Sunday, August 5, 2012

The cost of free speech, It ain't cheap mate!!

Tony Abbott is warning the creation of a "media watchdog" as being a "political correctness police". This is indeed interesting rhetoric from a man who calls himself a former journalist.  Abbott’s misinformation, character assassination, obstructionist political divide and concur strategy defines his leadership. The opposition is the beneficiary of a tide of lies and propaganda never seen before in Australian politics in what can only be described as unchecked commentary masquerading as journalism.  Everything from the economy to social reform, infrastructure to the NDIS is blatantly misrepresented in an orchestrated assault on anything that differs from neo-conservatism.  Its a non stop political opportunistic football match that forgets the rules and fair play. Its win at any cost playing the man not the game. This mis-information war, fuelling every conceivable prejudice furthers his political agenda by the consistent use of one word “NO”. All the hallmarks of Edward Bernays 1928 book “Propaganda” are at play here. Spruik the lie enough times so as to create doubt and even the smallest amount of traction sets the wheels spinning and mud flying. . Insecurity, doubt fear, hatred and mis-information all followed to the letter, but how much sticks? In a progressive multicultural society, social dialogue has plummeted to the lowest ebb in Australian political history.  Fuelled by Abbott’s election promise to repeal legal recourse under section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, which prohibits statements that offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people on grounds of race or ethnicity you have effectively eroded the last line of defence. Abbott is far from sorry and so obviously out of touch with the people such legislation is designed to protect. This is a dangerously regressive act that is more at home in a totalitarian power rather than in Australia’s multicultural egalitarian society.

As we have seen dating back to the 1800's the media has become a law unto itself, incapable of and uninterested in self-regulation. I am not in favour of more regulation of anything, however as with guns there needs to be rules, responsibility and accountability for ones actions. Today’s changing media landscape is at odds with traditional information powerbases. The requirement for news outlets to embrace technological change has seen democratisation of media with archaic legislation out of step with the new models of media consumption.  Currently media is cheap so agenda based political, social and commercial campaigns have blurred the line between opinion and fact, opinion and reporting and my favourite, journalism and entertainment. The standard modus operandi in media outlets is to weigh up commercial gain over litigation. That is, how much advertising revenue do they make over how much they may or may not have to pay if they are sued or fined. This gamble has proved lucrative and commercially successful for Australian media generally as the current systems of complaint recourse is virtually non-responsive to any concerns “average” people have. In short, self-regulation provides a firewall between the media organisation and the regulator as the complaint has to go through the organisation first. “We believe we are compliant with the act” responses are the norm and 90% of frustrated people take the matter no further. So if you get no joy, then you complain to the toothless tiger ACMA who “may” rarely impose an infringement that is a ridiculously disproportionate monetary fine compared to the advertising revenue earned. Subsequently, why wouldn't media outlets take this gamble? They have a better than 90% chance of getting away with it outright and if they do get fined, the talent is still making a fortune with little or no consequence other than a by-line or retraction.

So how does this work you may well ask? Good examples are carefully constructed inflammatory comments to create a “rise” amongst less informed audiences, cash for comment and stating erroneous facts to push an agenda. The term “Shock Jock” defines a very murky area of media debate around the world. Alan Jones, Andrew Bolt, Ray Hadley and Steve Price have all predicated a format based upon their outspoken views on a range of topics designed to fuel outrage in public opinion. This strategy is lucrative in selling advertising as former advertising executive and owner of Radio station 2GB John Singleton can attest. Jones has constantly come under criticism for his defamatory, inflammatory and inaccurate comments on a range of issues and has maintained when the subject of legal action, he is an “entertainer” not a reporter or commentator. "I'm not a journalist" people listen to me for entertainment he proclaims. This illusion of a "Man for the people" providing a "spleen vent" for the less educated and uninformed is a format formulated to maximise income not social discourse. Jones breaking “Stories” that were no more than press releases for advertising clients erased the line between advertising and reporting until it was indistinguishable, forcing ACMA to make disclosure mandatory law. Jones and Bolt are the Australian poster boys for the marketing arm of the neo-con movement “The Tea Party”. Jones has unsuccessfully tried to get up a Bill ORiley type program till he was unmercifully dumped for bad ratings. Bolt has succeeded with the help of Mining Magnate Gina Reinhardt thanks to her financial interest in network 10. Bolt does not need to rate, just parrot the message and collect the cash. Gina is on a media buying mission and has very deep pockets convinced that its her say on the information super highway. Interestingly after her foray to own Fairfax without agreeing to sign up for editorial independence,  she has since suggested that Fairfax sell its radio assets and the most likely bidder is Singleton. Well surprise, surprise what a coincidence.  What a sweet deal, she still gets the net result as Singleton will run the same Shock Jock formula for success and Singleton (that great Aussie bloke so in touch with the common man) makes more money. 

