This is about as ridiculous as it gets

The biggest news story of the day isn’t the drop in interest rates – that will save those with a mortgage an estimated $65 a month – no, the biggest story is Kevin Rudd’s fringe:

IT’S starting. A groundswell of discontent is building against the greatest of Kevin Rudd’s sins – the hair flick.

The Prime Minister has perplexed and irritated us for years with his trademark habit of running a hand through his fringe at least once a minute. The rate rises to one flick every ten seconds when the PM is outdoors.

It isn’t Kevin Rudd’s only bad habit. We’ve previously documented the best of his unique gestures, including ‘the back of the farm’, ‘the Specsaver’ and a personal favourite, ‘the shot put’.

The hair flick entered public life as a lovable quirk. Now thousands of Australians shudder when Mr Rudd reaches for his hair.

Here’s the worst part. His hair barely moves. When Mr Rudd flips his fringe, his hair just returns to its original position. There is no aesthetic dividend to justify this exercise in male preening.

This morning’s press conference in Brisbane was surely the final straw for Australian voters. The wind billowed through Mr Rudd’s hair, leading him to readjust it. Again. And again. And again.

Finally, with the election campaign underway, we’re beginning to talk about the big political issues. Refreshing, isn’t it?

Update: THE FRINGE STRIKES BACK. A new Twitter account has popped up today, called @KevinsFringe. Its motto? “Flick it. Flick it real good.”

JOIN THE CAMPAIGN. Tweet #stopthehairflicks: @KRuddMP | @KevinsFringe | @Kieran_Gilbert | @brihonyspeed | @SamClench | @newscomauHQ

Oh FFS! This morning’s press conference in Brisbane was surely the final straw for Australian voters. Really, what a load of bullshit.

And isn’t it typical of to encourage mainstream media and social media debate on such a pathetic issue whilst doing naught to encourage discussion on how interest cuts could benefit you, or wait for it, if someone might actually give some credit to the Government for them? Funny too, that none of Tony Abbott’s annoying traits are ever mentioned, such as walking away from interviews

This is about as ridiculous as it gets.

But then again, it is the Murdoch media. Expect the ridiculous.

The hair flick that non-one really cares about.

The hair flick that non-one really cares about.

56 comments on “This is about as ridiculous as it gets

  1. Well I shudder and turn away when Abbott opens his mouth. That tongue seems to thrash around like a salivating long lost sailor. Repulsive. And then there is his walk, like he just got off a horse. Oh and then the fake tan and the bald patch. PM? I don’t thinks so.

  2. How about the way he sucks his teeth before he answers a question. Can you image this idiot on the World stage?

  3. just one of the fringe benefits of having the Ruddster at the wheel – but unluckily for News journo’s he hasn’t got red hair and wide hips, er, come to think of it the Ruddster is a kinda hip anyway

  4. Michael, I believe it had something to do with the wind. Seen another, in another interview doing the same. Rudd does have very fine straight hair that blows about in the wind.

    Needs to do what Abbott has done at this time. I noticed he has a new hair cut. Very short, and if I did not know better, glued down with that oily mess that men used in the past.

    Yes, Rudd did look annoyed at the time, but it did not stop him being on the ball, and having answers ready for everything said.

    What I noticed was the similarity between the hair of Rudd and Albanese

  5. Abbott is so out of his frontal lobe and in to his limbic brain for so long that he has become like a reptile.(or a vampire actually). See the video on YouTube of him being really leery this way. The guy who wrote the hair flicking article should be writing for “bimbo brain weekly” or something. I know him and he is a nasty customer. Ever since he joined Fairfax it has gone downhill. Rudd could throw the knives back at Murdoch and News Ltd by declaring a new policy of restricting media ownership down to no more than 49%, to be brought in to law with his next term. That would fixed them and give them something to blither about and get tangled up in their whatevers.LOL

  6. Well the good thing about this new clown murdoch has got in is he thinks we are like Americans………..How wrong he is when we all laugh at the murdoch media’s releases on superficial crap like this!

