Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Australia Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Are any Liberal supporters as pissed off with Peter Costello as I am?
Aussiegunneragain    3/10/2009 7:50:50 AM
I supported Costello's right to bow out the Federal Liberal Leadership race after the last election because he had spent a long time in politics and had done a good job as Treasuerer, but I reckon the way he has floated around afterwards and failed to absolutely kill off any leadership speculation is bloody lousy. It has given the press the oxygen to keep rumourmongering about the leadership and has undermined Malcom Turnbull, who is a good candidate trying to find his feet in the toughest job in politics. Apart from anything else Costello is going to be nearly 60 by the time he has any chance gaining power (after at least two terms) and will have a strictly limited shelf life, so what the hell is his game now? Does anybody else reckon he should stop stroking his own ego and bugger off? news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/costello-favoured-over-turnbull--poll-20090310-8the.html
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
bigfella    Told Ya   3/11/2009 7:50:34 AM
I've reposted below excerpts from an article I posted 18 months ago & below it in bold my own comments. Cohen predicted that Costello would leave Parliament & so did I. I believe that had the world economy not gone into meltdown in 2008 he probably would have quit once he'd finished writing all the book he plans for the near term. What I think is happening now is that Costello thinks that the economic crisis gives him a chance to roll Rudd. I still doubt he has the guts to actually stick around as opposition leader for any length of time. 
 
What has happened since I wrote my rant simply amplifies what a spineless self-centred bully he is. I hope he does take the leadership. I want to see him lose the only election he will ever contest as leader. 
 

Barry Cohen
December 12, 2007

ANYONE who thinks Brendan Nelson will lead the Coalition into the next federal election missed his interviews on The 7.30 Report and The Insiders.

"Pitiful" was the word that came to mind. There was no resemblance between the answers and the questions. Both interviews were accompanied by TV clips of Nelson screaming, "I've never voted Liberal in my life." That should warm the hearts of Liberal supporters already alarmed at his earlier membership of the Labor Party?.


Which brings us to the morning after the night before and Peter Costello's impersonation of LBJ's "I shall not run" speech. Now that was a surprise.

Since entering Parliament in 1990, at the ripe old age of 32, Peter Costello has been the spoilt brat of Australian politics.

The golden boy of the Victorian Liberal Party, he arrived in Canberra well known for his successes in student politics and his legal battles with the trade unions. He immediately gained a place on the Coalition front bench and within four years was deputy leader of the opposition.

It was heady stuff for one so young, but he took it as his due. He was not used to being denied anything he believed was rightfully his.

Six years after entering Parliament, Costello was treasurer, a position he held until a short while ago. He made it clear, however, that while others might consider his rise meteoric he considered it a mere stepping stone to becoming prime minister.

But while John Howard kept winning elections, Costello's accession to the
throne was deferred, thus ensuring periodic tantrums that did nothing to enhance his reputation with his colleagues or voters.

The punters liked Howard while not caring much for the pretender because he always looked so pleased with himself. He tried to get rid of the smirk but the sincere look was worse.

Costello's critics accuse him of lacking the stomach to challenge Howard, but that's a bit unfair. While Howard kept winning elections, Costello couldn't muster the numbers. His mistake was in continually getting his troops up to the start line then failing to charge.

His ultimate act of political cowardice was the mother of all dummy-spits after the election. Just when his party needed him most he paid them back for not making him PM?.

Barry Cohen was a federal MP from 1969 until 1990. He was minister for the arts, heritage and environment in the Hawke government from 1983 to 1987.

 

Most of what follows in a rant. If you don't want to read it then don't post some pathetic whine afterward about how you hate rants. If you simply wish to disagree, by all means do so.

 

I should point out that I have a much higher regard for our politicians than most people. They do a job few of us would be prepared to do - long hours, long months away from the family and the abuse of millions of ignorant strangers. While I am happy to attack policies & political personas, I try to avoid personal attacks on politicians. I am going to make an exception here because Costello himself has been happ