Abbott and traditional media vendors have much to lose from reform. The main stakes are money, power and influence. Disproportionate representation of the perception of fact in social debate is a dangerous situation. Lies; masquerading as qualified fact to further political traction and generate revenue is immoral and at odds with Australian ethos of “Fair Dinkum”. When discredited, scientifically unqualified, self-promoting charlatans like Christopher Monkton are paraded on equal footing in the media as Professors of Science; public debate is well and truly broken. At what point did people just give up in ambivalent acceptance that an auctioneer turned entertainer like Hadley (He is by far the worst sports commentator in Australia) had any credibility to inform political debate in Australia? When did the “opposing everything to get a rise” opinion of Bolt (a base level educated, company indoctrinated journalist) hold weight over a Professor of physics, climatology or the head of the CSIRO? These people are the good guys who have dedicated there life to furthering scientific advancement of the human race. So when did society stoop so low as to attack them because it’s inconvenient?  I’ll tell you when, when despite being presented with factual truth that the Australian economy is one of the best in the world, people believe lying talking heads we are broke.  I’ll tell you when, when money and the egocentric lust for power in a cult of personality within an attention deficit news cycle holds greater currency than the factual truth itself. What is offensive and ridiculous is the assertion that when people like Bolt and Jones are subject to account under the due process of law they assert that their “Free Speech” is being stifled. Stifled they proclaim; whilst being syndicated nationally in print, radio and television. Their speech is far from free; it’s big business generating millions of advertising dollars. Is that the same “Free speech” a disenfranchised public would enjoy if they ever rang up these authoritarian egomaniacs to debate or question todays “designed topic” and are don’t get past the switchboard? I think not.

I once met Stan Zemanic. He was a surprisingly gentle, attentive intelligent man. I asked him “do you believe half of that stuff you say because you sound like the world’s greatest stirrer to me”. Stan looked me in the eye with a cheeky grin and said, “it’s all show business”. Unfortunately, show business is affecting the real business of social debate, freedom and equality in Australia.

Tuesday, July 17, 2012

The great Neo Con job (The mad Monks Tea Party)

