Home > Current Affairs, Politics - Domestic, The EYE-BALL MediaZone, The EYE-BALL Opinion > EYE-BALL Opinion – EYE-BALL MediaZone Growl No: 3 – The Australian’s – Janet Albrechtsen – Journalist

EYE-BALL Opinion – EYE-BALL MediaZone Growl No: 3 – The Australian’s – Janet Albrechtsen – Journalist

– EYE-BALL MediaZone Growl No: 3 –
– The Australian’s – Janet Albrechtsen – Journalist – on a story titled –
“Man up, Labor and expel Rudd”
| Author: EYE-BALL MediaZone | 26th June 2013 |
Ihave a view that Janet Albrechtsen is a whole lot of woman and too much woman for most men – I normally enjoy reading her column from a male perspective but there are times when she gets it horribly wrong.

Albrechtsen published a story overnight that tells us more about Albrechtsen’s own brand of gender politics, and why Gillard’s misandry continues to go unchallenged by other women.

Read the story below:

Man up, Labor and expel Rudd

| Author: Janet Albrechtsen | Date: June 26th, 2013| Link to On-Line Story. |

IF the next election is lost for Labor regardless of what happens with the leadership this week, those who care about the party must start planning now how they will rebuild. Julia Gillard should exit the political stage, perhaps taking up a career lecturing about gender politics, delivering speeches about misogyny to wild cheers from disgruntled women and mentoring Emily’s List girls. That leaves what has been Labor’s biggest problem for many years now: what on earth to do about Kevin Rudd?

Of course, if Rudd becomes leader before the election (remember Bob Hawke took the leadership less than a month before the 1983 election) and leads the party to a respectable loss, the party may unite around Rudd. If, however, Gillard remains leader, Rudd will do what he does best – wreck it for those he detests and ultimately treat with contempt a great party that existed before the first parliament sat in 1901.

Indeed, for a little more than three years now, Rudd has been a man driven by a burning desire to seek redemption, revenge and a return to what he believes is his rightful place – the leadership of Labor and the country. The Rudd Problem stems from the spectacular manner in which federal Labor deposed the man from Queensland who curiously claims he’s only here to help.

Those who know Rudd should have known he would seek revenge after being removed as leader. In the days following June 24, 2010, Labor offered no real explanation. Driving a political truck through Gillard’s feeble explanation that under Rudd Labor had lost its way, the Liberal Party told a confused and stunned electorate about faceless men and a Sussex Street death squad. It conjured up images of Pinochet’s Chile, and secret assassins in the night. The damage was done in the electorate, and the seeds of retribution were sown in Rudd. Labor’s failure to come clean about Rudd allowed him to become a martyr.

It was only after Gillard’s stocks plummeted that we learned the truth about Rudd’s removal. He was a psychopath, said Steve Gibbons; he had no Labor values, said Wayne Swan; he ran a chaotic, dysfunctional government, said other ministers who also complained about Rudd deciding big policies with no consultation. Off the record, a senior Labor figure told ABC journalist Chris Uhlmann that Rudd was a narcissist, a “crypto-fascist (who) made no effort to build a base in the party”. His faction comprised poll numbers and when the polls dipped, Rudd was out.

But as the polls changed against Gillard, Rudd became even more expert in his martyrdom role. The church-going family man was more akin to a smiling assassin flying solo, trying to destroy Gillard on an almost daily basis and, in the process, necessarily, destroying the government’s electoral prospects.

Yet Rudd soon morphed into the party’s saviour, a most bizarre outcome given he was the architect of Labor’s biggest policy disaster – the arrival of more than 40,000 illegal immigrants, many hundreds of tragic deaths at sea, and billions spent trying to stem a flourishing people-smuggling industry. Gillard’s poor performance and Labor’s mismanagement of Rudd has allowed him to skate above his policy disasters. In fact, the policy-free nature of Rudd’s campaign reveals the shallowness of his claim. It is based solely on cheesy TV and radio chats and chummy hugs at shopping centres. And you have to hand it to Rudd. He rivals Peter Beattie and Tony Blair for grand master of political spin. Last week, there was Rudd stepping from his government car, political staffers carrying his work stuff, while he pretentiously clutched his sleeping bag en route to the chief executive Sleep Out for the Homeless in Sydney.