 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain    BF   3/12/2009 9:48:57 PM
I remember that discussion and stand by my response at the time that your characterisation of his decision to leave politics at that time as cowardly was a unjustifiable and pretty vindictive personal attack on a man who had made a greater contribution to the wellbeing of Australian's over the course of 17 years in parliament than most people will come close to making. I stand by that assertion, if he wanted to retire at that time and follow other pursuits then that was his business, he wasn't under any obligation to answer to anybody.
What I object to now is that having made that decision he doesn't seem to be sticking to it. I agree that he seems to be being opportunistic because the GFC will probably result in the Government being beaten around a bit on the economic front, and on a related matter high paying bank jobs are in short supply at the moment so he doesn't have much else to do. Irrespective of the GFC it is highly unlikely that Rudd is going to get the boot this time around so the Libs need a leader who will stick it out for two terms and I don't think that he wants to do that. He needs to rule out a leadership challenge and let Liberal Party and Turnbull re-focus and rejuvenate. It's not just for the sake of Liberal voters either, but for the sake of a healthy democracy. Despite the fact that the Lib's under Turnbull are making some good points about some of the less desirable elements of Rudd's handling of the GFC, the message is drowned out by Liberal leadership speculation. Every government needs to be held to account and this won't happen while Costello plays his games.
 
Quote    Reply

bigfella       3/13/2009 2:34:20 AM

I remember that discussion and stand by my response at the time that your characterisation of his decision to leave politics at that time as cowardly was a unjustifiable and pretty vindictive personal attack on a man who had made a greater contribution to the wellbeing of Australian's over the course of 17 years in parliament than most people will come close to making. I stand by that assertion, if he wanted to retire at that time and follow other pursuits then that was his business, he wasn't under any obligation to answer to anybody.


What I object to now is that having made that decision he doesn't seem to be sticking to it. I agree that he seems to be being opportunistic because the GFC will probably result in the Government being beaten around a bit on the economic front, and on a related matter high paying bank jobs are in short supply at the moment so he doesn't have much else to do. Irrespective of the GFC it is highly unlikely that Rudd is going to get the boot this time around so the Libs need a leader who will stick it out for two terms and I don't think that he wants to do that. He needs to rule out a leadership challenge and let Liberal Party and Turnbull re-focus and rejuvenate. It's not just for the sake of Liberal voters either, but for the sake of a healthy democracy. Despite the fact that the Lib's under Turnbull are making some good points about some of the less desirable elements of Rudd's handling of the GFC, the message is drowned out by Liberal leadership speculation. Every government needs to be held to account and this won't happen while Costello plays his games.


AG,
 
The reasons I hit him so hard at the time were
 
1) That was precisely the sort of standard he used in the way he treated others
 
and, more importantly
 
2) The political party that had given him so much needed him to give a bit back
 
and finally
 
3) It was my sense that he wasn't retiring because he had 'done his bit', but that he was too lazy & gutless to put in the hard yards of a first term opposition leader.
 
As it turned out that part of my assessment was more accurate than I could possibly imagine. He effectively threw those who took up the mantle he refused under a bus while he sat on the back bench writing his memoirs on the taxpayer's dollar. His current behaviour is not a new direction, it is just a continuation of a longstanding trend. he doesn't want to work for the top job, he wants it handed to him. He isn't even prepared to put in the effort required to sit on the front bench. In the meantime he is happy to undermine the work of people who are prepared to 'have a go'.  
 
To be honest, I didn't think my judgement of the man would be so accurate. He is a disgrace. 

 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain    BF   3/13/2009 3:27:54 AM




I remember that discussion and stand by my response at the time that your characterisation of his decision to leave politics at that time as cowardly was a unjustifiable and pretty vindictive personal attack on a man who had made a greater contribution to the wellbeing of Australian's over the course of 17 years in parliament than most people will come close to making. I stand by that assertion, if he wanted to retire at that time and follow other pursuits then that was his business, he wasn't under any obligation to answer to anybody.



What I object to now is that having made that decision he doesn't seem to be sticking to it. I agree that he seems to be being opportunistic because the GFC will probably result in the Government being beaten around a bit on the economic front, and on a related matter high paying bank jobs are in short supply at the moment so he doesn't have much else to do. Irrespective of the GFC it is highly unlikely that Rudd is going to get the boot this time around so the Libs need a leader who will stick it out for two terms and I don't think that he wants to do that. He needs to rule out a leadership challenge and let Liberal Party and Turnbull re-focus and rejuvenate. It's not just for the sake of Liberal voters either, but for the sake of a healthy democracy. Despite the fact that the Lib's under Turnbull are making some good points about some of the less desirable elements of Rudd's handling of the GFC, the message is drowned out by Liberal leadership speculation. Every government needs to be held to account and this won't happen while Costello plays his games.