  7. Please if someone can get the footage shown on Channel 10 The Project of Abbott talking to a family it’s a pearler.

    If you really want to see Abbott idiocy, awkwardness and a great reason why he should not be PM or let loose on the international stage, that footage encapsulates it in 30 seconds.

    What a dickhead.

  8. I would rather a hair flick than lippy the lizard tongue. Kev is flicking, Abbotts licking. Shutter, Ooooooo.

  9. FFS, next it will be the earlobes and the size of his bum. Does anyone else detect a tone of desperation in this “article”? Pun intended.

  10. Obviously many here are not students of Rudd and his background.
    As a year 8 student he was sent to boarding school (Marist Brothers Ashgrove)
    as a somewhat effeminate nerdy boy he was obviously a target for some
    rough house treatment. Soon he was to return to the succour of his mother
    in Nambour. Attendance at the local high school was no better for young
    Kevin it may have been worse with the tougher country kids giving him a hard
    time to say the least. He was pictured in a very sad state roped to the school
    flag pole. This has caused him to be quite anxious and nervous typified by
    the habit with his fringe.Now you know why, I have seen him do it for more than
    25 years,bad habits are very hard to shake.

  11. Um ah… yes umm… Migs… Ah um I… um ah ….. um… agree… ah… entirely um ah. 😯

    As Helga in Allo Allo said “You May Kiss me now, Herr Flick!”

    Imagine him making a speech at the UN?… We could fight another world war before he’d finish. 🙄

    Cheers 😀

  12. Fed up @10.22pm, yes! If I see one more photo of him cramming food down his scrawny neck, I’ll have to slap someone!

    LOVO, to have that oaf representing this country on the international stage is reason enough to hope Labor smashes him once and for all. Even better would be seeing the likes of Neil falling on their swords.

  13. Did one noticed the look that Rudd had on his face, and to a lesser amount Albanse. One seen them looking as they had scowl on their faces, screwing up their eyes. I seen a picture on another site. Aimed at their face was a very bright light, that was rectangular scene, say 3×2 feet. I have no idea what it was, unless to have better light for photos. That would have added to the impression that Rudd was unsettled. If one lloks carefully, you can see Rudd face lit up brightly, while Albanese face behind looks to have a shadow.

  14. This thread is having a whinge about the MSM commenting on Rudd’s flick and then you lot proceed like the usual conga line in pettiness in relation to Abbott

    Can’t you see the hypocrisy?

    Just plain dumb!

  15. scaper reckons a bunch of quilters blogging about politics and anything else they want should be acting in a more professional manner than paid journos who expect US to pay for their rantings.

    Go figure. (Is my bum big in this blog?)

  16. Don’t you all have something better to do than discuss mens hair?

    Yes, we can discuss BUMS (and quilts) 🙂

  17. pettiness, sure, hypocrisy, well, if we were charging people for this content, and pretending we were a ‘news’ service, then yea, that would be hypocritical. Otherwise, yea, introspection works as well as ‘stupid’ 😉

  18. Sad to say this whole piece and most of the commentary has fallen into the same trap as being decried: while Kev’s hair flick coverage is of course distractional, I haven’t found one comment regarding the fact that more people depend on higher interest rates for their livelihoods than are paying off mortgages, or that – notwithstanding the LNP’s blatant double standards on the matter – the lower rates do reflect a struggling economy.

    I suppose the whole piece and responses here reflect the famous book title by the master analyst of ‘framing’ – George Lakoff – “Don’t Think of an Elephant”. Tell people not to think of an elephant – or in this case Kevin Rudd’s hair flick – and what happens? You’ve been duped by the framers, I’m afraid.

  19. “…the lower rates do reflect a struggling economy.”

    They reflect a projected easing, not a struggling economy, but also other factors like the exchange rate.

