The latest two-week rolling online panel survey by Essential Research shows federal Labor retaining its record 61-39 lead from last week, although the preferred prime minister gap has narrowed from 41 per cent to 35 per cent. Tellingly, the government’s handling of the financial crisis has the favour of 63 per cent of respondents against 18 per cent disapproving, compared with 31 per cent and 35 per cent for the opposition. Also covered are attitudes to the US presidential race.
ltep – it’s not the rest of the conversation that is the problem is it? What makes you think that because someone has discussed the conversation with a reporter that they also said that Bush didn’t know what the G20 was?
[Where did that part of the story come from?]
Probably the same place that alleged Bush said “What’s the G20?”, i.e. somebody’s arse
Fortunately the issue the Liberal Party has decided to corrupt the ABC with is a non event and will find difficulty in making any impact on the public who already know and trust Rudd on foreign affairs and know that he or his office wouldn’t engage in such things.
This is something the OO, Turnbull and the ABC ought to think hard about. Rudd will hardly be affected by this because he has something they are losing very quickly, credibility. Turnbull does not yet have much credibility and in fact the last public opinion on him was that he was not trustworthy.
Itep, what about making it up?
HSO,
It’s not that good!
[Grog
“Well it’s possible that’s what’s happened here. Where did all the other details of the story come from?”]
Sorry Gusface, not sure what you’re referring to.
ltep the more you relate that story to me (I haven’t read it) the more implausable it seems to me that Rudd or his office leaked it. It is crap.
Dario/HSO
Why would the journalist bother making up a story which makes the Prime Minister look like he’s influencing world leaders?
Gary Bruce you don’t seem to get it. It’s bad that any part of the private conversation was leaked to the press, not just potentially embarrassing parts of the conversation.
Ltep – does that story make Rudd look good in your eyes? I don’t think it is a good look at all. Hence the reason for the story.
[Gary Bruce you don’t seem to get it. It’s bad that any part of the private conversation was leaked to the press, not just potentially embarrassing parts of the conversation.]
Oh c’mon! Parts of conversations between leaders gets reported ALL the time. Just as Cabinet papers get leaked – the ship of state is the only ship that leaks from the top.
109 and you think Rudd and his office would be aware of that? Give me a break.
Heard two news stories on the ABC today about the expected rate cut tomorrow. Both times the stories were basically vehicles of publicity for the Liberals.
This morning it was U-Turnbull, saying the banks were prosperous and could afford to pass on the full extent of the cut to customers. And this evening, the same line, this time delivered by Mesmer-Eyes.
Now, I would have thought the ABC might have questioned these senior Liberals a little. Something along the lines of, “How credible do you think your party is on interest rates, given that under your government rates rose to the second-highest in the developed world?” Possibly a request for a “please-explain” to the fact that under the Liberals’ high-rate regime the proportion of average income needed to service the interest component of the mortgage reached the highest levels ever.
But nothing. They simply accepted the Liberal soundbites without any follow-up, analysis or contextual comparison.
This is disappointing for: 1) the shallowness of reporting & analysis; and 2) the apparent prostitution of what is supposed to be a neutral news service for the day’s Liberal Party Talking Points.
Gary Bruce, yes it does make Rudd look good to the casual observer.
Grog, show me one other story which goes into the private discussions between two world leaders like this one does. In addition show me one which paints such a great image on one of the leaders.
ltep, please explain to us what possible benefit Rudd or his office would have from ‘leaking’ that Bush didn’t know what the G20 was, when clearly he did. Give it a try…
I tend to think as I may have said earlier that this was a premeditated and coordinated attack on Rudd trying to undermine his extremely strong international credentials.
The Liberal party advantage on economics as such as it was in the public eye has suffered and is not much of an advantage anymore and they (the Opposition) made a dogs breakfast of the economic crisis. They have thus moved on to foreign affairs as they know it will be a major part of Rudd’s future activity given the economic crisis and international meetings. This is why they have taken something very trivial, invented it to be something else and have been running non stop with it, to extreme levels.
The ABC has well and truly outed itself as having an agenda to undermine the government.