AG,

 

The reasons I hit him so hard at the time were

 

1) That was precisely the sort of standard he used in the way he treated others

 

and, more importantly

 

2) The political party that had given him so much needed him to give a bit back

 

and finally

 

3) It was my sense that he wasn't retiring because he had 'done his bit', but that he was too lazy & gutless to put in the hard yards of a first term opposition leader.

 

As it turned out that part of my assessment was more accurate than I could possibly imagine. He effectively threw those who took up the mantle he refused under a bus while he sat on the back bench writing his memoirs on the taxpayer's dollar. His current behaviour is not a new direction, it is just a continuation of a longstanding trend. he doesn't want to work for the top job, he wants it handed to him. He isn't even prepared to put in the effort required to sit on the front bench. In the meantime he is happy to undermine the work of people who are prepared to 'have a go'.  

 To be honest, I didn't think my judgement of the man would be so accurate. He is a disgrace. 


I don't think we are going to agree on the issues surrounding his decision not to contest the leadership after the election but I agree that he is being a selfish, attention seeking prat now, which is probably worse coming from me because I'm on his side.  To be honest I've never thought that he is a viable leadership candidate anyway, he just doesn't have the well rounded political judgement to be a good Prime Minister. AFAIC the potential for a decent alternati e succession in the Lib's went downhill after Peter Reith fell on his sword over the phonecard issue. Cest la vie.

 
Quote    Reply

Archer 155mm       3/13/2009 4:05:35 AM
 
Quote    Reply

bigfella       3/13/2009 8:55:26 AM



 



I don't think we are going to agree on the issues surrounding his decision not to contest the leadership after the election but I agree that he is being a selfish, attention seeking prat now, which is probably worse coming from me because I'm on his side.  To be honest I've never thought that he is a viable leadership candidate anyway, he just doesn't have the well rounded political judgement to be a good Prime Minister. AFAIC the potential for a decent alternati e succession in the Lib's went downhill after Peter Reith fell on his sword over the phonecard issue. Cest la vie.




 
I think we can agree on one thing - he is not PM material.
 
I disagree on Reith. I don't think the minister responsible for encouraging a company to take the 'Cobar Option' (restructure to strip workers of accrued entitlements) and 'Children Overboard' was ever going to be a serious contender for the top job. I think the succession problems in the Liberal Party went beyond Reith's indiscretions. Howard was a very skilled operator who had no intention of allowing potential rivals to emerge. He took this to the extent of not allowing anyone capable of succeeding him to get into a position where they might become an alternative.
 
Howard was great at using people. One of his closest confidants was Downer - in political terms a eunuch. Lexie might have been happy to bully DFAT staff, but he didn't want the top job - the political equivalent of a girl's gay friend. As for the rest, look at people like Reith, Abbot, Costello & even Turnbull. Reith was so covered in political blood by the time he left that he was never a threat. Abbot was promoted well beyond his level of incompetence - providing a loyal right wing attack dog with a following on the 'Likud' wing of the party. Howard was smart enough to let Costello's own flaws as already pointed out to sink him. Turnbull was leveraged into a safe seat as a slap in the face to Costello - a moderate Liberal with even more ambition than Costello, and from Sydney.
 
Unfortunately for the Libs, Howard had little interest in succession planning. As any dictator will tell you, a successor can all too easily become a rival (before you get too upset, the dictator reference was about Howards rule of the Party - which he did with an iron fist. Like Franco, however, he planned for survival, not succession). However favourably Howard will be remembered by Conservatives for his time in power, I suspect the manner of his exit & the mess it left behind will not be remembered kindly.

 
Quote    Reply

Hugo       3/13/2009 10:50:34 AM







 







I don't think we are going to agree on the issues surrounding his decision not to contest the leadership after the election but I agree that he is being a selfish, attention seeking prat now, which is probably worse coming from me because I'm on his side.  To be honest I've never thought that he is a viable leadership candidate anyway, he just doesn't have the well rounded political judgement to be a good Prime Minister. AFAIC the potential for a decent alternati e succession in the Lib's went downhill after Peter Reith fell on his sword over the phonecard issue. Cest la vie.










 

I think we can agree on one thing - he is not PM material.