It’s definitely a war of economics not military might that shapes the globe at the moment....America is proposing to elect that greedy dumb halfwit Romney (see a pattern here) refusing to reform its banking system by regulation. How is self-regulation working out for America?.... Lunatics running the asylum comes to mind. Wall Street controls America and it is not in good hands. Considering the corruption, criminality and inside deals that see unchecked capitalism a micron either side of the law and a galaxy away from morality, you may ask why am I so concerned with American domestic politics?  America’s lack of accountability and financial incompetence affects the rest of the world immeasurably, especially Australia.  The Tea party hoax is no more than a smoke screen for these lobbyists to Neo con ordinary Americans with blind nationalism as they rob America blind. Neo conservatism and its marketing arm "The Tea Party" has become a cancerous scourge that infects the globe. The template for neo-conservatives to indoctrinate the stupid with lies for political advantage, far removed from the original intent of its historical roots. Apparently the greedy people within America would have you believe that regulation of the banking system, credit default derivatives or affordable centralised healthcare is socialism, using demonic terms like "communism" spruiked by the Ivy League financial graduation club and its lobbyists in the politics of fear. Apparently these corporate cowboys would have you believe they have right to rape pillage and sodomise working Americans and their pensions, whilst calling anybody that disagrees with this criminality Left, Pink and anti-investment. Seriously what total bollocks, never let the truth get in the way of a good yarn is an Australian saying that epitomises their spin version of a  fact-less world perpetuated by lazy journalists, opinionated commentators and agenda based neocons (Cons being the operative term). Americans are not aware of the state of their own economy and what/who got them in this position in the first place. A compelling documentary is  "Inside Job". China is the single largest holder of US treasury bonds ($1.170 trillion). China owns the USA, they can stop, cripple and destroy America's economy in a heartbeat. These same privileged inside traders have a common predictable strategy of defence when asked to explain their actions. Get all nationalistic, waving the flag, whipping up the blind rhetorical porkie pies whilst they sell your country from beneath you and claim it’s the unions, liberals, socialists and anyone else but them.  Unfortunately we cannot protect our borders from this blight on humanity which is the politics of greed, ignorance wrapped in false nationalism sprinkled with religious morality for good measure. At the moment Tony Abbott is over in America amongst the “like minded” Neocons. I am an Australian with a long memory.  A politician is measured by his legacy, centralised healthcare (demonised by drug company lobbyists as socialism) is a product of the Whitlam government. Let me say when he remembers one of the greatest prime ministers in Australian history as the worst, I feel his demonization of our current Prime Minster holds to his judgment and credibility. Tony is a fake, he has nothing no plan and nothing but slogans. His biggest supporters are a bunch of unchecked capitalists who would have you believe that we owe them. Like America, this is the great Neo-CON.

Conspiracy theory? No, click here. This is fact and beyond the news cycle of inconvenient truth

Friday, April 27, 2012

The mis-information back road to the NBN

As a former network design engineer who has designed and implemented some very large networks, I am beyond frustrated with the pollicisation of telecommunications regulation in Australia. More to the point, I am appalled by the negative polarised mentality that has dictated public debate on just about everything to do with Australia’s future direction.  Bipartisanship for the greater good has been replaced by opposition to every issue from the opposite side of the political divide. Negativity for negativity’s sake erodes democracy especially when the term “mandate” is used in the same sentence as democracy. I must maintain my political heartbeat” because a pole informs my future not my vision for the future has produced a generation of politicians without vision. The yes brigade; informed by dubious, loaded polling masquerading as public opinion. It would seem that visionary thinking, like critical thinking has been sucked into the vortex that is the news cycle. I am a technologist and like my other scientific colleague’s, we suffer at the hand of a new phenomenon; “malleable scientific convenience”.  We all know this game don’t we? It was popular in the dark ages when scientists were burnt at the stake as heretics. Now we prefer crucifixion by public opinion with those fakers and shaman known as “commentators”. These “commentators” used to stand on soap boxes in parks on Sundays shouting all sorts of crazy things for people’s amusement. Back then we did not take them seriously. Now in the information age, silly soapboxing has been adopted as the preferred model of journalistic credibility..  After all who wants to be a reporter when you can be a commentator? Who wants to be an accountant when you can be an economist? Who wants to be a disc jockey when you can be a social commentator especially when you can conveniently call yourself an entertainer if anyone wants to sue you for telling porky pies or inflaming  xenophobic hatred rite?.  It seems that if we don’t get an answer that supports this divide and conquer agenda, its attack, discredit and lie till public opinion is so confused that it collapses into exhaustive submission.

