At this moment we have a Senate filled with incompetent people who have only their Party support to put them where they are.  No merit.  Check F.F. Fielding and Barnaby.

Taking the Rudd government as an elected government of the entire country, is it unreasonable to ask that the "house of review" really "reviews" the effect of the elected government on their particular state constituents? And only that?

Currently we have a 2007 elected Federal Government which is trying to establish the reforms for which it was elected - and a Senate that is made up of mostly narcissist party orientated clowns (on both sides) who will merely commit their constitutents to whatever the major parties decide!  Whatever they say, as according to Barnaby Joyce, is obligated to back the party that paid for their election.  Fair dinkum.

I watched the unmitigated attacks on Rudd and his Mother and his education by the Howard "New Order" mob when he was first elected to lead the Labor party.  And the Murdochracy says that now he is getting dirty - and this from the Capitalist media baron of all.

IF the votes of our citizens are dependent on their judgement of the information that they have been supplied with is, by definition, intentionally influencial but only untruthful and paid for opinions. 

It did my heart good to watch Andrew Denton's interview with that wonderful "working man's" advocate Billy Connolly when he described his opinion of John Howard and the people of Howard's era.

I have been sickened by the obvious Murdochracies attack on Kevin Rudd.  Although I have argued this situation for years, it still annoys me when the private enterprise media decides which way they will go.

Case  in point is the so-called "Newspoll" - why does anyone accept that perhaps 2000 people from Vaucluse are going to vote that way.  Deception and profit by "shock and awe".

The "powers that be" have decided that the Rudd Labor government has established a concord between the business communities and the unions for the benefit of the Australian people.

As a long time unpaid Union delegate, I can honestly say that the union portrayal in the media is very far from the truth.  After all, there are more Employer Unions than there are Workers".

Is unity a crime if it is exercised by the workers?

God Bless Australia.  NE OUBLIE.

The formula agreed to by Kevin Rudd for tomorrow's "first of perhaps three" debates is IMHO very generous to Tony Abbott. While the P.M. has the call as to the means by which he accepts Abbott's challenge, he has been diametrically different to “Rattus” in 2007, not only by the number of debates but by the entire set up.  And I mean "set up".

So the only genuine criticism that can be claimed at Kevin Rudd is that he has "leveled the playing field".

Firstly, the moderator Chris Ulman is most certainly NOT a Labor worshiper but is probably more unbiased than any other political Journalist that I can think of.  The ABC under the Howard "New Order" had changes made that morphed that Public identity into a more "rightist" side of the political landscape.  And those changes were reflected in his antagonism towards ANY debates at all - even with all of the variables favoring him.

To find 10 fair and unobligated journalists in the Australian Main Stream Media (which as Malcolm Fraser stated, really has only one and a half proprietors) is impossible in my opinion.  The Corporation writers are Corporation weapons and will have a chance to prove otherwise.  Don't hold your breath.

Secondly, the venue could not have been fairer vis-à-vis top level (or should that be the bottom level) of Australian politics.  While the format is strict we have to accept that that is not only normal but imperative IF either person wants to pass on to the public their genuine beliefs in our failing Health system.

Thirdly, there must be only very few Australian families who cannot TAPE the debate starting at 12-30pm. as my Wife and I will.  Therefore the complaint by the "Mad Monk's" wealthy supporters must be for some other reason.  Could it be that the tried and consistent debating method of the Liberals has been to interrupt their opposition to put them off balance?  Or to make them lose the thread of their speech?  I have noticed this from every single Liberal who has debated Labor on TV - "block the message".

Leigh Sales on Lateline tries hard but with the imposing style of the "born to rules" she is a Sisyphus.

So tomorrow will determine whether the media opposition to the Rudd government is prepared to destroy his forthright government of the people by the people and for the people?

As far as the P.M's future based policies are concerned, they are in fact "policies in progress".  That was good enough for “Rattus” wasn’t it?

To any handy person who has ever painted their own house will know, it is somewhat disingenuous to say "you have 'just' painted your house?"  Struth.

God Bless Australia and stop the MSM governing our country.  NE OUBLIE.