 

I disagree on Reith. I don't think the minister responsible for encouraging a company to take the 'Cobar Option' (restructure to strip workers of accrued entitlements) and 'Children Overboard' was ever going to be a serious contender for the top job. I think the succession problems in the Liberal Party went beyond Reith's indiscretions. Howard was a very skilled operator who had no intention of allowing potential rivals to emerge. He took this to the extent of not allowing anyone capable of succeeding him to get into a position where they might become an alternative.

 

Howard was great at using people. One of his closest confidants was Downer - in political terms a eunuch. Lexie might have been happy to bully DFAT staff, but he didn't want the top job - the political equivalent of a girl's gay friend. As for the rest, look at people like Reith, Abbot, Costello & even Turnbull. Reith was so covered in political blood by the time he left that he was never a threat. Abbot was promoted well beyond his level of incompetence - providing a loyal right wing attack dog with a following on the 'Likud' wing of the party. Howard was smart enough to let Costello's own flaws as already pointed out to sink him. Turnbull was leveraged into a safe seat as a slap in the face to Costello - a moderate Liberal with even more ambition than Costello, and from Sydney.

 

Unfortunately for the Libs, Howard had little interest in succession planning. As any dictator will tell you, a successor can all too easily become a rival (before you get too upset, the dictator reference was about Howards rule of the Party - which he did with an iron fist. Like Franco, however, he planned for survival, not succession). However favourably Howard will be remembered by Conservatives for his time in power, I suspect the manner of his exit & the mess it left behind will not be remembered kindly.





I'm no Franco fan but his succession planning is generally considered to be quite the accomplishment..  from dictatorship to constitutional monarchy and keeping the hard rightists at bay unlike what played out in neighbouring Portugal.
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain       3/13/2009 8:24:10 PM







 







I don't think we are going to agree on the issues surrounding his decision not to contest the leadership after the election but I agree that he is being a selfish, attention seeking prat now, which is probably worse coming from me because I'm on his side.  To be honest I've never thought that he is a viable leadership candidate anyway, he just doesn't have the well rounded political judgement to be a good Prime Minister. AFAIC the potential for a decent alternati e succession in the Lib's went downhill after Peter Reith fell on his sword over the phonecard issue. Cest la vie.










 

I think we can agree on one thing - he is not PM material.

 

I disagree on Reith. I don't think the minister responsible for encouraging a company to take the 'Cobar Option' (restructure to strip workers of accrued entitlements) and 'Children Overboard' was ever going to be a serious contender for the top job. I think the succession problems in the Liberal Party went beyond Reith's indiscretions. Howard was a very skilled operator who had no intention of allowing potential rivals to emerge. He took this to the extent of not allowing anyone capable of succeeding him to get into a position where they might become an alternative.

 

Howard was great at using people. One of his closest confidants was Downer - in political terms a eunuch. Lexie might have been happy to bully DFAT staff, but he didn't want the top job - the political equivalent of a girl's gay friend. As for the rest, look at people like Reith, Abbot, Costello & even Turnbull. Reith was so covered in political blood by the time he left that he was never a threat. Abbot was promoted well beyond his level of incompetence - providing a loyal right wing attack dog with a following on the 'Likud' wing of the party. Howard was smart enough to let Costello's own flaws as already pointed out to sink him. Turnbull was leveraged into a safe seat as a slap in the face to Costello - a moderate Liberal with even more ambition than Costello, and from Sydney.

 

Unfortunately for the Libs, Howard had little interest in succession planning. As any dictator will tell you, a successor can all too easily become a rival (before you get too upset, the dictator reference was about Howards rule of the Party - which he did with an iron fist. Like Franco, however, he planned for survival, not succession). However favourably Howard will be remembered by Conservatives for his time in power, I suspect the manner of his exit & the mess it left behind will not be remembered kindly.





It's true that Reith's (heroic) fight for industrial relations reform did a lot of political damage to him in the eyes of Jo Punter, but I think he could have remade himself into a viable contender. Remember that John Howard made a real indiscretion with his Asian Immigration comments in 1988 and he was PM 8 years later. As for COB, even if you accept that an indiscretion was made I don't think that that was ever a very big issue in the eyes of Jo Punter, as opposed to people who would never had voted for the Howard Government anyway.
I will agree with you on Abbot, putting aside fromt he fact that I don't agree with his social politics I think that he is a f*cking clown (what sort of Minister turns up late to a debate and then still tries to run for leadership?). Downer was never going to be leader either, though I think he was a good foreign affairs minister (Bullying DFAT .... huh? have you forgotten Gareth Evans!). Turnbull has real potential to remake the party but Costello seems intent on screwing that up for now ... f*cking idiot.
 