So what can Labor do about Rudd after the election?

It’s possible that Rudd will come to his senses and move on from political life. And right after that he and Mark Latham will become besties, Tim Flannery will recant his views about global warming and the ABC will announce that a conservative will host a prime-time current affairs program.

Labor is left with two choices. Make Rudd leader to satiate his desires or expel him from the party. Forget the first. It will only prolong Labor’s pain. That leaves expulsion – perhaps just as unlikely because it will require enormous courage and determination to deal with Rudd in one final, fell swoop. It’s drastic. It’s dramatic. But it is final and effective if Labor wants to rebuild its brand free from Rudd’s crazy narcissism.

Under the ALP state constitutions, any ALP member can charge another with behaviour that warrants expulsion. The federal executive can also seek expulsion. The grounds include: action or conduct contrary to the principles and solidarity of the party; behaviour that is disloyal or unworthy conduct; engaging in disruptive tactics; making public statements about internal party matters that may harm the best interests of the party; not supporting the ALP platform and rules of the party to the best of the member’s ability; or failing to vote and work for officially selected party candidates.

After the election dust has settled, a convincing case could be mounted against Rudd if the many criticisms of him are true. Take the allegations about Rudd’s leaks. They are legion. Latham details some in his book, The Latham Diaries. In Confessions of a Faceless Man, Australian Workers Union boss Paul Howes wrote about more leaks just before the 2010 election: “It seems that the same person who leaked last night’s story to Laurie Oakes has now given similar quotes to Peter Hartcher at The Sydney Morning Herald. It firms up my suspicions that Rudd is waging a dirty war against the Labor Party.” Howes wrote that he became so incensed by Rudd’s alleged behaviour that on July 30, 2010, he drafted charges against the former PM to warrant his expulsion but never filed them. Interestingly, Rudd has never taken legal action against any of these allegations of disloyalty.

Labor has expelled men greater and lesser than Rudd. Billy Hughes was expelled while PM in 1916 and Jack Lang was expelled in 1942. Each expulsion is different but in each case it’s done for the good of the party. It will be up to Labor’s future leaders – men such as Bill Shorten, Greg Combet and Howes – to find the courage to rid the party of this troublesome, capricious, vengeful, angry former PM, toothy smile and all.

If Albrechtsen possessed the necessary objectivity to be a journalist, her story about a post-election ALP should be about why a person of interest in a ‘police investigation’ into a serious fraud was promoted by Union factions to become our Prime Minister in the first place.

Albrechtsen should be writing about Gillard’s criminal charges post the September Election … and about how the Union influence in Gillard’s promotion is linked to those involved in the AWU scandal and its cover-up.

The absence of questions by Albrechtsen and other mainstream journalists into Gillard’s claims that she – ‘did nothing wrong’ – just does not satisfy the masses.   Gillard’s gender politics is her own character flow – she surrounds herself with men in power yet runs to her feminista support base when she needs a good cry about why men don’t like her.

Albrechtsen’s lack of objectivity in favour of story about Rudd’s role in trying to unseat Gillard is reason why Albrechtsen can never be rated above a ‘C’ grade journalist.  Looks and sassy style can only get you so far in the game and Albrechtsen is someone who has it in spades.  But when it comes to serious journalism – she is nothing but a misandrist at heart.

Surely any moral person with an ounce of integrity, and an open mind has to be aware of Gillard’s flawed past connected with her association and involvement in the AWU scandal, that her status as a Lawyer is compromised with good reason, and that her past sexual relations with other married ALP MP’s would be a choice that would not fly with Australia’s voting public.

Albrechtsen would rather look to Rudd for reasons why the AP is floundering.  Why would that be?

Albrechtsen writes about a post-election Gillard and how she deserves the privileges of an ex PM – she does not entertain any other thought or reasons other that why the ALP is in the mess it is in and not have to face the allegations that have dogged her every day she has been in public office.

Does Albrechtsen believe that the campaign against Gillard over her criminal past is a misogyny plot – a campaign based on the fact that Gillard is a female.  How does Albrechtsen get to hold such a role as a journalist with such a closed view?