What I am looking forward to is six months out from an election and just before Obama makes a visit to Australia, Rudd in parliament demands Turnbull and the Liberal party make an apology to the President and the United States for equating them as supporters of terrorists. (should Obama win). Or ask do they support Howard’s view and demand that they repudiate his view.
The same benefit the rest of the story would have, to make Rudd look like he was calmly getting the President of the US to agree to something which would be advantageous to Australia.
Now explain to me why Rudd cannot flat out deny the entire story and that none of it comes from his office.
itep @ 98
Where did that story come from?
That is the story as reported, the lie is the supposed leak.
[Grog, show me one other story which goes into the private discussions between two world leaders like this one does]
ltep, this took me 2 seconds to google. Read it.
http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=28&ContentID=48268
[The same benefit the rest of the story would have, to make Rudd look like he was calmly getting the President of the US to agree to something which would be advantageous to Australia.]
By making him out to be stupider than we already think he is? You must be joking…
Believe me ltep the casual observer wouldn’t be reading the OO and certainly wouldn’t be reading such an article. This is a beat up and will be dead issue, and IS a dead issue already.
Grog
sorry the rest of the post just vanished. 🙁
Those are very general outlines of conversations as opposed to the specific outline the Australian gives. They also don’t spin the conversations to make it appear as if Rudd is winning something for Australia.
All of you are just so blindly devoted to the ALP that you cannot bring yourself to think Rudd’s office played any part in this. In the end it’s a personal opinion, you think the Australian is making it up to make the ALP look bad. I don’t think so. I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree.
Itep, you seem to be assuming that the private conversation was leaked to the press. There is no evidence for this.
Why would they do it? I’ve already advanced the idea that damaging the government at every turn is the primary function of the Coalition, the O.O. and now seemingly the ABC.
I’ve already advanced reasons why neither Rudd or his office would do such a thing.
Just going on and on about it does nothing. You’re getting about as boring as Generic Person.
I really don’t wish to repeat myself, or have to rehash previous discussions.
I just don’t understand why you’d try so vehemently to defend Rudd’s office when they’re doing so little to defend themselves. A quick, short statement would clear it up. No the story is factually incorrect in its entirety and no part of the story has been conveyed to the Australian by our office.
“All of you are just so blindly devoted to the ALP….”
A bit harsh on GP and Glen, but I’m happy to welcome them as fellow travellers if Itep’s outing them.
[sorry the rest of the post just vanished. ]
bet it was great! (the lost ones always are!)
ok ltep this is the best i can find from just one google search:
of “blair and Bush phone call” on google:
[The Independent suggests that a phone call from the U.S. president to British Prime Minister Tony Blair led to the removal of Foreign Secretary Jack Straw Friday.
The newspaper reports that friends of Straw believe Mr. Bush was extremely upset when Straw pronounced any use of nuclear weapons against Iran “nuts.”
Both The Independent and the Guardian write that Straw’s “fate was sealed” after a White House phone call to Blair.]
Or this from Howard and Bush:
[It is believed President Bush informed the Prime Minister, John Howard, of the extended visit on Wednesday during a phone call. The surprise news immediately set in a motion a wave of security and operational planning.]
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/05/07/politics/main1596108.shtml
OK not the detail you want. But it’s getting late, and I’m more into the stupidity of Julie Bishop raising IR again, or Joyce on the university fees than this old straw clutcher of a story.
My final point – if Rudd leaked it, it’s no worse than Costello’s gaffe after meeting the Fed Chair, and he got on ok afterwards.
ltep, you are asking us to believe a story when something as ridiculous as “What’s the G20?” appears in it, is denied by both parties, but yet the rest must be true?
[All of you are just so blindly devoted to the ALP that you cannot bring yourself to think Rudd’s office played any part in this.]
That is not true. You seem to think that Rudd and his office are a bunch of ego maniacs that will do or say anything just to big note Rudd. Even at the expense of the US Australia relationship. Give me a break. This is the Bolt argument.
I would argue that this article does the opposite as can been seen from what is happening now.
