The Kevin Rudd vs. Tony Abbott true truth smackdown (with show tunes & Clarke and Dawe):

Henrie Ellis writes: Re. “Tony Abbott’s struggle with the truth” (yesterday, item 1). For gawd’s sake, what if Tony Abbott was lying when he said he was loose with the truth, so he wasn’t even honest then. If he was being honest he is a self confessed liar who cannot be trusted.

For some to rationalise that Tony (to use his own words) was just trying to be “fair dinkum” ignores his record for deception and equivocation on many policy issues. That begs the question — is this testosterone fuelled pollie a fantasist living in Liberal la la land?

Liberal la la land is where great big new taxes live and fester, where genuine refugees are called “illegal immigrants”, where climate change equates to human and animal waste, where statistics and liars co-exist in a symbiotic relationship, where everyone unless employed is a welfare cheat. In Liberal la la land the government aka Kevin Rudd is directly responsible for deaths in the home insulation scheme.

On the occasions when the BER funding has been rorted and maladministered despite feedback that the overwhelming numbers of schools in all systems have welcomed the scheme, la la land claims the money has been wasted on the nation’s children and schools.

This is the la la land populated by pathetic, tired has beens in the shadow cabinet awaiting the resurrection of the discredited voodoo economics of the neo conservatives, of populist ignorant nonsense and blatant dog whistling.

Julian Gillespie writes: I’m not a Liberal voter, I’m a person who believes that that the biggest business in this country — the government namely will do as it wants . So when Tony Abbott coughs-up and admits he bullshits, I’m hardly filled with shock-and-awe. No, just a little taken a-back by all the other pollies trying real-hard to say he’s full of it.

Meanwhile, why is it so very hard for our Prime Minister and other seniors to go stampeding in-for-the kill on Tony on this blazingly obvious “political misstep”. Why not? Because every other person in Parliament was more than a little dumb-struck by Tony’s honesty.

I don’t get up for Tony very often, and probably won’t when he wants me most too; but as for stepping-out and speaking a basic piece of centuries-old political truth — son, you are absolved.

Chris Johnson writes: Why Tony Abbott is one big conundrum is like asking why a chameleon changes its colours? Your average hard-wired bullshit artist doesn’t usually get to lead a political party but in this case Tony Abbott’s colleagues all ignored the warning signs. That the guy reached his level of incompetence before a national television audience in an election year is as much their fault as his.

A man with a long reliable record for telling porkies, prone to ill-timed uncontrolled outbursts of bad and silly language, open to a bit of casual subterfuge like knobbling his opponents are traits we discourage in society but in the Liberal Party they’re apparently assets.  The Tony Abbott phenomenon isn’t about flirting with the truth–– it’s about knowing when to draw the line particularly in public office.

Down at the surf club shooting off your mouth, being a mug lair and swaggering round in lycra might all be part of the scene but inside parliament and in a leadership role Tony Abbott’s time and place mechanism isn’t even trip-switched.

The best thing Tony Abbott has done is leave the priesthood. At least in a public life there are balances and checks to weed out those who tend to walk on the wild side.

John Shailer writes: A desperate Kevin Rudd has sent out his attack dogs and media pack to beat up a loose remark from Tony Abbott into an alleging Tony is a deliberate liar.  This is pretty rich coming from Kevin, who has turned breaking promises into an art form.

Abbott simply said that a remark in the heat of the moment does not carry the same weight as a carefully considered statement?  Tony is prepared to give an honest answer to question, rather than engage in the gobblegook that his opponents use, and this  gets him into trouble occasionally.

However if the next election comes down to a question of honesty between Kevin and Tony, I know who I would trust!

Jackie French writes: Unfortunately the study quoted states that it’s the ability to lie successfully that denotes a good executive brain. Tony Abbott has yet to achieve this. With apologies to Gershwin, and please  sing along:

It ain’t necessarily so,
It ain’t necessarily so.
The things that you’re liable
To hear from his Bible.
They ain’t necessarily so.

Vic Waters writes: With apologies to Clark and Dawe.

Thanks for joining us tonight, Mr Abbott.
You’re welcome Brian, very nice to be here.
Is it?
Is it what?
Nice to be here?
Yes, I just said that.
Yes, I know you said that Mr Abbott, but should we believe it?
Yes, of course; it’s nice to be here.
Alright, is that an official statement, Mr Abbott?
No, well, er,…um well if you mean…
Is it part of an official statement, that you’re glad to be here?
Well, no, uh, um but….
Alright, well could I move on to something a bit easier?
Yes, I wish you would Brian.
Alright: you have told the Australian people…
Well, the few that watch the 7.30 Report…
Quite: you told them that they should only believe you when you are making an official speech – is that right…no I’ll rephrase that – is that what you said?
Yes, Brian, I did say that.
And was that an official speech?
No, I was just talking to Kerry…
So it wasn’t official?
NO, as I said….
So should we believe you?
What?
If it wasn’t an official speech, in which you said that we can believe you when you make an official speech, how do we know that’s true?
I have to go now Brian.
Really?