
- Kevin Rudd. Too Pompus For Some
- Prime Minister’s style too pompous
- Rudd Playing catch up on Communicating Agenda
- Abbott wining voters with plain talking
Kevin Rudd will no doubt go down in history as one of Australia’s hardest working Prime Ministers.
However holding the office of the highest elected official in the nation is about more than hard work, intelligence, experience and skill, it’s also about being an effective communicator.
The Prime Minister is naturally proficient with his ’on camera’ conduct to the extent that he makes a statement, asks himself a question, and then delivers the corresponding answer (of his own choice and making).
This is a cleverly orchestrated style that more or less alleviates our already compliant and increasingly lazy journalists from actually having to do any work at all.
Simply turn up with a microphone and hey presto! You have ”a report” (and I use that term loosely) “fit to print” (also used loosely) and/or broadcast.
This technique has served Kevin Rudd well, at least up until now.
We have indulged his occasional, and let’s face it, impressive speeches in fluent Mandarin, much to the chagrin of his predecessor, the late John Howard, and we have excused his unnecessary self-indulgent verbosity when simple terms would’ve been fine.
However, this distinctive style verging on sanctimonious pomposity may well become his undoing. Who is he trying to impress with his verbose style? It certainly doesn’t resonate with voters on the street.
In plain language, Kevin Rudd has failed to “KISS” or “Keep it Simple and Stupid” a term which most professional copywriters will be familiar with.
KISS Means reducing a complex message down to simple digestible “bite size” pieces.
The basic premise of the KISS principle is that if you can explain something in complex terms or simple terms, always opt for the simple option.
Regardless of the intelligence of the reader or viewer, and/or the complexity of the subject matter, people want to hear things explained simply. It’s a commonly accepted fact, and one which the Prime Minister frequently fails to appreciate.
We don’t want to be baffled by his brilliance. We just want to know the clear and simple facts. Surely that shouldn’t be too much to ask?
It’s a lesson that Mr Rudd might want to turn to Malcom Turnbull for advice. Given Mr Turnbull’s clear, articulate and passionate speech rejecting the Coalition’s climate change “policy” in Parliament the other day.
Tony Abbott recognises the importance of the KISS Principle, and as such has repeated the banal and simplistic term of phrase “Great Big New Tax” more than enough times than any of us care to mention. However Mr Abbott realises that in the context of the media cycle, the more often he repeats this key message the more likely it is to appear in a 15 second sound bite in any media broadcast.
The recent polls would suggest that he has been succesful in employing this tactic despite the lack of detail surrounding his alternative approach to the Government’s proposed ETS.
Kevin Rudd may now well be going to some lengths to explain the rationale behind the Governments’ scheme, however it would appear that the KISS Principle is something that the Labor Government may still need to come to grips with if they are to stem the increasing public sentiment towards the Coalition’s alternative “direct action approach.”
It might be a lesson that Kevin Rudd has learnt just a little too late.
News.com.au reports that a prominent politically active Christian lobby group says that surrogacy should not be a solution for gay and lesbian couples who want children “as pets.”
The Australian Christian Lobby has called on Queensland MPs to amend or reject a new bill to decriminalise altruistic surrogacy, where a woman carries another couple’s child for no payment.
Heated debate is expected in parliament as MPs debate the issue this week, with the opposition hoping to restrict access for same-sex couples.
The ACL says children are not pets and should not simply be given to anyone who wants one.
ACL managing director Jim Wallace says the surrogacy bill should have been directed at permitting surrogacy as a last resort for infertile married couples.
Instead it represents a piece of radical social engineering which will alter the natural make-up of the family by permitting single adults and same-sex couples to have children via surrogacy, he said.
“This is experimenting with children’s lives and at this stage they have no way of really knowing just how devastating the effects on the children will be, or the extent of identity confusion that will result.
“We’ve already had to make amends to a Stolen Generation and a Forgotten Generation – is this the next one?” He said the state had a moral duty to act in the best interest of all children.
“The state should not be accommodating the desires of single men, single women, two men or two women to do what is not possible in nature – that is to have babies,” he said.
“We urge all Queensland parliamentarians to consider the needs of children and reject this bill or at the very least to split the bill so that MPs can have a true conscience vote on the separate issue of whether to permit single people and same-sex couples to have children via surrogacy.”