Fair enough Grog. At least you acknowledge Rudd’s office may have leaked it. If there’s a chance he leaked some parts of the story there’s also a chance he leaked the false assertion that Bush did not know what the G20 was.
Many here won’t even acknowledge the fact that any of the story could’ve been leaked from Rudd’s office.
Bishop in another bungle.
http://petermartin.blogspot.com/2008/11/another-bishop-howler.html
Sigh, Itep. Let me say this again. If you haven’t noticed, there is a global financial crisis going on at the moment,. It might actually take some time to take in the data coming in from across the globe, particularly when no one knows what it all means, what the new rules may be.
Just how young are you?
What are you talking about HSO?
[Bishop in another bungle]
Yeah, she’s a star…
steve – she’s a goner – Christmas break she’ll be moved to health or education. A big call I know and hard as she is Deputy, but her credability is shot. Turnbull obviously didn’t want her as Treasury, so he’ll be building up a nice file of “reasons for you to move for the good of the party”.
Oh for an Australian SNL…
Julie Bishop is such a winner, steve.
she’d never leak a state secret would she steve.
I mean she is a fiberal and like malcolm , a true warrior for the truth…….
whether she could remember it is another matter 🙂
[Fair enough Grog. At least you acknowledge Rudd’s office may have leaked it. ]
yeah they might have – the G20 bit though seems to me to be more poor journalism – an off the record joke recorded as fact – than a real “leak”. I doubt the PMO would actually say that to a journo for use in a story. I guess my disagrement with you are the ramifications of the story if Rudd’s office did leak it.
But as you have said I think we’ve all reached a point of impass on this topic!
Next!! 🙂
Apparently Julie Bishop thinks workchoices is still not dead… (he fishes….)
She really is clueless as a Shadow Treasurer. Her passion for Liberal Party IR ideology is obvious, given she is still defending aspects of SerfChoices. Surely IR would be the natural and sensible slot for her.
Reminds me of how Howard never gave Nelson the Health portfolio. He had the experience, had the passion, yet he was stuck with, variously, Defence and Education for heavens sake.
Like a fish needs a bicycle Bishop needs Shadow Treasury.
What the hell are you enquiring about now, Itep.
“Sigh, Itep. Let me say this again. If you haven’t noticed, there is a global financial crisis going on at the moment,. It might actually take some time to take in the data coming in from across the globe, particularly when no one knows what it all means, what the new rules may be.
Just how young are you?”
What was that about?
[A bit harsh on GP and Glen, but I’m happy to welcome them as fellow travellers if Itep’s outing them.]
Hardest I’ve laughed in years.
So again we’re confused as to what happened to WorkChoices. Can we have a straw poll as to what people’s favourite slang terms are for it? Mine is SerfChoices. Sums it up well.
Her comments on IR are especially dummb as Turnbull had made a point of killoing it off as an issue by appoointing nobody Keenan to the position. And Keenan had done well to say WC was done and dusted.
But just when you thought the fire had gone out, Julie comes along to poor petrol on the embers…
I personally don’t think Wayne Swan is a particularly brilliant or confident politician (I also don’t think that’s really important), but seeing off one opponent, Bishop, should boost his confidence.
No 132
Steve, I wonder why you’re not chastising Rudd for talking down the economy. He said it’s going to be tough and ugly today. Not happy Kev.
Bishop is accident prone. She really isn’t up to the job. I hope she hangs around for awhile.
[Keenan had done well to say WC was done and dusted]
He didn’t exactly say it was done and dusted though. (My emphasis) …
[{Michael Keenan} said the Liberal Party still had a “philosophical position” on workplace relations but “obviously we are also not going to argue with the Australian people about what they told us in 2007”.]
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24439000-5013404,00.html
They still have “a philosophical position on IR”, so their attachment to it is not dead.
Yesterday’s effort from Bishop was a cracker, too.
[JOURNALIST: Does the Opposition have any idea on how to free up those frozen funds?
JULIE BISHOP: If the Government had not put in place an unlimited guarantee in the first place this would never have occurred.]
No 143
I think your support for compulsory unionism is a vehement indication of your support for involuntary servitude.