A little over a week after the ousting of Kevin Rudd and the ascension of Julia Gillard to Prime Minister, I spotted this odd juxtaposition of new releases in a bookstore at Sydney airport on my way home. I thought it worth a snap.
The authors of the Gillard book either went into hyper overdrive or had the book waiting in the wings to get it published that fast.
Pundits in AU were saying Rudd’s downfall started with the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) and was sealed with the advocacy of the mining super profits tax. Oh, and boat people didn’t help.
Rudd was the first prime minister in office to be dumped by his own party before completing his term. That’s gotta hurt.
Why Julia Gillard may comfortably win a coming election.
If some other world leaders start to address the same issue they may haver a good chance to get elected also.
…before completing his first term. Dumping PMs mid term has been done before.
REPLY: yes but as I understand it, not by his own party. -A
Les Francis says:
July 4, 2010 at 6:03 pm
“Why Julia Gillard may comfortably win a coming election.
Ms Gillard again signalled a policy shift, pledging to cast aside “political correctness”.
If some other world leaders start to address the same issue they may haver a good chance to get elected also.”
Bring that on! I say once we’ve kicked this AGW baloney into touch we all start on political bloody correctness! Maybe once we get that sorted we could all make some progress.
Actually I was really happy to see this change happen, and happen the way it did. There must be a way to remove a prime minister from office without having to go to an election, especially in Australia where the odds of a successful ‘No confidence’ motion are negligible.
In Australia, the party is elected to government, and the governing party must have the ability to censure the prime minister to prevent ongoing and increasing damage to the country brought about by the actions of the prime minister. They are the only group in a position to act in defence of the national interests, and all credit to Labour for doing so.
What a weird world.
The name “Political Correctness” originated as something of a joke, literally in a comic strip, and was used to make fun of the extreme left wing. But now it is deadly serious totalitarian ideology, – cultural Marxism. The totalitarian nature of “Political Correctness” is revealed clearly on college campuses where the student or faculty member who dares to cross any of the lines set up by the “victims” groups or ideas that PC revolves around, quickly find themselves in judicial trouble.
Where as Scientific Skeptic(ism) originally was a scientific, or practical, epistemological position (or paradigm) where one did not accept the veracity of claims until solid evidence is produced, it now a derogatory term used with scorn by our “Political Correct” world leaders intent on applying “Lysenkoism” to all sciences.
Every word, every phrase, gesture and inflection is carefully stage-managed to sooth a troubled electorate that elected, nearly 3 years ago, a leader that was ‘Howard lite’. John Howard was our long serving conservative PM until 2007. The same people that put Rudd in power also deposed him and put Gillard in. Nothing is spontaneous, all is stage-managed to win the next election tipped for late August.
Once back in it is back to usual soft socialist spin.
Oh! really?
Check after the election if this is true.
Machiavelli would be pleased.
Perth, West Australia is recording some of the coolest days in the last 15 years.
http://www.inmycommunity.com.au/news-and-views/local-news/Cold-weather-sparks-fire-warning/7561093/
The callous demonize fossil fuels for saving us from freezing, and they say it is caused by global warming 🙂
Chris Polis
There is. But Kevin didn’t want to go for a swim off Portsea. 🙂
Yes prime ministers have been ousted mid-term before, but never during the first term.
And for what it’s worth, I think Julia Gillard is a closet sceptic.
Regarding strange juxtapositions.
The “Fuddruckers” burger chain in the USA had financial
difficulties last year.
It is a pity there wasn’t an outlet in OZ, I am sure they would
have done good business.
At least in Australia (and other systems where the effective head of state is the leader of the party with most seats in the parliament), a non-performing (and often a well-performing) PM or whatever, can be legally removed BEFORE the elected term is up.
I can think of another country where this ability (non-performing only) would be both a national and international advantage.
There is a hot debate about PC brewing in the UK now. Here is the book that started it all …
The Retreat of Reason: Political Correctness and the Corruption of Public Debate in Modern Britain
by Anthony Browne – 2006
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Retreat-Reason-Political-Correctness-Corruption/dp/1903386500/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1254127721&sr=1-1
“The effects of PC culture that is so strongly enforced by our media and government are clear when we see how individuals have to behave day to day to ensure they are not offending some group or other. Browne brings home his point when introducing hypocrisy in PC culture, misleading statistical evidence to support PC objectives and the new victim culture that is so evident in today’s society.”
Great Stuff! … and it is only 90 pages short …
“Rudd was the first prime minister in office to be dumped by his own party before completing his term. That’s gotta hurt.”