Queensland is the only Australian state in which altruistic surrogacy is a criminal offence, punishable by a $10,000 fine or three years’ imprisonment.
Commercial surrogacy will remain illegal under the bill.

Now you can enjoy the convenience of internet confessions!
By the holy power vested in me, it brings me great joy to announce that now you can confess your sins online here at Gutter Trash.
Let’s face it, who can be bothered trudging down the road to some dire old cathedral when you can ditch the dirt right here without leaving the comfort of your home or office.
It’s all part of the service provided by Rebitology.
In this fast paced communication age it is only right that we respond with a more immediate way for you to cleanse your soul of its impurities.
Please confess your sins via the comments box blow, beginning with the introduction “forgive me father for I have sinned….”
Tell us about your mortal sins and trangressions. You’ll feel better.
If your confession is posted, consider yourself absolved.
If you find that your confession has been placed in moderation, consider yourself damned for all eternity to the firey pits of eternal damnation!
So, how long has it been since your last confession…?

Hello,
Good afternoon and welcome to a great big new Monday by the Magazine Rack.
I hope you all had a good weekend. Today is a public holiday in Hobart (for whatever reason), and the weather is picture perfect.
Aside from the latest Nielson poll showing the continuation of Tony Abbott’s honeymoon (which I suspect will be short lived), the other interesting political news of the day is Kevin Rudd’s plan to slash immigration.
The changes, to be unveiled by Immigration Minister Chris Evans today, are expected to target professionals with university degrees who are sponsored by employers and discourage self-nominating migrants such as cooks, hairdressers and accountants.
The new policy will axe the Migration Occupations on Demand List, which lists 106 occupations in demand.
In other news, I managed to clean out all the “absolute crap” that was in the garage over the weekend, so I’m feeling a bit smug about that.
Rest assured, any fleeting feelings of smugness will soon be dissipated by some impending and unexpected disaster.
The latest Nielsen poll suggests that support for the Rudd Government and its emissions trading scheme (ETS) is falling.
The results shows that Federal Opposition Leader Tony Abbott’s alternative “emissions reduction fund” is proving more popular than the Government’s ETS.
Forty-five per cent of those polled preferred Mr Abbott’s plan compared to 39 per cent who supported the Government’s ETS.
Although Labor and Kevin Rudd still lead the Coalition, the gap is narrowing.
Kevin Rudd’s approval rating has dropped by six points to 60 per cent since the last poll in late November but he is still ahead of Tony Abbott at 44 per cent.
Mark Westfield, the former senior media adviser to Malcolm Turnbull has penned an interesting piece at the Business Spectator and suggests that Tony Abbott’s solid start to his leadership of the Coalition is beginning to put pressure on Labor leader Kevin Rudd for the first time since he won power in November 2007, and has exposed federal Labor’s policy flaws, lack of substance, and failed promises.
Rudd has been vulnerable for some time as, one by one, his 2007 promises fell by the wayside or have degenerated into fiasco – Fuel and Grocery Watch, computers for all students, stopping whaling, a ‘solution’ to the Murray Darling water crisis, the Oceanic Viking and ‘turn back the boats’, the National Broadband Network folly, so-called conservative economic management and the huge run up of debt on billions of dollars of wasteful spending.
The Henry taxation review will also provide a cornucopia of opportunities for the opposition because it will inevitably result in tax increases.
However, it’s difficult to appreciate that Tony Abbott and the Coalition are serious about climate change given their conviction that it’s “absolute crap”.
For this reason, Labor can seize upon this as evidence that Mr Abbott is simply playing populist politics and is simply shifting positions with the political breeze. The “weather vane” as quipped by Labor.
According to Westfield, the surge in the polls for Abbott should be regarded as a “wake-up call” for Rudd and Labor who have become complacent to the point of being contemptuous of the electorate.
The following article is a guest post by the inimitable Tom of Melbourne….
I enjoyed reading “Freakonomics” and “Superfreakonomics” has recently been published. Written by Steven Levitt and Stephen J Dunbar, an economist and a journalist.
The authors take a very original approach to social issues, and use economic modelling to investigate social phenomenon. They come up with some interesting and entertaining conclusions.