There is no doubt Albrechtsen has misandrist tendencies when it suits her – her moral judgement against Rudd in favour of Gillard’s untenable position is the evidence …

Albrechtsen chose not to write about Gillard’s rise to become PM when she more than most with access to fellow ‘The Australian’ journalist Hedley Thomas’s research would know about Gillard’s past – why would she chose to ignore that evidence – unless it was an Editor’s pick to give the paper an angle that could only be written by a female journalist …

Failing the above scenario – Albrechtsen’s willingness to pen a story about Rudd as the destroyer is based on a ‘man-hate’ position she cannot defend …

Please – if you found this story to your liking and would like to promote it to your social media contacts – i.e. Twitter, Facebook, or other icon linked account below – please use/click on your favoured Icon(s) to promote the story.  Thankyou.

Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website – MP’s

The EYE-BALL Opinion’s – MEDIAZONE …

  1. June 26, 2013 at 4:36 pm

    Hi Eyeball. It’s fascinating to read how people see things so differently. I always enjoy Janet’s writing and I found this article no different. I loved her very barbed “tongue in cheek ” suggestions and scenarios of what Gillard and Rudd could do after politics. Hilarious!

    Janet has written very consistently on Gillard’s AWUWRA transgressions and been very much to the point. Her denunciation of Gillard’s misogyny speech and the disgraceful follow-ups by McTernan’s Handbag Mafia was brilliant. Her demolition of Penny Wong and Tony Jones on the AWU Fraud on Lateline some weeks ago was a joy to behold.

    I’ll be very interested to see how others interpreted her article, but for me it was a brilliant analysis and summation. But isn’t diversity of opinion, open debate and discussion a wonderful freedom to enjoy and I thank you for your entertaining site, allowing such stimulating interaction. We should never forget that Gillard, Bob Brown, Wayne Swan, Christine Milne, Steven Conroy, Nicola Roxon and others tried to take this freedom away!

    Cheers H/B.

  2. June 26, 2013 at 5:28 pm

    Hi Hillbilly, thanks for the candid response … to be honest smart savvy women scare me … you never know what their agenda is … career, relationship, or advancement …

    So the ‘tongue in cheek’ as you call it was to me just a ‘change of cloths’ for someone that can change her looks and style every other day.

    We men are truly whipped …

  3. Barry M
    June 27, 2013 at 5:35 am

    Eyeball, I am surprised at your take on Albrechtson’s article but it is one way of looking at it.
    What I am far more surprised about is your line…’smart savvy women scare me’
    Among other things that line gives credence to Gillards blue ties crap. Why would any self assured person be concerned about not knowing another persons agenda. A self assured person would work out what their agenda was and deal accordingly. And we are whipped only if we like being whipped. Men play into the hands of women who use the gender card by actually recognising the gender card. Until we treat the ‘gender card players’ the same as we treat other men we will get whipped every time. Abbott is a good example, his gentlemanly conduct with regard to the Harpy fishwife’s behaviour of Gillard has only encouraged her to go harder.
    Smart savvy women don’t have to rely on the gender card to achieve their goals. Being ‘smart and being savvy’ will work every time for them, just as it works for men who are ‘smart and savvy’. Don’t be frightened of the smart and savvy woman, be bloody frightened of the gender playing Harpies they will do you over every time if you allow them to get away with their fake gender wars.

  4. June 27, 2013 at 8:25 am

    Hi Barry M,

    Thanks for the candor … perhaps I’m old school when it comes to women – opening a door, sense of protectiveness, perhaps my admiration for their mother instincts and a solid belief that children need their mother at home in their early years.

    Albrechtson’s article to me was a waffle – a space filler – nothing about nothing when there was so much more she could have written about …

    Given the events overnight – not the SOO thrashing dished out to the Blues … but the game change in having Gillard gone does not change the fact that Gillard is still under a police investigation and nobody wants to write about that …

    Why is the media holding back on this story … why when they all know of Gilard’s involvement is there so much formality being observed in her demise when Gillard still owns her past …

    Nobody should feel sorry for Gillard – and Albrechtson’s story gave me a sense that it was written with grounded support for Gillard and a bias against Rudd’s supporters undermining Gillard.