Most importantly, he wasn’t dumped because of any policy difference with Labor or his replacement: It was all personality and leadership style.
That’s Australian democracy for you: Vote for Rudd, get someone who decides they don’t like Rudd.
Prime minister isn’t the same as the president as you don’t directly vote got a prime minister as you do for the president in America.
Americans often get confused by the Westminster System.
Australia’s (and Canada’s and Britain’s) Prime Minister is most closely equivalent to the House of Representatives majority leader in the US. Like that position it is an appointment of the majority party in the lower house. He/she isn’t chosen by the electorate.
Same with the Australia PM. Although elections have revolved around the party leaders increasingly as personality politics has risen. Rudd, like Gillard is only voted for by her own electorate (one of 150 seats across the country)
Rudd was removed because he couldn’t negotiate, couldn’t see the weaknesses in his own position, understand alternative perspectives, understand risk and uncertainty, had strong opinions on stuff he knew nothing about, and refused to listen to the genuine concerns of an entire major representative body of the Austrlaina community-miners. Australians hate this kind of person, and that is why he had to go. He was only useful in presenting a strong persona to get into power, but useless in actually understanding what actually being a Prime Minister is about. He was Australia’s George Bush, never should have go there in the first place.
This is a good read on the (near-OZ) NZ situation w/ new ETS (read comments also):
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10656324
Regarding the above article (link), I wonder if this (quoted below) influences activities at Harvard Earth Sciences?
“Will the money paid to the Government through the ETS cover the money to be paid to all those with interests in forestry who include the Harvard endowment fund?
The global investment fund of the US university has a big stake in Kaiangaroa Forest and they’ll be tickled pink to think they’re getting such a splendid return.”
Not that Law these seems to have produced very many winners lately (boola boola).
“He was Australia’s George Bush, never should have go there in the first place.”
Actually, he was Australia’s Barack Obama. No substance, just spin to feed the daily news cycle. And, even more to the point, no real regard for advancing the national interest. He was more concerned with getting a seat on the U.N. Security Council than in good governance of the country. Sound familiar?
As for Gillard, she comes from the extreme left of the Labor Party, formerly a died in the wool communist, which may explain why they’re going to such lengths to try to appease more conservative voters. Then, as so famously stated by the former (and now disgraced) Environment Minister Peter Garrett: Once we get in, we’ll change everything. I guess it will serve us right if we’re taken in twice in a row.
This is the Austrialian experience that mimicks Barack Obama. All talk and no results. Eutopia is not a result. It is an imagination. Rudd openly spoke of what human interests he wanted to damage.
Is he smart enough to understand what his problem is after he was evicted?
“Beauty is only skin deep.” I fear poor Julia is not very deep and –like The Obama, The Great One, The Magnificient, The Wise– will be a great disappointment to a vast majority of voters because of her inability to govern ‘for the good of all’. The Web sure has changed politics. Unfortunately, the last to realize this are the politicians and the Party Bosses. They still think they can get away with grand theft and murder and no one will ever know.
Rudd’s veneer cracked and all could see the hollow man underneath.
His position as the chief salesman of the Australian Labor Party became indefensible. His dictatorial style within the party, caucus and cabinet became intolerable. His insistance on getting his way, regardless of the consequences, even if he had to micro-manage every hare-brained idea into disaster himself, were getting on the public nose.
He’s done a lot of damage to “Brand: Labor”. The ALP was desperate to replace Rudd with somebody more electable.
And Rudd’s replacement is selling the same used car. The only change is the fluffy dice dangling from the mirror.
re Gillards chance of warming the seat for long.
they picked her as a patsy to mollify us, while I like a female PM- unless she outright signs and declares NO carbon Fraud to happen.(is that a Core promise??)
sends the boats back,
sacks garret,
and removes our Kyoto bondage.
she will be out soon too.
.
Gillard has said that she believes in Anthropogenic climate warming and that it’s caused by carbon dioxide, and that Australia needa an Emmissions Trading Scheme. For this reason I would never vote for her, but the opposition and the Greens have even worse policies in this area. What is one to do? Here in Canberra and also in Perth it’s been colder than we would have expected, yet politicians still jabber on with the MSM about getting rid of “carbon” – in other words, stopping electricity generation by burning cheap and plentiful coal! They’re either mad or the most dreadful hypocrites! Bring on the next Ice Age I might say, except that it’s clear that warmer is both healthier and more productive!