I also agree that Howard wasn't very keen on succession planning ... he loved what he was doing t
 
Quote    Reply

bigfella       3/13/2009 9:07:25 PM















 















I don't think we are going to agree on the issues surrounding his decision not to contest the leadership after the election but I agree that he is being a selfish, attention seeking prat now, which is probably worse coming from me because I'm on his side.  To be honest I've never thought that he is a viable leadership candidate anyway, he just doesn't have the well rounded political judgement to be a good Prime Minister. AFAIC the potential for a decent alternati e succession in the Lib's went downhill after Peter Reith fell on his sword over the phonecard issue. Cest la vie.






















 



I think we can agree on one thing - he is not PM material.



 



I disagree on Reith. I don't think the minister responsible for encouraging a company to take the 'Cobar Option' (restructure to strip workers of accrued entitlements) and 'Children Overboard' was ever going to be a serious contender for the top job. I think the succession problems in the Liberal Party went beyond Reith's indiscretions. Howard was a very skilled operator who had no intention of allowing potential rivals to emerge. He took this to the extent of not allowing anyone capable of succeeding him to get into a position where they might become an alternative.



 



Howard was great at using people. One of his closest confidants was Downer - in political terms a eunuch. Lexie might have been happy to bully DFAT staff, but he didn't want the top job - the political equivalent of a girl's gay friend. As for the rest, look at people like Reith, Abbot, Costello & even Turnbull. Reith was so covered in political blood by the time he left that he was never a threat. Abbot was promoted well beyond his level of incompetence - providing a loyal right wing attack dog with a following on the 'Likud' wing of the party. Howard was smart enough to let Costello's own flaws as already pointed out to sink him. Turnbull was leveraged into a safe seat as a slap in the face to Costello - a moderate Liberal with even more ambition than Costello, and from Sydney.



 



Unfortunately for the Libs, Howard had little interest in succession planning. As any dictator will tell you, a successor can all too easily become a rival (before you get too upset, the dictator reference was about Howards rule of the Party - which he did with an iron fist. Like Franco, however, he planned for survival, not succession). However favourably Howard will be remembered by Conservatives for his time in power, I suspect the manner of his exit & the mess it left behind will not be remembered kindly.













It's true that Reith's (heroic) fight for industrial relations reform did a lot of political damage to him in the eyes of Jo Punter, but I think he could have remade himself into a viable contender. Remember that John Howard made a real indiscretion with his Asian Immigration comments in 1988 and he was PM 8 years later. As for COB, even if you accept that an indiscretion was made I don't think that that was ever a very big issue in the eyes of Jo Punter, as opposed to people who would never had voted for the Howard Government anyway.


 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain    BF   3/13/2009 10:30:22 PM


AG,
 

I know you are a fan of Howard's IR reform, but advising a company to restructure so as to deny employees leave & superannuamtion that they have already accrued is indefensible.

 Given the circumstances of Howard's fall & the role of IR I would suggest that this would be an albatross big enough to sink Reith. There is s big difference between what an opposition leader says & what a government minister does.

We'll never know about Reith and the leadership, so that part of the discussion is academic. What we do know is the wharfies had been using extra-legal means (i.e. thuggery) for decades to maintain their monopoly which allowed them to rip off all of us for decades. While we still don't and probably never will know who said what to whom on the Government/Patricks/NFF side during the dispute, the overiding issue for me is that the wharfies got the treatment that they deserved but not enough of it unfortunately. Live by the sword, die by the sword and all that.  
What astounds me rgiyfg is that other working people, particularily those who are in unions, still don't get it that they were sympathising with a bunch of fella's who were completely shafting them. If a company abused monopoly power in that manner everybody would be up in arms but just because wharfies are "workers" (though you wouldn't know it from the actual amount of work they did prior to reform), a significant chunk of the population identify with and feel sorry for them! I don't think that there is a  phenomena in the Australian political psyche (except perhaps for Monachism) which leaves me more bewildered and bemused.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics