Although what Rudd did was wrong in meeting with Burke, I don't see what the huge fuss is about. Is there evidence that Rudd made a deal with Burke?
I bet if it was around the other way, and it was John Howard it would be a big deal. Its a bit of a cop out to say, yeah look its not as bad as AWB or nuclear power yada yada yada. It wasnt just a minor oversight on Rudds behalf its titanic like iceberg off a mistake. It sounds like it was back when he was busy trying to get numbers so he could oust Beazley. 3 members of labor in Perth have got the sack over this guy so it came as no surprise when Rudd did everything but look at Costello while he was verbalising him.
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” ~ Winston Churchill
Yeah I understand this may sound Labor biased, but there is no evidence that Rudd did a deal with him. You can't find him guilty of what "may have happened". Whereas with Howard there was clear evidence against him with AWB and Iraq, but because he determines the enquiries (making him above the law), obviously he didn't allow any findings of incompentency against himself.
I bet if it was around the other way, and it was John Howard it would be a big deal. Its a bit of a cop out to say, yeah look its not as bad as AWB or nuclear power yada yada yada. It wasnt just a minor oversight on Rudds behalf its titanic like iceberg off a mistake. It sounds like it was back when he was busy trying to get numbers so he could oust Beazley. 3 members of labor in Perth have got the sack over this guy so it came as no surprise when Rudd did everything but look at Costello while he was verbalising him.
Huge difference. Rudd came straight out and said "it was me." Not only that he outed two of his colleagues whose names hadn't even been mentioned by anyone. In other boards even die hard Howard supporters are praising the way Rudd has calmly and openly handled this.
Difference with Howard and it has been a pattern from the day he got into power;
Very first thing he does is deny anything took place or anything happened (children overboard is a perfect example of this), and he and all his ministers keep denying it until it either goes away or he has to move onto phase two.
If the evidence is overwhelming that something has actually occurred that is not quite legit, then he goes into a savage round of shooting the messenger and mercilessly beating up on them, (Wilke is an example of this). That is kept up until the thing either dies down or he has to move onto stage three.
Stage three is blame shift to everyone else but his government (AWB is an example of this) whilst putting out as much flak and side issues as possible. Howard is the master at coming up with distractions when he is in trouble. If that doesn't work then move to stage four.
Run a stacked enquiry as far into the future as possible and then use what is obviously a white wash to state your innocence, and the final out;
Blame a fall guy, sack them but give them a huge reward and payout along with a prime job or position somewhere for taking the fall.
There in lies the lesson on Howard getting away with dozens of improprieties over the years, and why he is so different to the open and honest way Rudd has conducted himself.
If Howard is so open and honest ask yourself why is his the most secretive government in our history, why are public servants and bureaucrats under the threat of the terrorist act is the reveal anything about Howard's goings on, why he has closed reporters getting even basic info under FOI and why has he been the only PM in our history to sound proof his office at great expense, which is already in the middle of a very secure area?
Everyone is entitled to be stupid, but some abuse the privilege.
So you cant see any wrong in Rudd's behaviour at all.
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” ~ Winston Churchill
I bet if it was around the other way, and it was John Howard it would be a big deal. . . . .
Howards gaffs have made world headlines AWB = U.N sanctions crossover. Children overboard and many Ministerial stuff-ups that have been quickly swept aside . . this will be a storm in a teacup too . . just give it a week in 'news time' and a tsunami, earthquake or death of somebody famous will attract the publics attention again . . the public tire of this political nonsense very quickly.
I will be out of the country for the first 12 days of BB . how clever am I ! Smart enough to leave the 'dead-heads' behind
So you cant see any wrong in Rudd's behaviour at all.
...and you can't see anything wrong with Howard and many of his ministers over the last 10 years. There have been dozens of things, many far worse with the most recent his secret meeting to set up a nuclear power plant with his close mates ensuring they make millions off us tax payers, that was before he set up a multi million dollar enquiry to find on the viability of nuclear.
...and I said Rudd openly admitted his stuff up and said he was wrong so either hang him or let him get on with his work. That is far more than Howard has ever done. Howard is like Fonzie trying to say wrong in front of a mirror.
Everyone is entitled to be stupid, but some abuse the privilege.
Ian Campbell has come out presented all the facts which show he has done nothing wrong but be guilty by association, and as a result has resigned. Is Kevin Rudd headed for the same fate? A total of 5 ministers have lost their jobs.
Im not sure if Rudd should resign but I thought it was kind of childish that he called for an election. Did it sound a bit desperate to you?
Im pretty sure I know what the response will be from the regulars, but don't mad at me I am just updating the story.
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” ~ Winston Churchill
Ian Campbell has come out presented all the facts which show he has done nothing wrong but be guilty by association, and as a result has resigned. Is Kevin Rudd headed for the same fate? A total of 5 ministers have lost their jobs.
Im not sure if Rudd should resign but I thought it was kind of childish that he called for an election. Did it sound a bit desperate to you?
Im pretty sure I know what the response will be from the regulars, but don't mad at me I am just updating the story.
Ian Campbell has come out presented all the facts which show he has done nothing wrong but be guilty by association, and as a result has resigned. Is Kevin Rudd headed for the same fate? A total of 5 ministers have lost their jobs.