We technologists can only present you with the evidence based upon the benefits you already receive. It took us decades to assure the benefits of the steam train, the washing machine, the computer and the mobile telephone but convince we did. We are a patient breed and expect a few brothers and sisters to be burned at the stake for the greater good of our vision and its application. So you trusted us before and it worked, so why are we the bad guys now? Why are these puppet commentators locked in the perpetual news cycle the anointed keepers of modern credibility? What went wrong? Now it seems at every given turn there is a politician with a lobbyist, consultant or self-proclaimed expert in their ear. They are usually economists (a term used by accountants to sound hip and more important).  The main reason I left IT was that everyone who could operate MS word was apparently an expert.  The budget obsessed cost benefit analysts, whose vision is a bottom line on balance sheet that would not have given penicillin or an ECG machine a guernsey for fear of no quantifiable projected future revenue. These future police are typically the people who say “I'm sure we can do it cheaper” using terms like " revenue reactive scaled implementation" or "calculated risk". Let me translate that coded inference for you. They are gonna do it on the cheap against all the informed advice from qualified technical staff who designed and specified it, destroying all intended functionality to make them look better with management who remunerate their bonus . At that point they hand you glue, paper and a staple gun to build their useless cheaper version of the future. Then when this slow, unreliable, unstable, unscaleble, out dated before its installed version of the future falls over, they say "It's was not my fault, I told you so". I decided that Australia is so far behind the 8 ball thanks to cowboys (remember 1tel Jodi Ritch and Sol Trujillo, the backward Mexican) , polly speak and instant expert just ad software, that I was better off implementing existing technology to creatively deliver content. In the preceding ten years on nothing has changed except the amount of technology experts.

 I am old enough to remember our past to present saga, so let’s revisit a few prudent truths in regard to the basket case that is the Australian telecommunications industry. Australia was; (underlined in bold) a world leader in telecommunications with the best trained staff and infrastructure in the world. Australia was of the first countries to adopt digital switching from mechanical switching (ARE11 exchanges), high speed data, switched digital (Australia was a leader in ISDN ) and join telephone exchanges via  fibre in the 80’s. Australia is a small market with horrible real estate to own a telephone network. To put this into perspective there are about the same amount of working end connections in New York State that there are in the whole of Australia. Small pie, limited revenue and very long term investment.  Instead of absorbing Aussat into Telecom or OTC (who merged with Telecom) they set up a third entity which was doomed to failure from the outset. Then what happened? Deregulation by stealth after the Aussat debacle. Hey I think we can sell this thing! Yeah who too? I know we will sweeten the deal with a Telephone carrier licence and throw in a bit of that pay TV cable stuff. Sterling Idea, lets find a sucker and we are off hurtling down the slippery slope of market forces and competition.  You know this game…That’s the one where you get that incredibly valuable piece of infrastructure, commission a report with your interested mates and open it to the competition of market forces (your mates in big business).  Your accountant is in your ear again confusing the horizon with the bottom line, obscuring the vision of the future out there in the distance with the here and politically convenient now. Then the competitors; after arguing how much cheaper and better they are going to do it are too cheap to invest  in their own infrastructure (see market forces at work). So they string 1950’s RF cables over the telegraph poles you are trying to phase out to the horror of local councils. They provide third rate TV services no-one can afford, hijacking sport and anything they can charge for. Then they deliver this rubbish via second hand decoders they got cheap from the British who were throwing them out to third world countries trying to get cable TV networks up. Not content with a retail margin they agreed to initially (from Telstra) and faced with the prospect of actually having to invest in a network for long term clients, they sue the wholesaler (Telstra) for a better deal screaming….Monopoly, Unfair!!!! These people don’t care about your future; they aspire to personify the very word Monopoly.

Just when you though it could not get any worse, those hip economists decide that the government should never own basic infrastructure.  Instead, “we should give people choice” they herald, or as I like to put it give people the option of what wolves they wish to be thrown to. But don’t fear we have an ombudsman to protect you. He or she will look into your issue with these unregulated cowboys called Telco’s or resellers (see One Tel) after they have trashed your credit should you decide to not pay your bill in protest.

OK let’s sell our national carrier so ordinary Australians can own it. Ahh, excuse me, don’t I already own it?  I’m a taxpayer, didn’t my taxes pay for our telephone network? No, No No…We know what’s best for you and the future(see Ausatt:see political here and now)  …. So it’s sold, the share price crashes and those ordinary Australians and their superannuation funds have no pot of gold, just a big fat telephone bill and a bunch of shares in the errrr ummmm “The future”. Ironically had they invested in the past (coal for instance) they would be infinitely better off. The accountants and lawyers who set the whole scam up did very well thank you very much, as did the politicians…Look at my surplus, aren’t I a genius?  But what about all those people who lost their jobs? My shares are trashed thanks to that Mexican bandido, no trained staff anymore, and the network is a mess.  I can assure you that our consultants assure me that ideology and market forces will sort out your future.