    Cassidy this morning has already started the media wagon in indermining Rudd … and to be honest – most of the undermining of Gillard attributed to Rudd came from the media trying to create copy for their papers …

    A weight has been lifted and if a deal has been done to protect Gillard from the police investigation then Australia will have been robbed yet again …

    The winds of change are afoot and makes for interesting times … the media are still running the show and that does us no favours …

    Rudd being a media whore will shine brightly for a while – but the question will then be about whether the ALP’s flawed Union control remains … whether policy can sway the poll numbers … Gillard is a criminal and the fact that the ALP as a political party ignored that fact in promoting Gillard has to have consequences …

    If Gillard escapes justice then that is a reflection of our democracy and Albrechtson’s story should have reflected that as an aftermath … in my opinion …

  5. Barry M
    June 27, 2013 at 9:25 am

    Eyeball I am with you all the way on how ‘women’ should be treated. It is how I treat my wife and daughters and all women who WANT to be treated in that manner. My wife never worked a day from the time she first got pregnant to after they had finished their schooling. It was a joint decision based on our values. But if a woman wants to pull the gender card on me she automatically gets treated the way that suit her actions. Today such a thing can be taken as being sexist.
    My thoughts in my previous post apply to the feminists who want to wage gender wars and continually feel sorry for themselves and thus seek pity. There are plenty of smart and savvy women succeeding in the business and academic world who do not pull the gender card. Smart and savvy women want to get there on their talent. If we let the gender warriors get on top of us with their gender war crap then we will get whipped, and it is happening, their are a lot of blokes out their getting whipped, they are either nancies, enjoy being whipped or just don’t care.
    I remember my first introduction to ‘whipped men’. I had been sent to the USA when my employer bought an American company. My wife and I were in a restaurant and I noticed a two couples enjoying a night out and had babies with them. The blokes were nursing the babies and giving them their bottles. All the while the ladies were hitting the slops and having a great time. I waited for the change over but it never happened and I asked my wife if sharing duties was a thing of the past and said I was pleased our kids were at an age where it was not an issue for us. She agreed.
    Many men are turning into softcocks when threatened with the gender card.
    As for Gillard I think she will get charged along with Wilson and maybe Blewitt. The “documentary” evidence is far too strong for her not to be. The evidence is not ‘he said she said’ stuff, it is on paper. However it will depend on whether some of the crucial evidence has been shredded and/or removed from computer files. She certainly deserves to be charged. The interesting move by Shorten to support Rudd tells me Bill Ludwig has started distancing himself and the AWU from Gillard. Forget about where Howes support is, that is wallpaper, Ole Bill is expert in double dealing.
    The MSM is full of lefty luvvies, even in the Murdoch press, albeit a little softer than Fairfax. They will go down with her in respect to their credibility.
    There are also a heap of the current Labor MP’s who will get caught up in the cover up and don’t forget a certain member of our Judiciary.
    As for Scotums he is Dim Tim’s first best friend and also he is probably frightened of what his wife (and ABC employee) will do to him if he turned into a misogynist and supported Rudd.
    There is nothing that I have seen that has Albrechtson supporting Gillard. As a rusted on Liberal she may wish Gillard had been left in the job to make it easier for them to take more seats.

  6. Barry M
    June 27, 2013 at 9:29 am

    I forgot to add that Rudd will get the chop after the election and young Billy will get his lolly as a reward from Ole Bill

  7. June 27, 2013 at 9:58 am

    Thanks for the comment Barry M – I agree with the theme of your comments and acknowledge that men are in a gender quandry – dammed if they do and dammed if they don’t … it’s a generational thing and tought on men who lived and grew up with a set of rules that now have them confused and unsure about whetehr a flirty comment can get them fired or slapped …

    On the political side – to me – ‘less is more’ when it comes to politics – how we ever allowed this ‘soap opera’ crap into out living rooms 24/7 is where we went wrong …

    Politicians automaticly think all Australian want to know about their latest update – and impose on us that ego trip …until we turn it off and send them a message it will not change – i.e. dwaw a box on your ballot paper at the election and Vote “None of the Above” … I know it’s a challenge but if the deliberate informal vote rises then the politicians will be forced to listen … our democracy model has to change … more accountability, more transparency, and a set of rules that Governments must abide by that reflect the wants of the people …

  8. June 27, 2013 at 12:10 pm

    There is simply so much it is inundating.

