Wow, there's no chance they would support him. UN like the ABC is a conservative free zone, unless you're Muslim.

I actually wouldn't be surprised if the ALP told Turnbull behind the scenes that they were cool with him not being supported.

He is hated within the party.

If the conservative faction was a bit more Machiavellian, they would have supported the nomination, because it would have put the ALP in the position of supporting him when they hate him.

Now the ALP can cry foul and paint it as Turnbull capitulating to the conservatives again.

Maybe just being on this forum for too long is making me more conspiratorial in mindset???? hahaha

There's no political capital in this whatsoever, Rudd will be forgotten in a week or two. Of course there is always the off chance supporting him would help get him the gig, so best just nip it in the bud.

Yes I think that is a bit too conspiratorial :lol:

Honestly, I think the wheels are already wobbling on the Turnbull government and they haven't even sat a single day in parliament. First I think the Royal Commission into Youth Detention has been botched and now this. Both these things might be seen as minor but they have a habit of snowballing.

Would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when Malcolm called Kruddies :lol:

-PB

Krudd's a fuckwit, don't see how it's such a problem to refuse him. He's not Caesar Augustus ffs

Better to have been a fly on Mal's doorbell. Apparently Rudd flew from Brisbane to Sydney to see Mal and Mal refused to see him.

AzzaMarch

spot on as usual. If the Libs High Tory element had their wits, they could have been rather Machiavellian and approved of the nomination.

Also if Turnbull wasn't over a barrel, he'd have approved it.

I'm actually a bit pissed off about this. Even though it was basically academic because Rudd wouldn't have gotten the job.

In the event that he did somehow become Secretary-Gen, I think he could be anything from outstanding to poor. He has poor people skills (although as far as I'm concerned pissing off the ALP is something to be commended), but he was, at least, popular as a PM for the wider electorate for a good deal of his tenure. He's also intellectually right up there and being an expert on China is a big help.

Julie Bishop's opinion here is the most-informed. For all the criticism (just and unjust) that the Libs get, they have put in place a Foreign Minister who is absolute class. She's an absolute pro at that, understands international relations immaculately and is loved by DFAT.

She thinks that Rudd should have been approved so that's compelling enough.

In any event, even if she wasn't in favour (which she was), it's incredibly petty.

Turnbull comes across as utterly spineless.

Its not petty, he just wasnt suitable. Everybody knows it. Turnbull should just do the right thing as opposed to being "Machiavellian" and playing stupid games. Hopefully now that this shit is over we can stop talking about Rudd and move on to more important stuff.

And yet he's qualified enough for the current Foreign Minister to run ideas past him?

He's also an expert on China which is a huge help.

Clearly, he's suitable in those respects. Questions perhaps about his personality. But the custom is that party-political stuff doesn't stop these appointments, which it has done here.

Go by what those most competent thing. Julie Bishop's opinion is the most relevant. She thinks he'd do just fine.

JBs opinion is just hers, we shouldnt do things just because JB thinks we should.
Its not about "party stuff" which has stopped this appointment, even his own party hates him. He just isnt suitable and neither is Tony Abbott. If Labor want to put someone suitable we're all ears, Gillard, Beazley, Plib, Crean, just not Rudd.

Could the libs be anymore petty?

Nothing like scoring a few tacky cheap political points off Rudds name

That won't even be possible given the coalition were divided on this and it was a captain pick by Turnbull.

It really just makes him look petty:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-29/rudd-releases-letters-to-turnbull-on-un-secretary-general-bid/7674038

Then she shouldn't be FM. But she is. And why? Because she's very good at it. DFAT are thrilled with her.

Gillard or Crean? You've got to be joking, they'd be far worse. Gillard is far more self-interested and disingenuous than Rudd. She is a complete sell-out who basically punched Australian single-parents, universities and those in same-sex partnerships in the guts while they're already down (despite supposedly speaking for progress). And, unlike Rudd, Gillard has bugger all expertise in international relations. Nor does she even speak a language other than English (to my knowledge).

By the sound of it, Rudd has an "interesting" personality. But having gotten into fights with the Labor [sic] Party is probably not a bad thing. It probably means you're quite balanced. Most of them aren't fit to run a bath, let alone a country.

I dont think it looks petty because most people realise Rudd is a snake, untrustworthy and has a flawed character that makes him unsuitable for the position. The only people who will find it petty are "machiavellen" green and labor who have nothing better do to than feign support for the guy they tossed out of government in his first term.

Several of those whom you described as reasonable alternatives were culpable of precisely the same traits you accuse Rudd of. I gather you accuse Rudd of being a "snake" and "untrustworthy" for ousting a PM. As it happens, that's exactly what that lot did to him.