    In Australia, the economy has been growing a bit below
    trend over the past year. This is expected to continue in
    the near term as the economy adjusts to lower levels of
    mining investment. The unemployment rate has edged
    higher. (4)
    Recent data confirm that inflation has been consistent
    with the medium-term target. With growth in labour
    costs moderating, this is expected to remain the case over
    the next one to two years, even with the effects of the
    recent depreciation of the exchange rate. (5)
    The easing in monetary policy over the past 18 months
    has supported interest-sensitive spending and asset
    values, and further effects can be expected over time.
    The pace of borrowing has remained relatively subdued,
    though recently there are signs of increased demand for
    finance by households. (6)
    The Australian dollar has depreciated by around 15 per
    cent since early April, although it remains at a high level.
    It is possible that the exchange rate will depreciate further
    over time, which would help to foster a rebalancing of
    growth in the economy. (7)
    The Board has previously noted that the inflation outlook
    could provide some scope to ease policy further, should
    that be required to support demand. At today’s meeting,
    and taking account of recent information on prices and
    activity, the Board judged that a further decline in the
    cash rate was appropriate. The Board will continue to
    assess the outlook and adjust policy as needed to foster
    sustainable growth in demand and inflation outcomes
    consistent with the inflation target over time. (8)

    Nowhere in the entire RBA statement is the word struggling used or if someone can enlighten me is their an economic definition of just what constitutes a struggling economy, and not the Liberals and right wing definition of all economic conditions, even booms, is the economy struggling if Labor is in government but conversely all economic conditions, even recession, are the economy doing well if the Liberals are in power.

  20. Oh you mean Abbott’s 2010 policy he dusted off so that Peter can pay Paul on his paid parental scheme. Couldn’t even come up with a new policy, and it will cost $5 billion minus the PPL tax that he hasn’t funded anywhere, which can be added to the $70 billion in unfunded liabilities he already has.

    Laugh a minute is Abbott. He is simultaneously going to decrease taxes, increase revenue, cut the public service whilst increasing services, reduce and increase interest rates, increase employment, reduced power costs, reduce cost of living that’s keeps going up and up (just as it did under Howard) and the contradictions go on and on.

  21. really looking forward to the company tax being cut

    You mean like in the manner that Labor tried to do but the libs stopped on the floor of the Parliament?

  22. The Coalition will cut the company tax rate by 1.5 per cent from 1 July 2015.

    This tax cut will boost jobs and strengthen the economy.

    With unemployment already at the highest level in 14 years – and set to surge further to nearly 800,000 on the Government’s own forecasts – cutting tax is crucial to strengthening the economy and creating the right environment for jobs. A company tax cut will provide Australians with more job security.

    The Coalition understands the clear connection between taxation policy and investment, jobs and increasing wages.

    That is why along with our company tax cut, the Coalition will – if elected – scrap the carbon tax, scrap the mining tax, cut $1 billion in red tape costs and not proceed with Labor’s $1.8 billion fringe benefits tax hit on cars.

    Our company tax cut is part of our Real Solutions Plan to create one million new jobs within five years and to build a stronger Australia and a better future – for all Australians.

  23. Hmmm – another eleventy billion to cut somewhere, further entrenching a structural deficit and further ensuring a recession due to misguided “austerity”. These guys really have NFI…

  24. Funnily, the usual suspects being half truthful. The so called tax cut was tied to the mining tax legislation that collects fuck all.

    It was blocked by the coalition and the Greens. Imagine the state of the budget if the tax cuts went through with no mining tax revenue to cover such? Come in spinners/liars!

  25. But it doesn’t add up Bacchus, which is why Hockey is refusing to have their stuff costed.

    They are simultaneously promising huge reductions in government revenue and increased government spending all apparently paid for by sacking a number of public servants that doesn’t get anywhere near close enough to make up for the shortfall, and by cutting red tape, which will apparently save them $1 billion but cost far more than that in the destroyed environment, tax payers being ripped off and increased health costs.

