Sunday 21 October 2007

Notes re my box's action tonight*

* For you fans of double entendres.

No in depth analysis here. Merely some casual points from my notes. Such as: 'Howard kept going over time. Rudd said at one stage: I couldn't get a word in!' And: 'Howard still looking a grumpy old bugger... acting skills still reasonably intact dammit' and 'Ugh'.
Plus 'note: Rudd a gentleman, immediately walked over to Howard at the end and shook his hand, and not in a Latham I'd-rather-punch-you-in-the-throat, I'm-the-man, don't-mess-with-me kind of manner'.




Repetitions

Rudd:

I will act…
I will act…
I will act…

(re Libs) No action… Failing...
No action…
No action…
Failing...
Failing...
Failing...

Where’s the investment…?
Where’s the investment…?
Where’s the investment…?

When you were treasurer…
When you were treasurer…
When you were treasurer…

Howard:

My fellow Australians (scattered throughout and accompanied by soppy and ‘sincere’ expression - *yeesh*)

Pathetic [classy; not grumpy old man at all]

Got the right balance
Got the right balance
Got the right balance [re IR changes]



General


Rudd:

No matter what amount of 'bleating', Howard cannot be trusted.

Where's Howard's nuclear reactors now that we are close to the election? "Out the back door..."



Howard:

We can’t turn backwards [Yup. I agree with that.]

Speaks of his team who were at his side throughout the trials of terrorism... [did I see a tear trickling down his cheek? what an actor! you'd think they had bombs falling all around them!]

When cornered on how he promised before the last election that he wouldn't make changes to IR laws, yet he did (and apparently said 'you beauty' on that occasion... well, so says Rudd) - he is promising not to, again - he starts speaking 'to all Australians' and sucking up.

Also sad face when speaking of climate change. Tragedy for Australia and the world.
Compares Kyoto to cricket. (Not to be beaten Rudd later says 'But I batted first'. Other Aussie lingo of the evening included 'fair dinkum', 'fair go' and 'two bob each way'.)
Later says that his government is the one most likely to be able to change Bush's mind on climate change, more than any other government IN THE WORLD!!! [Did anyone else see him beating his chest then?]

Sucks up to his fellow Australians again when concluding: I'm an optimist because I believe in the Australian people.
...We've been able to support a strong economy with your help.
[Pu-leeez]

Then he blathered on about Australian history for some reason. How the teaching of our story is his 'education revolution'. Gosh. That's it? That was his concluding comment. Yeah right. Massive.


Costello:

Is one shot of him. Knows camera is on him so sits like a wax dummy with a plastic smile fixed stiffly on his face. For all we know it was a wax dummy.
Although, when people in the audience are asked not to interrupt it sounds as though the problem may have been Costello, whilst Rudd was speaking. I suppose it's after all that shouting they get to do in Parliament [anyone else see Howard slip up and say "Mr Speaker" when speaking to a Bennelong apple festival the other day? *hee*].

Howard speaks of Costello: ...Costello, who's with me tonight [thinking about handing leadership over his voice breaks]
[Re question about handing over leadership] obvious... Peter Costello... well into my next term [hits mic stand]




Re govt’s minimal spending in education


All getting rather huffy with each other (which was entertaining)
Rudd quotes OECD figures
Howard says they don’t include recent investments and it’s a dishonest debating point
Rudd: 11 years…
Howard: misleading
Rudd: no additional/recent OECD info…
Howard: ‘Pathetic. You are wrong.’ [Ah, that's very informative and helpful]




Both use dramatic language when speaking of terrorism and security


Rudd:

'I believe in a hard line approach.'
'Uncompromising...'


Howard:

'I will never surrender to terrorists...'
'No escaping...'
People 'brutally murdered' recently in Pakistan...
'Fanatical hatred'
...if we're perceived as weak the terrorists are more rigorous...

Howard also dodged the question of whether the threat of terrorism has increased or decreased because of our role in Iraq war. He dodged the question three times.
Ah, dodging and weaving. His greatest skill.

Rudd later points out how Howard promised not to increase troops before election but then after elected he doubled them, so why believe what he says now...

Howard says we will find out.... It's unreasonable to embroil what the troops are doing in this...

Rudd points out that he brought it up.

Howard says how it was Rudd who chose to ask about it...
'I was providing information to the Australian people' [woe is me, I was being really nice and caring for My Fellow Australians and you go and pick on me!] '...will interest the Australian public. You can sneer but I think people respect the role of forces... [I loves the Australian public, now don't you be mean to them! Nasty, nasty man.]



Reconciliation


Howard was asked why he wouldn't say sorry.

Howard: Of course I'm sorry but that's different to taking responsibility... or apologising. [And why does that matter? He only asked you about saying sorry!]
...Is offensive to millions of Australians... [Yes... You are.]
Guilt and blame... blah blah blah...
Inspired intervention (re recent action)
I'm proud of great team...
NT a watershed, overthrown 20 years of failure... [Er... and 11.5 years of that he was PM. Hmmm.]


Rudd proves he cares:

Little kids suffering...
Apology... about respect.
Know not personally responsible.
Create a bridge...
We embrace...
Bridge the gap...
Apology... bridge...





You know, I'm sure that Howard talked more than Rudd did. Or, maybe it just felt like it...


Anyway, big whoop. Really the debate's greatest value is as a guide for whose voice you can put up with for the longest. Vote for the one you found the least irritating.

PS. The worm found Rudd the least irritating. But that means nothing of course. Sorry worm. You're cute, and you've got more personality than both candidates put together, but you're actually even less useful.

PPS. They should have more debates as they bring out more policies. But... Ugh... I'm actually happy with the one I think. One and a half hours of solid waffling from those two, with NO AD BREAKS, was more than enough. Just let me vote and get this over with!!!