So what next? We buy part of it all back for the same price it was sold for to…. wait for it, “build a national digital network for the benefit of all Australians”. So that would be the one we owned in the first place. So where do we go? Down the path of economic political ideology, a path we technologists are never comfortable on. A treacherous slope; where visionary aspirations of convergent services are obscured by confusing irrelevant politics. This short sighted approach to technology has proved costly and set services back ten years. The sociological benefits have been regulated from honey to steam, evaporating in the ether of political ideology.  Rhetoric, lies and vitreous diatribe derail our future for a few cheap “shot at the title” points. Self-important megalomaniacs masquerading as political commentators (a termed used by reporters and disc jockey’s to sound more credible and important) poison public opinion, which is easy as most people don’t understand technology.  These fakes, who have trouble operating a toaster oven, pretend to be informed authorities. They are not interested in our future or the furthering of knowledge, just advertising revenue. If they dictate information and masquerade it as knowledge by dumbing down a complex issue to idiocy they increases rating's and their own pay packet.    A few weeks ago at a party, I was faced with explaining why the NBN was a good thing to a LNP 70 something after he spouted to me that “it’s a big waste of money”. I asked him how he came to his conclusion, explained my credentials and watched as he started squirming in his chair. He had that look on his face  that you get when you realise you are trying to explain a phone call to the guy that built the network.  I attempted patiently to resuscitate the dead and get beyond the three words in the slogans. Starting with  touch points I knew he would like “this is great for rural Australia” because, I had lost him. He was lost  in a glaze of I don’t care, your obviously one of them from the other side.  I could see the vacant look of withdrawn denial only truth can deliver. His next response I can only describe as indicative of what is wrong with Australia. If  that's the case why does Alan Jones and Tony Abbott disagree with you? When I pointed out I am far better qualified to make that assertion, I felt then and their how climate change scientist feel.  There is no bridge in this poisonous divide; credibility seems to get equal footing with nonsense.

Third world countries like South Korea warp past us and our future economy at the “LIGHT SPEED” of the real information Superhighway,” fibre to the house”. That not the light speed that those expert commentators say gen Y gamers travel at that we don't need because it’s a monumental waste of money, glue and staples. That's the speed at which real time medical imaging, teleconferencing, energy control systems, regionalisation and other future technological benefits, too visionary a higher concept for their poor toaster oven mentality to comprehend.  

We seem to be content to be lost on a misinformation back road with an out-dated street directory from nineteen fifty rather than tackle this elephant in the room at the expense of the future.  When I explained the practicalities of what we have now ten years ago, you laughed at me as your eyes glaze over. Now it’s here everyone sees the benefits.  See we were rite and have not failed you all. Don’t worry accountants build and the money will come, the business case will come, the economic rationalisation will come. When your bucket of ideological opposition is empty, the bipartisan visionary bucket is full of positive aspirational hope. Not everything has a quantifiable, economically rational cost. I sat around for years trying to figure out how to make money from the internet and looky now.

Furthermore, this nation was not was not three word slogans. I find someone who has no credibility whatsoever on this issue using lies in three word slogans like "big white elephant" and "will not work' an insult to Australians intelligence. This same language is being echoed by members of the Nationals in coalition who say they have the best interests of regional Australia at heart. Sorry I don't buy that hypocrisy any more than the shadow minister for communications does. This divisive Noism demonstrates a serious lack of understanding of the issue and its benefits capped by an unhealthy lack of vision. Do we want narrow focussed Luddite’s using divisive doomsday language running our fine nation; dictating its future? It’s this offensive and divisive political point scoring that threatens Australia’s future prosperity, not establishing critical infrastructure. We tried market forces, it did not work, let’s move on. So stand aside agenda benders or become road kill on one of the greatest asset’s a prosperous future economy can have; the road to information. Who knows?,It may just lead to knowledge and ultimately wisdom. Don't just take my word for it; The chief technical officer from BT is of the same opinion