    Big tick to Barry on the gender card.

    AWUWRA has for the time being run its course. It was difficult to get it going during Julia’s time as PM, it is now even more difficult, apathy, let sleeping dog’s lie. Of course a real democracy should fully and fairly investigate. Isn’t that the message about child sexual abuse. It creates trauma, it creates mental illness, it leads to suicides, it is a cancer on society. But Canberra is both corrupt and corruptible. Who is going to really clean it out? The foxes have built the chicken coop.

    Something which needs a bit more air, is the greater pragmatic approach to boat arrivals. A fortnight ago a boat sunk where there were many lives lost (50 something – detail is not published – it is an estimate only). There was a token search for survivors. When that token search ended it was announced patrol boats were too busy to retrieve the dead. ie buried at sea. How many times can you tell an alcoholic, don’t drink or an addict avoid the pitfalls associated with addiction? You can try to reduce supply. How many times can you tell these refugees, you are risking your life? Why is it Australia’s problem in international waters?

    This leads on to the parlous fiscal position this government has left.Only applying the brakes gently can work. There is no sure fire economic strategy. The immigration issue adds to this subverting of energy. Who really can apply the brakes gently? Do you trust Rudd, who started the rot, or Hockey, when the best he can offer is “we will see”?

    Janet Albrechtsen is many things. Most simply from the school of Attila the Hun. Taking prisoners drains your resources. I find it hard to believe her early words “wreck it for those he detests and ultimately treat with contempt a great party that existed before the first parliament sat in 1901.” The ALP has evolved, just like our existence. At times the rules of 1901 are out of date.

    At university if you can’t state both sides you fail. For me that is exactly what Albrechtsen is attempting to do. State both sides. Gillard disaster, Rudd greater disaster. Did she ever think Coalition greatest disaster? The ALP is in tatters. That is a given. I believe turning the page does mean without both Gillard and Rudd. But does that mean going back to more of the Howard years?

  9. July 1, 2013 at 7:56 pm

    As things start to settle there is much. So much, so so much.

    On June 22nd 2012 I was at a conference where Theresa Rein was a guest speaker. Her opening words to the effect “Sunday will be 2 years since my husband was sacked… ” I walked out.

    Tonight opinion polls say Libs lead Labs by 51% to 49%. Opinion polls by their statistical sampling nature have an error factor of 3%. How robust are the sampling methods?

    The media is now waiting for “the Rudd factor” to dissipate. Only last Friday I was so sick of hearing same old same I turned the radio off. I turned it back on last weekend to hear what was happening. Even now I don’t want to hear same old same.

    What has really changed? Combet has gone, Crean has gone. But the toads remain. No one wants to really take out the real problem. Self Interest.

    Today I was discussing with another the fact that this senate paper will be disproportionately large, even by modern standards. I get home to hear about protests in Tahrir Sq. Do these egotists understand too many Australians are hurting. What might be done to effect positive change?

    What can we do?

    The professional classes do not understand how people are hurting. ACOSS or Disabilitycare are a massively swelling group. Why?

    What will Disabilitycare achieve for our society? More people standing on the outside looking in? What is the strict definition of disabled? We need more and more Disadvantagedcare! What is that fine line between disabled and disadvantaged?

    An open and frank inquiry into AWUWRA would only scratch the surface, but it would be start, a good start. Stop this abuse of privilege. Who cares about Rudd being sacked or being reincarnated We just want effective leadership.

    Tahrir as in Tahrir sq translated means martyr, just like Sacre Couer de Montmartre. The Sacred heart of Mountain of Martyrs. Why does Australia need a Mountain of Martyrs?

    We are the land of opportunity. Enough said.

  1. No trackbacks yet.
Comments are closed.
%d bloggers like this: