We of course have come to expect politicians to play fast and loose with the truth, to be masters at equivocation, and to never answer a direct question, but it seems that Kevin Rudd has perfected all this – and then some. Indeed we find this perfectly played out in a recent article about the guy – someone we might call the great pretender.
What he says in this article – or doesn’t say, or says with weasel words – is just a perfect example of the way Rudd does things. And it is just not how anyone who seeks to run this country should be doing things. It is another good reason why he deserves to be given the flick.
This article is simply incredible for so many reasons. In it we see Rudd the master politician, who has perfected the art of lying, of distorting facts, and twisting things out of all recognition. It has to do with his push for homosexual marriage.
In his first debate he insisted that this would be a super-priority, rammed through in the first hundred days of being in office. Now he is back-pedalling like a frightened turtle. Let me offer a few lines from the article, then speak to it further:
“Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has declared he is not going to ‘ram’ his views on same-sex marriage ‘down the throats’ of others by allowing a referendum on the matter if he is re-elected. When asked on triple J’s Hack tonight why he would not promise a binding vote if he was ‘really serious’ about marriage equality, Mr Rudd said he would not force his views on ‘questions such as this’ on people who don’t share them.”
Um, yeah right Rudd. You are backpedalling big time for one simple reason: most folks are not the slightest bit interested in homosexual marriage. It is simply a non-issue, and one which will in fact cost Rudd votes by ordinary folks in the electorate.
And plenty of homosexuals themselves are not in the slightest interested in it either, as I carefully document in my book Strained Relations. And many of the big cheese homosexual activists who are now pimping this in fact not so long ago thought it was a non-event as well.
Consider what activist Rodney Croome said some years ago about this topic: “I was also once a sceptic about marriage reform, believing it to be a distraction from more important issues, at best unnecessary and at worst dangerous”.
And get a load of this baloney about not forcing a referendum on this. Oh, aren’t you nice Kevvie – so very considerate of you. The simple truth is this: of course he does not want to go the route of a referendum. He knows his stupid idea will be shot down in flames if he does. The people will vote it down big time. Indeed all the homosexual militants know this as well.
Thus they keep telling us we must not have a referendum on this issue. They are scared stiff about it, knowing they would lose big time. Thus we find ol’ Rodney penning whole pieces on this: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/why-a-referendum-on-gay-marriage-is-a-bad-idea-20130429-2inuh.html
There he whines about this issue being divisive and how “cashed up” groups will oppose it. Yeah right Rod. Our side is just rolling in the dough. After all, we have so much government funding – something which your side just never experiences – not.
So he offers us these baloney opinion pieces telling us the people cannot be trusted on this issue, so better leave it to the elites to decide for us. And that is exactly Rudd’s point as well. He most certainly wants to ram homosexual marriage down our throats. He wants to simply bypass the will of the people and use Parliament to push his deviant agenda.
This is just how dictators operate: ignore the people and force things on them whether they like it or not. Thus this entire article shows us just what a conniving, deceitful, low-life Kevin really is. It is incredible that anyone would even consider voting for this guy.
And when uber-lefty rags like the Canberra Times start saying the same things about the guy, then you know that Rudd is a real dud. In what was an extraordinary attack on the PM, the CT today printed “Rudd’s delusional world is crashing around him” by Nicholas Stuart.
It begins, “Perhaps accidentally, but Bill Shorten got it absolutely right when he said, ‘I know who’s more popular. It’s Tony.’ Make-up artist Lily Fontana got it totally right when she said, ‘I’ve never had anyone treat me so badly while trying to do my job.’ A third of the cabinet got it completely right when they resigned rather than work with Kevin Rudd.
“They didn’t judge him politically – their conclusions are personal and based on the belief that Rudd only cares about himself. According to them the rhetoric and the fine words simply serve to camouflage personal ambition, detached from reality.
“Indications that Rudd is living in a delusional world came when he allowed the perception to grow that he’d stopped campaigning to ‘undertake, in a calm and measured fashion’ briefings on the situation in Syria. ‘These are troubling times in the international community,’ he said, ‘and we need to focus carefully and squarely on unfolding events as they affect Australia’s core national interests.’ Well, it seems we’ve done nothing. Perhaps our interests weren’t involved after all.
“Rudd may have no policy principles, but we can live with that. But sociopathology (the absence of a moral compass and the belief that reality can be defined to suit yourself) is another thing altogether. To justify overthrowing Julia Gillard, he claimed she was ‘leading Labor to a catastrophic defeat’. Now he says: ‘I will not be engaged in any character assassination of her or her political … record.’ Both statements can’t be true.”
He ends his piece as strongly as he begins it: “He is, in short, arrogant and offensive to people whether they’re putting on make-up, picking up his clothes or serving up policy papers. Let me assure you, it’s not just one make-up artist who has suffered. I’ve heard similar complaints expressed by many staffers over the years, although always on the basis that the details aren’t to be repeated.
“Arguably it doesn’t matter if he’s a rude pig if he gets the job done. Some would excuse a gifted leader because they’re operating on a higher plane. Or, as Rudd claimed, ‘in the zone’. This works fine while things are going well; the trouble arrives if it begins to fall apart. There’s no one to fall back on.
“Rudd’s going down. People in the party are already peering over his shoulder to secure their future, because he won’t be shaping it. They’ve begun looking beyond Rudd to see who’s coming on as the next leader. There’s a spreading realisation that this campaign represents the end. There will be no forgiveness.
“The election campaign has moved into a new phase. The circle in the Ruddenbunker is growing smaller. Increasingly, people are keeping one eye on the exit. Too many inside Labor hold bitter grudges. It’s the media’s job to record honestly what others tell them. Facts are verifiable – but packing a story full of fact doesn’t mean you’re faithfully recording what’s occurring. It’s necessary to look beyond statements to reality.
“There comes a moment, once every three years, when the spinning and construction and the myth-making stops. That time is finally approaching with all the ruthless finality of a Soviet tank army closing in on Berlin in 1945. The phantom defences won’t stop Abbott’s assault. Many voters may not particularly like him, but they still prefer him to Rudd. That’s for a reason.”
As I say, when even the CT dumps on Rudd, you know he is history. I can’t wait for September 7.