— The future belongs to those who see the possibilities before they become obvious

John Scully

Saturday, April 14, 2012

Dr Bob calls it a day

The man who failed to resuscitate Jimmy Hendrix yet managed to resuscitate Australian political debate is to hang up his political cap and retire. Senator Brown who has taken the Australian greens from the wilderness to the mainstream is making way for the new guard. Australian politics will never be the same without the voice that has the conviction to say what we all were thinking.
Here is my tribute to a great man who unlike John Howard actually has a legacy……

Monday, February 27, 2012

The dust settles and the fakes revealed

The dust settles and the fakes revealed.

Julia Gillard has won the support of the caucus with a resounding margin making Kevin look quite delusional. This may spell be the end of Rudd’s extraordinary political career.  He is in fact a fake. A phoney....I want my money back.

As Labor regroups licking its wounds, its time for the party to take a good hard look at itself. Over the past decade Labor has become increasingly at odds with its traditional heartland. Labor struggles with a schizophrenic left identity of progressive social equality and the new ultra right of liberal light. Despite trampling the left faction into whimpering submission with the gusto usually reserved for Tony Abbott they choose to display the left side when the photo op calls for compassion. 

The great challenge is to stay engaging enough to sell the relevance of great policies in a country in great shape under Labor stewardship. This is the core of the challenge for the next 18 months; fix the atrocious communication problem that dilutes labors incredible achievements.

Prime minister Gillard is an incredibly capable political negotiator, but she has an image problem, cant sell a pitch and is an average communicator at best.  My hope is that this will change as she is a;;owed to rise above the childish “illegitimate” rhetoric of the opposition.  Labor has a mixture of bad media advice from old hands living in the old world and total inexperience. Cleans sweep the media advisors, restructure and sell the pitch.

 The most hopeful fallout from the whole sad affair has been the resignation of Mark Arbib from parliament. Mark Arbib is the poster boy for all that is wrong with the Labor machine. Arbib is the right factional leader from NSW with a wake of political destruction and caucus carcasses behind him. It remains to be seen if Arbib’s influence in the party will be diluted or strengthened as a result of the leadership ballot.  Did he jump or was he pushed? seriously who cares...The time to reform the party, especially in branch stacking and pre-selections is long overdue. This very factor has alienated “the true believers” within local Labor branches and had party faithful leaving branch’s disillusioned in droves. There is a serous operational disconnect between caucus and the branches. Head office, more over the administrative committee have way too much say and try to control local branch contest where they may not like the outcome. A study on the real political power of union officials voting against the will of their members as a block within caucus against the vote of the ordinary hard working branches to secure faction power.

Prime Minister Gillard has called for unity and I feel this shockwave has rattled Labor to its core with one overriding scary prospect. Tony Abbot as PM?.....
Yes Scary thought isn’t it …. Yeah Tony Abbott...get it in your head, this is a zombie  apocalypse...
consequently here is me in my underpants mad as hell......

Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Somebody done somebody wrong...

Labors current leadership speculation is a clear statement of the quality and state of Australian politics across the political divide. Disunity in opposition is problematic for the confused voter; however disunity in government is a parliamentary death wish.
This poses the question “where have all the great political communicators gone?”

Many within the Labor ranks prefer to blame factors other than there own disunity for Labors mistakes.  Labor may have well committed one of the greatest blunders in Australian political history by ousting a serving Prime Minister and installing an unelected Prime Minister that predicated re-election on a lie. This foolish move has festered away in the voting public’s mind and remains a source of great frustration within labors ranks.  It would seem that the core values of democracy and a fair go for all are at odds with the desperate political powerbrokers of Labors right. Constant barrages aimed at a succubus media symptomatic of the problem rather than the cause is nothing more than hollow excuses from a government with great policies and no pitch. This is a simplistic blame a thon, as not since the twenties has the media in Australia been so concentrated, lazy, biased, intrusive, untrustworthy and irrelevant. If lazy biased media are across the vast array of multiplatform communication channels on tap eagerly waiting for the next non- event to happen what do you expect? In an unregulated market where the lines between entertainment, opinion and journalism are convoluted by commentary, ACMA sits like a toothless tiger. Breaching ACMA guidelines is a very profitable calculated financial risk for cashed up media outlets. Waifs of fact threaded together with lies to fuel self-serving or paid opinion make lots of money.  Most Journalists in Australia have forgotten the meaning of the word “reporter” preferring to spin rather than scribe. So what happens when factional camps within a government systematically leak nasty leadership speculation? The media lap it up, add a few innuendos and run like hell with it to press. Who could blame them if it’s a lie the liable bill or ACMA fine is a low percentage of the revenue generated.