    They could sack the entire public service and it wouldn’t make up for their shortfalls.

  26. it appears that the National Party has not seen Abbott’s PPL scheme.

    Carr and Bishop debate from 5.45 eastern time

  27. Oh! one of the Libs out to strangle everyone’s sensibilities is here. 21 months till the tax cut. What will you do in the meantime if you gain power? That is the worry.
    Prefer to stay with tried and true present Labor Govt. thanks. Too risky to change now.

  28. Yes, getting nasty.

    “ One of Malcolm Turnbull’s senior staffers has sent a popular Australian technology blogger a caustic email telling him to “get fucked” and informing him that “nobody takes your psychotic rantings seriously”, as the relationship between Turnbull and sections of Australia’s technology community continues to sour.

    The blogger concerned, Steve Jenkin, runs a popular local blog entitled ‘Stevej on NBN’. Jenkin, who is a long-time IT professional, is well-known for his regular articles severely criticising the Coalition’s National Broadband Network policy and praising Labor’s policy. Recent headlines on his site have labelled the Coalition’s fibre to the node-based policy a “financial disaster” which will lose the Federal Government “billions”, for example, and Jenkin has also attempted to fact-check a number of key Coalition assertions.

    Although Jenkin has taken a broadly partisan approach in his work, his blog is read by some elements of Australia’s technology community. Jenkin has also engaged directly with technology journalists in an effort to get his ideas publicised more widely, and has succeeded in having his articles published on some media outlets, such as Technology Spectator. In addition, Jenkin has also engaged with Turnbull’s office directly, in an attempt to obtain more information about the Coalition’s NBN policy.

    Jenkin published one of those interactions on his blog yesterday, consisting of an email exchange between the blogger and Stephen Ellis, a policy advisor who works directly for Turnbull and is believed to have directly responsible for helping to develop the Coalition’s NBN policy, as well as the background briefing document which was released alongside the policy in March. Ellis has an extensive background in both journalism and technology; details of which can be found online.

    In his blog post, Jenkin noted that he was seeking detailed information from Ellis with rega,”

    Burke now on ABC 24 Morrison making things up. What a surprise

  29. The politics of the day

    In what is likely to be one of its biggest campaign pledges, the Coalition has promised a 1.5 per cent cut in company tax. This will apply to around 750,000 companies, at a cost of $5 billion.
    The tax cut is described by the Coalition as ‘offsetting’ its paid parental leave scheme – which is to be funded by a 1.5 per cent tax increase on Australia’s biggest companies.
    If you’re not following the logic, another way of saying this is: there will be no net change in the tax rate for big companies but a tax cut for small/medium businesses. The Coalition’s paid parental leave scheme now joins the long list of Coalition promises that is, in real terms, unfunded. So does the tax cut for small and medium-sized business.
    Opposition treasury spokesman Joe Hockey said: “This is money that will be recovered by increasing the growth in the Australian economy.”
    It looks increasingly clear that the Coalition’s economic program is based on the principles of supply-side (‘voodoo’) economics – that reducing taxes will lead to higher government revenues.
    A ‘Boost For All,’ as the Herald-Sun’s front page described it. A magic pudding, in other words.

  30. he Coalition is making bold statements about economic management – but without costed policies, voters can’t judge whether the bluster has any basis, writes Ben Eltham

    It must be nice to live in the economic fantasy-land inhabited by the Coalition.

    For something like six years now, the Coalition’s economic team, led by Joe Hockey, has attacked Labor’s economic management. When the Government recorded deficits, he attacked Labor’s spendthrift ways.

    When weaker-than-expected economic growth caused a string of downgrades to the Treasury forecasts, he attacked the Treasury and the validity of its estimates.

    When the Government made policy announcements – as governments do – on things like the NBN and the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, he attacked the people Labor had hired to run those agencies, warning them their agency would be abolished should the Coalition take office.

