.
Sadly the party has grouped behind the union bimbos, it will be their downfall.IMO

 

[Tisme]

I like to look back on things to see how they played out. An interesting observation is how the Lowy Institute seemed rather professional in its assessment (at the time) of Kevin. This is not one for the congenital haters, if only to encourage a degree of +ve.

Kevin Rudd's China legacy
16 March 2012 6:48AM
Whatever you might think of Kevin Rudd, he was certainly active internationally, both as Foreign Minister and as Prime Minister. But what were his achievements and what will his legacy be?

This post is intended to kick-start a discussion of what Rudd achieved in foreign affairs and begins with his China policy. We want to hear from you too, so please write in: blogeditor@lowyinistitute.org .

A major aspect of the Rudd years was China. At the time of the Chinese Olympic torch protests in Australia, I received an unusual call to come to the Lodge on an unrelated matter, and remember waiting for some time as Rudd dealt with the shenanigans the Chinese were pulling. When eventually we sat down to talk, it was not hard to discern that the Chinese were clearly (and seemingly pointlessly) rubbing the new PM the wrong way.

But almost from the get-go the media got Rudd wrong on China. Far from being the Manchurian Candidate, WikiLeaks cables revealed him to be as clear-headed about China and Chinese negotiating strategies as he was in private during that meeting at the Lodge.

According to officials, Rudd led serious Cabinet-level contemplation of Australia's approach to its single largest trading partner, and although it has not been made public until today, produced the first ever (and still secret) Cabinet-approved strategy mapping out our approach to China.

Under his watch, Australia also produced a highly ambitious Defence White Paper, setting up what is essentially a Marine Expeditionary Force designed to be plugged directly into any major US operation in the Pacific (read defence against China). And although it was his successor as PM who ultimately oversaw the delivery, Rudd must be credited with laying some of the groundwork that has seen the US establish what is basically a permanent military base in Australia.

But Rudd was not all muscle and no diplomacy. His Peking University speech was an attempt to engage the Chinese Government in a new style of dialogue. And he allocated $100 million to establish a China Centre at the ANU that should aspire to be the world's leading research centre on the subject.

For all the claims about being the Manchurian Candidate, Rudd's approach towards China was about as hard-nosed as you are likely to see from either side of Australian politics. It was brutal in its acknowledgment of the downside risks China's rise presents while championing the opportunity.

What also seems noteworthy about Rudd's approach was that in most instances he stood his ground with the Chinese Government. Even as China overtook Japan to become Australia's largest trading partner, Rudd did not succumb to the temptation to lie down when the Chinese tried to steamroll Australian principles and values.

In the torch relay dispute, despite repeated attempts, the Chinese Ambassador failed to exercise Chinese sovereignty in Australia. What's more, Rebiya Kadeer got her visa (and the Chinese Government made her and her cause famous in Australia), and even if it was untidy, China was unable to buy a larger stake in Rio Tinto. The Dalai Lama was the clear exception to this values-based diplomacy, but maybe Mr Rudd and his ministerial successor agree he is just a 'Cunning Monk'.

What will Rudd's China legacy be? Well, if 'Thoughtlines' is any indication, his successor has a somewhat different approach towards China. That might see the corners of the Rudd approach smoothed. But ultimately, Rudd's China policy will be used by all states with a major stake in the Asia Pacific region. China's authoritarian leadership and massive development challenges make predictions about whether it will rise peacefully a best guess only. Any prudent government will have to hedge.

and how his legacy appears to be in lock step with current approaches:

Top government official offers clear view of how Tony Abbott sees the world

June 30, 2015
John Garnaut
Asia Pacific editor for Fairfax Media

Michael Thawley's seven minutes of analysis, delivered from hand-written notes at a high-level Canberra forum, reflect his considered personal views.

But they also amount to the clearest exposition of how Tony Abbott sees the world that has ever been delivered.


Thawley was the key foreign policy adviser to John Howard and is a mentor to Abbott's national security adviser, Andrew Shearer.

These men don't speak for each other but they share a common perspective.

Thawley said in his speech it would be "crazy to bet against China" given its extraordinary and unbroken 35-year economic performance.

But he also pointed to the astonishingly difficult economic transition that China has to make from being an investment-dependent economy, where cadres man the gates of capital, to one that is mediated by market institutions and driven by hundreds of millions of autonomous consumers.

"This is a truly huge challenge and if China does succeed it won't be the same place afterwards," said Thawley.

"It won't be a democracy, maybe, but it won't have the same institutions that it does now. It will be a very different country."

In Thawley's view, the siloed, stratified, secretive and security-centric nature of Communist Party power is as limiting as it can be formidable.

These structures will either constrain China's continuing economic rise, or they will radically change, and the current structures are unsuited to China assuming a role of genuine global leadership.

There is room to question Thawley's analysis of how Chinese leaders will respond to the competing demands of dictatorship and growth.

But before he is lambasted for indulging conservative ideology, or even neo-conservative ideology, his critics should look more closely at the growing gap between the economic reforms that China's leaders said would deliver and what they have achieved.

They should look back at how US President Barack Obama tried to make room for China on the global stage, but was treated with contempt.

And critics should look more closely at the history of the overlapping network of security arrangements that now connect Australia, the US and almost every major country in the region.

These networks have been constructed by Howard, Rudd, Gillard and Abbott, with remarkable continuity, because none of these prime ministers have believed that Chinese "primacy" is either inevitable or desirable.

It's just that nobody has tried to spell out a rationale before.

Whether or not you agree with Thawley's views on China it's a good thing that somebody in Canberra has finally had the courage to express them.

 

[SirRumpole]

I like to look back on things to see how they played out. An interesting observation is how the Lowy Institute seemed rather professional in its assessment (at the time) of Kevin. This is not one for the congenital haters, if only to encourage a degree of +ve.



and how his legacy appears to be in lock step with current approaches:

Imo China's long term strategy is to make us economically dependent on them in order to make us less likely to speak out against their military incursions in our area.

With all the cow towing to Chine over trade agreements it's going to be more difficult over the years to separate our economic ties from our military and security interests.

When CHAFTA is signed, China will have taken a big step towards achieving its long term military strategy.

 

[noco]

Imo China's long term strategy is to make us economically dependent on them in order to make us less likely to speak out against their military incursions in our area.

With all the cow towing to Chine over trade agreements it's going to be more difficult over the years to separate our economic ties from our military and security interests.

When CHAFTA is signed, China will have taken a big step towards achieving its long term military strategy.

So in your opinion, the LUG party has given up on the flood of Chinese workers invading our country and has now started a new campaign that at some time in the future we will be threatened with the might of the Chinese military strength?
Really?????...you must be joking....The little yellow men invading south east Asia to get to Australia.

As Richo says..."What ever it takes".