<< ANSWER MISREAD ~ MAIN ~ THIRD TEST, DAY FOUR >>
THE FORK DOES NOT SYMBOLISE RUDD
We haven’t heard much lately from Cretan Chris Sheil, the wildly popular academic who had to quit blogging when his site became a runaway underground train. Turns out he’s made a few cameo appearances in comments here and there, talking up Kevin Rudd:
The new leadership team is doing real fine.
Uh-oh. Rudd has been hit with the Chris of Death! Next, some penetrating insights about ... well, I’m not really sure:
The ‘fork in the road’ was a pearler, even enlisting the far right in spreading it around. What the pundits imagined was that this was somehow like the ‘ladder of opportunity’, which is what Latham put himself out as so-called ’standing for’. Yet the ‘fork’ was not intended to symbolise Rudd, but send a message about Australia being at a turning point, which all the repeats and jocularity assisted in ensuring went far and wide across the brown land. Ruddy joined in the jocularity, except his was real. These will come frequently, not necessarily as intending to symbolise Kev, but as ways of encapsulating the message, and the more oxygen they get, just like those adverts that everyone talks about, the better for the ALP.
Chris is sounding a little like Robert Bosler.
Get behind them I say; this time we’re going all the way.
He hasn’t been this enthusiastic since December 2003:
Bye bye Johnny ... Mark Latham’s remarkable rise and rise continues.
Still, I shouldn’t be so hard on the lad. He’s got enough trouble coping with his pals on the left; click ‘n’ scroll for an entertaining Sheilfest.
Sheilvoyance!!! Yes!! Woo, thats the best news I’ve had all day.
Bullshit like this from Sheil is the gift that keeps on giving:
Correction Babs. I’ve been in the Rudd camp for 16 years, which is how long I’ve known the guy, and supported him in every leadership tilt. My preferred fallback in the Crean days was the Beazer, with Latham the worst choice. I admit to being bouyed by Latham’s campaign, especially when the Newspoll gave the ALP a 52/48 split with less than two weeks to the poll. Yet all subsequent events have confirmed my initial Latho’ impressions. This is the opposite scenario to Rudd, always my preferred candidate, a former colleague, and I someone I always think of as a friend.
After this Hanyu, I concur.
so rudd is going to be ridiculed into the lodge
has mike hudson considered running for US prez in ‘08?
Posted by eeniemeenie on 2006 12 17 at 05:23 AM • permalinkMutter, mutter ... damn those right wing blogs and their humour. I know! I’ll try and make it look as if their jokes are actually propelling Kevin down the road, taking the Left Fork (after signalling right), and on over the Bridge to Farr: To the Lighthouse, you know, the Light on the Hill, the precious!
Surely this is the beginning of the end for Rudd.
Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 12 17 at 06:35 AM • permalinkJust speaking of a fork is not good enough. I’m sure Latham (if elected) would have eventually revealed that the ‘the squeeze’ was to be eased with a metaphorical garlic crusher. Indeed, there’s nothing better than an entire platform based upon cutlery-centric policy.
One can speak of ‘performance spatulas’ used to lift the productivity of entire departments, ‘targeting tongs’ which pick out specific industrial relations practices from the dross.
Welfare of course, will be delivered by a ‘largesse ladle’ and the social safety net repaired with ‘needy needle.’
The excesses of Howard’s improvements to the Defence Force will need to be trimmed using ‘Garrett garotte.’
I shudder to think.
Stick a fork in him, and see if he’s done.
Posted by AlburyShifton on 2006 12 17 at 06:57 AM • permalinkAh yes, Chris is so right. The more we talk about “forks in the road” the more Rudd’s message gets out there. Any publicity is good publicity. Just ask michael jackson. With all that publicity we’re bound to get behind them and go all the way. Erm… or maybe my tasteless mind just draws dubious comparisons when I try thinking of what Rudd’d do to Australia if he got half a chance…
What most depresses me is that eventually Cretan Chris and his cronies will be correct. No party stays in office forever - especially if the economy has a downturn - and then we’d end up with Rudd… who isn’t a socialist - he’s a twit.
Tim, you had me going there for a minute. I had to go back through several threads to find out that The Cretan really isn’t from
Crete...or is he?
Posted by Wimpy Canadian on 2006 12 17 at 10:43 AM • permalinkNot being well read into Australian politics, my comments here may be off mark. But it’s apparent (to me) that Chris Sheil learned very little from Latham’s defeat in the last election.
I’ve noticed that The Sheila simply can’t stand being seen as wrong, even to the point of holding a position that makes no sense.
Back to Rudd…...the other commenters were attempting to analyze Rudd’s errors (I am sure that he makes them, being human and all), and CS brushes those comments aside (in a very rude and insulting fashion) as amateurish…..as though Sheil, and only Sheil, is the expert on Rudd.
My take on the Latham Loss™ is straightforward: the ALP campaigned on a “Anyone But Howard” strategy, which caused them to ignore all of Latham’s flaws….but said flaws were noticed by the voters. Not unlike Kerry’s loss in 2004 (although I have to admit that Latham at least has a personality, even if a bit, ummmmm, eccentric).
The ALP was seriously out of touch with Australia…..and still is, as near as I can tell.
And here we see CS falling back into exactly that same way of thinking, which is a major mistake on his part (not to mention the ALP). The other commentators were doing their best to have an open discussion about Rudd….and CS didn’t want to hear it.
Kimberly summarized the entire problem here:
As the headline says “if you can’t win the game then change the rules”.
You can dish it out, cs, but you can’t take it.
I make an argument and you compare me to Tim Blair. Whatevs, dude. I hope you’re right about Rudd, but you’ve said nothing to convince me, because every time anyone makes a point that’s sceptical, you just resort to hyperbole and petulance.
eg - “Sorry for being here.”
It’s not all about you.
What is blogging for? I thought it was meant to be about having a conversation?
My take on this: If the ALP can shake the Chris Sheil style of thinking (as Kimberly, Mark Bahnisch, and the others were clearly working on), and get in touch with the world about them, they are on the road to recovery.
I’d love to see the Democrats do the same thing. Alas, I don’t see that happening in the near future. But I can always hope.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 12 17 at 11:07 AM • permalinkIronic that patronising academics such as Shiel would probably contribute to Rudd’s failure at the polls if their message were actually to get out beyond their tiny readership.
Posted by Willmott Fribbish on 2006 12 17 at 06:45 PM • permalink‘Blog Of The Year - Crikey, 2005.’
I could have hit the Back button right there.
Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 12 17 at 10:45 PM • permalink
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
Ruddy? And, Kev? Are Sheil and Rudd bosom buddies or something? Are they so close that Rudd told Sheil what he was thinking when he was being lampooned over the ‘fork in the road’ thing or does Sheil think he can read minds? It’s all very strange.