But rather than provide a book review, it is interesting to have a look at one of the chapters that “Superfreakonomics” deals with – Climate Change and its causes. Without going to the entire discussion on their ideas for remedial action, costs etc, the question of personal consumption habits is interesting.
I tend to think this is clear evidence of the politicisation of the carbon emission question. They identify -
“But the ways humans affect the climate aren’t always as obvious as they seem. It is generally believed, for instance, that cars and trucks and airplanes contribute an ungodly share of green house gases. This has recently led many right-minded people to buy a Prius or other hybrid car. But every time a Prius owner drives to the grocery store, she may be canceling out its emission- reducing benefit, at least if she shops in the meat section.
How so? Because cows — as well as sheep and other cud- chewing animals called ruminants — are wicked polluters. Their exhalation and flatulence and belching and manure emit methane, which by one common measure is about twenty- five times more potent as a green house gas than the carbon dioxide released by cars (and, by the way, humans). The world’s ruminants are responsible for about 50 percent more greenhouse gases than the entire transportation sector. “
The methane produced by cattle is far more damaging than carbon, but naturally politicians of all persuasions won’t go anywhere near the issue. It would mean upsetting people in rural and regional Australia!
Of course the most environmentally friendly meat in the world is our very own national icon – the kangaroo!
“You could also switch from eating beef to eating kangaroo — because kangaroo farts, as fate would have it, don’t contain methane.”
What an outstanding export opportunity, but naturally that would be seen as a campaign at the expense of existing export markets.
A real book review is here –
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Books/superfreakonomics-read-excerpt/story?id=8848071&page=2
Kangaroo or beef – I’m going to change my consumption to eating our entire coat of arms each week!

Welcome to this motivational “shovel-ready” edition of Weekend Gab Fest!
Have you ever been subjected to a presentation delivered by a motivational speaker?
Usually these people – predominantly American – can show up anywhere. Especially company conferences.
They’re mostly out of the same mould as Evangelical Preachers but without the God aspect.
Aside from that they have just about everything else in common except motivational speakers tend to worship the pursuit of money, and by the very fact that they’ve probably been hired by your employer, they’re hell bent on getting you converted to the wisdom of their ways.
We had one such “motivational speaker” attend a recent conference where I work, and it was a completely surreal experience.
It was like being in the audience of Oprah, except this guy, and let’s call him “Gary Glenn” for the sake of this discussion (because that’s his name), was like the quintessential Everyready Bunny.
Bouncing around and imparting his wisdom through a carefully sequenced and cleverly orchestrated series of powerpoint slides accompanied with a smooth sales pitch.
Yes! You can succeed!
Gary was a pro.
I knew straight away that he had delivered this same presentation probably no less than ten thousand times. How else could he carry it off with such suave persuasion?
For one thing, he could change the powerpoint slides without having to glance at the screen to see whether what he was saying was corresponding to what we were seeing.
“A real pro” I thought as he flick the remote across his shoulder without turning to face the screen behind him. Or swirling the remote behind him, in a fast action move as if he was cracking a whip at a raging bull fight.
And he was full of all the animated body language, hand gestures and eye contact as he worked the room, the way that only “real pro’s” know how to carry off.
But there was one minor detail that was his complete undoing, as far as I was concerned anyway.
You see, as soon as he appeared on stage, it occurred to me that he looked like he was wearing a rather hap-hazzardly placed hair piece.
So while others were hanging on his every word, I was carefully looking for those tell-tale signs that our Gary might not be entirely authentic.
The capped teeth were one thing, heck most Americans go for that perfect even smile these days.
And I could excuse the fake tan, but the brillo pad that was flopping around on his noggin? No, that presented real issues.
Despite his “constantly suprised” expression, I concluded that Gary hadn’t opted for a facelift.
Yet.
But it was the way his hair kind of came away from his neck line at the back that gave the game away. It resembled one of those Winter Olympic ski jumps.
Here he is looking like something out of “Dynasty”…
And here he is now…
Be sure to watch some of his videos…!
So what do you think, real hair or not?
Hello!
And welcome to another installment of Music Jukebox, brought to us by resident Boogie Bear Nasking.
This week’s theme, courtesy of the Big N, is “your freedom my rights”
I shall offer this up…