The libs with egg on their face yet again. They spend an entire day slanging mud at Rudd for meeting with Burke and then one of their own ministers comes out and says he also met with Burke and then resigns, clearly given a golden hand-shake by Johnny because it allows Johnny and the Libs to continue their childish tirade against Rudd (who has apologised, unprecedented for Howard) without Labor being able to hit back at Campbell or the Libs for their involvement with Burke.
Quoted from The_Pragmatic_One
Im not sure if Rudd should resign but I thought it was kind of childish that he called for an election. Did it sound a bit desperate to you?
Yes that is a bit childish.
I still don't see what all the hoo-ha is about, the Libs are lining up one by one in Parliament like a bunch of monkeys with poo in their hands waiting to fling it at Rudd. Let's say Rudd did consult Burke over the leadership or even made a deal with him, what's wrong with that? Isn't that "just politics"? Isn't it normal to deal with lobbyists and "numbers men"? In the end Rudd only got 2 out of 9 votes from WA anyway.
Sounds to me like the Libs are blowing this up bigger than Iraq/Nuclear/AWB to take the focus off their own failures. It's completely childish.
The libs have become hysterical as before this they had nothing on Rudd, all they could attack him about was he was inexperienced or he was "trying to be everything to everyone" which is not a bad thing.
Let's put some context on Ian Campbell's resignation. He has resigned from Cabinet not from Government. The Liberal party refuse to rule out that Ian Campbell won't be given another ministry position, a new cushy job on higher money and/or a golden handshake.
Howard himself ruled out removing Ian Campbell from the party or punishing him financially in any way.
Also Howard stated that Rudd must go as nobody who is not open and candid with the Australian people should be allowed to rule, whether they are the PM or potential PM.
Wait on, this wouldn't be the PM who faced the AWB commission and along with this Foreign minister and Trade minister answered every question with; "I don't recall", "I have no recollection of that meeting", "I can't remember", "I may have met that person by can't remember doing so", etc.
The PM who deliberately lied on Children Overboard so as to demonise refugees.
The PM and his Foreign minister who directly lied in parliament over Iraq.
The PM who through closing down FOI has stopped all journalist getting information on his government's actions and policies.
The PM who sound proofed his office so others could not him ranting and raving (I've heard him in full flight and watching this little man loose it is something ludicrous to behold).
The PM who has bought in punishments of up to 20 years jail under the terrorism act for any public servant or personal staffer whistle blowers who honestly reveals Howard's or his government's misdemeanors.
The PM who has a secret tax payer funded backroom dirt committee.
The PM who has instigated the most secretive and closed government in our history.
Surely not that wasn't the PM who said our PM's should be open and candid.
Everyone is entitled to be stupid, but some abuse the privilege.
Let's put some context on Ian Campbell's resignation. He has resigned from Cabinet not from Government. The Liberal party refuse to rule out that Ian Campbell won't be given another ministry position, a new cushy job on higher money and/or a golden handshake.
Howard himself ruled out removing Ian Campbell from the party or punishing him financially in any way.
I heard Campbell may be re-instated post election.
Quoted from boomslanger
Also Howard stated that Rudd must go as nobody who is not open and candid with the Australian people should be allowed to rule, whether they are the PM or potential PM.
Does he think we the public are retarted (no offense to those that are retarded)? Oh yes, we keep voting for him .
Quoted from boomslanger
Wait on, this wouldn't be the PM who faced the AWB commission and along with this Foreign minister and Trade minister answered every question with; "I don't recall", "I have no recollection of that meeting", "I can't remember", "I may have met that person by can't remember doing so", etc.
We need some clever Keating-esque people on the other side of Politics. Someone that's going to question Johnny's age and if he's too old to be in Politics because his memory seems to fail him too many times. Someone that would say "Glad you could make it to Parliament today John, we thought you may have forgotten, and it's good to see you remembered to wear pants as well".
There's no-one witty in Labor any more. And boy does Costello look like a pork-chop carrying on in Parliament with his attempted wit (it can be amusing at times), we had been thinking Costello must watching old videos of Keating in Parliament and Stephen Smith said it on Insiders. I think Costello has a big picture of Keating which he kisses before he goes to bed every night.
Quoted from boomslanger
The PM who sound proofed his office so others could not him ranting and raving (I've heard him in full flight and watching this little man loose it is something ludicrous to behold).
That's funny. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so serious that he's our PM.
Who's advising Rudd, can I see a change of staff soon?
I know who was advising him before
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” ~ Winston Churchill
Well, here's my 2 cents then. I think the Gov have failed to demonstrate that Rudd ever had any intention of making any arrangement with Burke. Maybe that was Burke's motive for arranging the whole thing, but Rudd didn't necessarily know that. The Gov say its inconceivable that Rudd didn't know the purpose of the meeting, but its not hard to imagine a scenario where Rudd thinks its just a meal at a restaurant, but Burke sees it as an opportunity to build a relationship with a possible future PM. Maybe Burke just didn't tell Rudd this was a 'networking' exercise, possibly for fear that Rudd would run the other way.
By the way, as for Rudd not looking at Costello etc, I think its pretty common practice. Howard often has his chair turned to the side and doesn't look when a question's being asked.
[face=Geneva][/face][color=blue][/color]Ant farms- cruel and barbaric, or not that bad really?
Logged
. . what a mess. 
Does he think we the public are retarted (no offense to those that are retarded)? Oh yes, we keep voting for him .