    – See more at:

  31. s cutting the corporate tax rate a good idea? The Business Council thinks so — it wants to increase the GST on the rest of us to cut the company tax rate to 25%. The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry thinks it’s a good idea, albeit for the nebulous reason that it will “boost confidence”. The Coalition thought so in 2010, when it proposed a 1.5% company tax cut in that election campaign. But then the Coalition went off the idea and when Labor tried to cut the company tax rate by 1%, they joined with the Greens to block it.

    The Coalition and the Greens, a unity ticket on blocking company tax cuts. Whodathunkit?

    And Labor used……

  32. Once again correct. Abbott misquoting, in fact close to lying once again, Anything new in that.

    Abbott actually shook hands with some workers today at the cordial factory, then they march behind him. Wonder what would have happened if they decided not to.

    “…………Labor’s policy of course was based on the Henry Tax Review, which backed a corporate rate cut. The fact that Australia had a high corporate tax rate compared internationally meant, that review concluded, that we should reduce “the company income tax rate to 25% over the short to medium term, as fiscal and economic circumstances permit” — albeit coupled with a change in non-renewable resource rent taxation.

    That important caveat was missing from this morning’s announcement by the Coalition of a 1.5% corporate tax cut, intended to offset its 1.5% tax rise on medium and large business to fund Tony Abbott’s paid parental leave scheme — the one the rest of his party and the Nationals hate.

    The Coalition has declined to explain how the tax cut, likely to cost $5 billion over four years (the costing compared to the predicted cost of Labor’s tax cut is significantly lower, reflecting lower corporate tax revenue growth expectations) will be funded. “We are confident that the company tax cut will deliver some partially offsetting benefits to the budget bottom line over the medium term,” Abbott announced this morning. This, of course, is supply side nonsense, articulated by economist Arthur Laffer, that cutting taxes produces higher tax revenue, which has been repeatedly mocked by economists and shown to be wrong in practice……”

  33. This is what was missing today from Abbott and Hockey.

    “albeit coupled with a change in non-renewable resource rent taxation.”

  34. …….The Coalition has declined to explain how the tax cut, likely to cost $5 billion over four years (the costing compared to the predicted cost of Labor’s tax cut is significantly lower, reflecting lower corporate tax revenue growth expectations) will be funded. “We are confident that the company tax cut will deliver some partially offsetting benefits to the budget bottom line over the medium term,” Abbott announced this morning. This, of course, is supply side nonsense, articulated by economist Arthur Laffer, that cutting taxes produces higher tax revenue, which has been repeatedly mocked by economists and shown to be wrong in practice.

    George H. W. Bush called this sort of thing voodoo economics and he was proven to be right by the tax history of his, his son’s and the Reagan presidency.

    Interestingly, though, the Business Tax Working Group last year wasn’t so enamoured of a corporate tax cut, having found some businesses, namely mining companies, didn’t like the idea of cutting tax concessions in order to fund cutting the headline rate:

    “… the economic benefits from a reduction in the company tax rate from the current rate are likely to be smaller than when the rate was much higher in the 1980s and 1990s, notwithstanding that capital may have become more mobile since then. The Working Group considers that a cut of two to three percentage points would be required to drive a significant investment response …”

    So, the Coalition line that a tax cut will drive greater investment and more jobs might be a little, shall we say, overstated.

    Indeed, the Canadian experience — they’ve been cutting corporate taxes regularly since 1988 — suggests there is no evidence that cutting corporate taxes increases investment — if anything, lower corporate taxes there have accompanied a decline in business investment

    Cutting taxes for companies has a different impact than cutting tax for individuals (the stimulus value of which is also problematic — many people save their tax cuts, rather than spend them). Companies can spend the money paying shareholders a higher dividend, or pay company executives higher remuneration or directors higher board fees. Super funds and other big investors will press companies to pay as much of the lower tax bill back to them by way of higher dividends. That will flow into higher fees for the super fund managers and their advisers, with anything left over going into the funds themselves for policyholders.