A government that cannot manage its own media cohesively cannot govern effectively. Despite an amazing record of achievement with the big picture issues on the table, Labor in general has a fundamental communication problem. There are only a handful of people on the front bench with the necessary communication skills to sell a message.  Overall most current serving politicians of all persuasions are poor communicators effectively stifled by speculative opinionated journalists.
The current culture within Labor for selling and communicating ideas is shambolic and uncoordinated at best. Labor media advisors are an incompetent rabble having managed to make a successful minority government look more like Italy than Australia.

The problem comes down to who has the goods rather than the numbers.
If you take a close look at past Labor leadership choices it is understandable. Kim Beasley was a great communicator. Despite his strong attributes as an orator, academic, visionary and being bred from formidable political stock, he was in the wrong faction from the wrong state. Nothing in that for Sussex street.

Kevin Rudd for all his faults unified the party to a resounding victory returning Labor from the political wilderness. He was at one point the most popular Labor leader of all time, which displays the fickle nature of the media rather than his ability as Prime Minister.
Kevin simply talked too much, sometimes in code with dusty dictionary technical acronyms that said absolutely nothing. In the ensuing battle for the job he negotiated his own cabinet on his own terms bypassing caucus factions.                                                                                      
Prime minister Rudd began to unravel within the first six months as spin replaced substance. Running government from his office without much ministerial council. Super Kev headed for the super fall. Power brokers realized early on that it was his mission to split and eroded the powerbase within the complexities of Labors factional powerbase particularly in New South Wales. The same faction that gave you Mark Lathum (A foul mouthed, ex Liverpool councilor bully boy with the diplomacy of Ivan Milat) killed off Kevin as they did Kim Beasley. Nothing in that for Sussex street. 

Julia Gillard rewarded the faceless men like Mark Arbib with a cabinet position. He who destroyed the New South Wales Labor party as the architects of a popularly elected Prime Ministers demise. Mark Arbib is an incompetent, political operative devoid of credibility with a wake of political destruction behind him. He has little to offer Australia in terms of vision or ability having  churned leaders and factional opponents of greater caliber than he could ever aspire too for his own political gain. He will systematically destroy anyone who threatens his power base. Make no mistake Arbib would steam roll Julia in a heartbeat if his cushy non constituant senate position depended on it. How do I know this? He once tried to have me thrown out of the party for daring to question party democracy.

Julia Gillard is going to get smashed in the next election. She is not electable, too much baggage, spoiled goods and a terrible leader.  She may be the best negotiator in the room but that's of no consequence if she cant sell or pitch great idea's. The best idea's, most of which were "Kevin Vision," are lost in a vapor of polispeak. Despite her political prowess and personal ability, her public perception is shot. One swinging voter described her to me as "a whiney lying lawyer". Apparently she was from the left, right? I'm sorry but a woman from the left living with a hairdresser does not believe in gay marriage?  Like many things Julia, it just dont add up.

As I write this comes the news that Kevin has resigned as forien minister bad news for Australia as he is by far one of the best foreign ministers in Australian political history. It would seem that Julia may be the red weather vein of populous politics flailing in the gail of journalistic and factional opinion. The waiting game of the effect from the flow on of compensation from reforms is as risky as toppling a Prime Minister.  If Kevin rises like Lazarus remains to be seen at the moment its not looking good. One thing I am total in agreement with as a true believer, reform in Labor is as inevitable as climate change.