Paul Kelly, editor-at-large and head political commentator of the Australian is losing sight of the issues, and concentrating on the political skills of either opponent in this election. Latest example is on the kyoto protocol (damn editor can't paste in the link for some reason)
He keeps saying that Howard's policy is right, but he is stubborn for sticking to this position. He keeps saying that Rudd is a me-too policy copycat and anything beyond that is glib symbolism, but praises him for doing it.
Either there is some practical point to signing kyoto of there isn't.
If you deny there is any benefit and then by praising people who sign up for politically symbolic reasons you are praising spin.
More politely you are praising political skill, but this has nothing to do with the issue at hand as as such is irrelevant to the debate.
We are not going to vote for Rudd because we think he is a skilled politician. Rudd is furiously trying to spin Howard's political skill as a reason not to vote for him. People need to know where Rudd stands and if it makes a difference. They will make there decision based on that.
Paul Kelly can have as much admiration for Rudd's facade as he wants. He job as a journalist is to penetrate it on behalf of his readers. Paul please give us the facts about where each candidates stand on the issues and allow us to be awed or bored by the polical skill of either leader on our own.