I won't weigh in on whether or not these "coups" are acceptable or not. But if you're going to accuse Rudd of them, you can't, in the same breath, suggest others culpable of exactly the same thing are morally better.

Rudd getting into fights with Labor has nothing to do with him being balanced, lol. Rudd imo doesnt have the temperament to be sec gen, he is vindictive and will try to embarrass Australia rather than act in our interests. Who cares that he has knowledge of China. Just a bad choice, as are Crean, Gillard etc but imo not being a narcissist is a good start.

I agree that there are question marks next to his temperament. As I say, I think he could either be an average Secretary-General or an outstanding one. I have a suspicion it would be all or nothing.

Turnbull ought simply have referred to his colleague who is most used to enjoying a working relationship with Rudd and most aware of his knowledge of international affairs- his Foreign Minister, Julie Bishop. She said yes. And even if she hadn't...

Convention demands that they do support his candidacy (unless there's some genuine reason not to- e.g. racism, tax avoidance, etc.).

The fact that so many on the internet are already saying Turnbull comes across looking weak makes it fairly damn obvious that he does.

Rudd took it to another level. He deliberately sabotaged his partys prospects of winning relection, for his own grandiose needs. There probably arent too many in the oz political landscape suitsble for sec gen, im merely pointing out Rudd is a terrible choice and though Gillard etc would all be terrible choices Rudd is a particular kind of saboteur who is morally unfit and underserving if a prestgious position like that. Being a c*nt in parliament shouldnt be rewarded by being supported by the parliament you were a c*nt to.

Only labor and green stooges are saying he is weak. Theyre just trying to exploit the decision for a few cheap, tacky political points, to make them feel better for their election result. Most Australians recognise he would be a bad choice for sec gen and support the PMs decision. If Rudd wants to be ambassador to give it tk him but im afraid convention isnt a strong enough reason to back someone who will undermine and embarrass Australia as well as being undeserving and failing the character test.

rusty

I personally disagree with you that Rudd did take it to another level.

Basically, imo, the ALP backed Rudd in 2007 because they saw him as their best prospect (even if he wasn't the most popular in the party). He became PM, did ok and thus enjoyed a reasonable degree of popularity in the electorate. However, things were falling apart at the seams within the party. They openly despise him. How much of this is due to Rudd's ego and how much of it is due to the ALP generally being comprised of morons, I'm not sure.

So they decided to ditch him and back Gillard who better reflected the personality of those with power within the party.

She was thirty times worse. It became untenable. Rudd, and the party, realised that their only hope was for him to become leader again. So they swapped again.

It's basically ALP incompetence more than anything.

Rudd was bad. You just cant blame it on labor incomptence and morons, if most of your party despises you chances are there is something with your leadership style, and i would say sec gen of the UN requires leadership skills which galvanise the world leaders rather than divide. Unlike elections the Un is not a popularity contest and involves minimal direct interaction with the public. It simply comes down to not trusting Rudd to advance Australias national interest, and that lack of trust is well founded.

As I said, I have some concerns about his personality. I'm not sure he's quite as selfless as the likes of Kofi Annan. But it should have been irrelevant because personal differences should not dissuade the Libs from approving his candidacy. But even my concerns are tempered by the kind of stupidity and selfishness which is par for the course within the ALP.

Frankly, who cares what embittered people like Wayne Swan, Julia Gillard and Simon Crean think.

I have respect for Doug Cameron and I have respect for Julie Bishop. They both enjoyed good working relationships with Rudd. That's enough to go by.

Furthermore, it's not about advancing Australia's national interest. That's not the mandate of the UN Secretary-General.

From Australias perspective he could work against our interest. After all , the voters delivered him labors worst ever election result, he knows how much that couldve twisted his already fragile psyche.

Do not trust him.

funniest thing laughing my arse off.....Rudd the bully, potty mouthed egotistical narcissistic doesn't get his way and chucks a spaz attack, proving he isn't up to the task

i agree about Julie Bishop, class act......can't agree that Rudd would be up to the task........kunt is a loose canon........no people skill and has massive tantrums.

some associates of mine used to be on his security detail and absolutely everyone hated him for being a Kunt and wanker full of himself and rude as fuck..........not a good look for Australia

understatement of 2016

How has he chucked a spaz attack by requesting a meeting with Turnbull? :?


So in your eyes has Bishop's judgement here in supporting Rudd been poor? I guess obviously in Turnbulls it has, which should surely raises questions about her job performance/security as Foreign Minister. Don't think the Libs can have it both ways on this.