    It’s higher aggregate demand boosts company sales and revenues (and, ideally, profits), not lower company tax — particularly if, as the BCA wants, you raise the GST to fund it. Australian companies have been saving as much of their surplus cash, echoing what consumers and mortgage holders are doing at the moment. In fact, Australian companies have an estimated $100 billion in cash tucked away in their bank accounts (much of it in the major banks on term deposits earning not very much).

    That cash pile has been rising for the past three years — ever since super funds and other investors bailed out these big companies in and just after the GFC with more than $120 billion of new capital and loans. Companies have been slow to spend this money on new investment because of weak demand in the economy, not high taxes.

    That makes it problematic to see how a 1.5% tax cut, in two years time, will help the economy grow and create more jobs — not for the next two years when the economy will be at its most vulnerable during the move from the resources investment boom to growth driven by higher domestic demand.

    A far smarter idea for Joe Hockey and Tony Abbott would have been to look at the entire area of corporate tax, which includes dividend imputation, the tax deductibility of interest payments and depreciation. All should be put up for discussion — if you lower corporate tax, then dividend imputation is less needed as is tax deductibility for interest payments. Imputation costs the budget an estimated $18-20 billion a year by some estimates. The tax bill for interest payments is also substantial while depreciation is wreaking havoc on the budget at the moment and will do so for years because of the impact of the enormous mining investment boom.


  35. Tony Abbott listens to Joe Hockey speak. Hockey was asked what had changed since a recent speech in which he said the company tax cut could not be afforded. Photograph: Morne de Klerk/Getty Images
    Tony Abbott says the $2.5bn a year cost of his 1.5-percentage point cut to company tax will be paid for by spending cuts already announced, but has refused to identify which ones.

    The Coalition leader referred reporters to savings he identified in a speech to the National Press Club in January and in his budget-in-reply speech in May.

    In the budget-in-reply speech in May, Abbott promised to keep the carbon tax compensation – last year’s personal tax cuts and increases to pensions and family benefits – even though he will abolish the carbon tax and emissions trading scheme for which they were compensating.

    At the time he said the $4bn cost of those promises would be met by the following savings:

    • Reducing public service jobs by 12,000 over two years through natural attrition, which “once fully ramped up” would save about $1.75bn a year.

    • Discontinuing the government’s contribution low income earners’ superannuation to save just under $1bn a year.

    • Delaying the phased increase in compulsory superannuation from 9 to 12%, so that the 12% increase is achieved in 2021 rather than 2019 – to save around $1.1bn a year by 2016-17.

    • Rescinding the increase in the humanitarian refugee intake from 13,750 to 20,000 – saving $500m a year by 2016-17.

    • Scrapping the $10bn Clean Energy Finance Corporation to save around $350-450m a year, which is the estimated cost of the concessional element of the corporation’s loans.

    Other spending cuts already promised by the Coalition are the abolition of Labor’s schoolkids bonus, which saves around $1.2bn year, a one-off cut of $500m to car industry assistance and privatising Medibank Private, which would take some time.

    These cuts do not appear to cover the ongoing cost of the company tax cut, which is also likely to increase over time.

    The treasurer, Chris Bowen, accused the Co,,,,,,,,,,,

  36. What’s a wanker the Author is, what idiot thinks low interest rates are a good thing? Don’t you have Superannuation, how do you think low interest rates and interest rate cuts effect that? Don’t you have savings and investments, how do you think low interest rates and interest rate cuts effect them? Only ONE THIRD the population benefits from low interest and interest rate cuts, the other TWO THIRDS are worse off. Only the wealthy who have invested in real estate and negative gear benefit, not the poor….Author please get an education if your going to make comments about things you know knotting about.

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s