Let others comment on the debate itself, I want to comment on Prime Minister Rudd’s rudeness today.

Rudd has done this sort of thing before. He refused to look at the Premier of N.S.W when she was discussing health with him. He purposely looked down and ignored her. No eye contact, no acknowledgment of the other person. Just look at your notes or straight ahead and be as uncouth as possible.

Well, Rudd did it again today during his debate with the Leader of the Opposition. Tony Abbott would direct a comment to him and Rudd refused to face him.

I find that kind of behaviour to be so crass but I am reluctant to put it down to bad upbringing. In Rudd’s case I feel it has more to do with arrogance. He exhibits many qualities of a narcissistic personality by failing to validate other people.

His spin may be annoying. Quite frankly, I’m totally fed up with his mums and dads references and that working families phrase. But what is worse is the way he treats other people. He simply can’t look them in the eye.

I wish that Abbott would have said “Hey Kev, look over this way, mate! Don’t you have the decency to face me?”

Evidently, the answer to that question is no.

The problem with Kevin Rudd is that he is not masculine. He’s as asexual as Alexander Downer was but without Downer’s kindly demeanour. Whereas Downer reminded us of a benevolent uncle, Rudd is more like a petulant child. He sulks. He is disrespectful to women as he was to Premier Kristina Keneally and he is disliked on a personal level. The more he feels threatened by the popularity of the Opposition the more bombastic he will sound.

For a man to appeal to women he has to possess the manly trait of inner strength, not to be confused with blind ambition. Rudd is brimming with ambition to strut the world stage at the United Nations.

I don’t get the sense that Rudd is a strong character by way of temperament. A bully he may be to all around him, but bullying is the antithesis of masculine strength.

Rightly or wrongly, the way women regard a man has to do with an hormonal response to him. Former Prime Minister, Paul Keating had masculine appeal, and in a different way, John Howard demonstrated it also. That certain something that makes a man a man. Hard to define, but a politician either has it or he hasn’t.

I suppose that it has to do with a woman being able to imagine the man having sex. I’m being intentionally basic here, but it really is comedic to imagine a sex scene with Rudd asking himself questions such as “So how do I feel about this?” “Am I having a pleasurable experience?” and then answering himself with “The bottom line is…”

Quite frankly, I suspect that Rudd would be more content doing it all by himself with only himself in mind. He is self-sufficient in a most unattractive way.

And it’s not about looks either. There are many handsome men who are not attractive to women. Take male models, for example. Say no more. And there are many plain men who exude masculinity. I guess it has to do with behaviour and getting things done in a quiet and dependable way. Less talk and more action would do it. It’s about time that the government stopped promising change and started getting down to business in a serious manner.

Those countless announcements of revolutions are becoming ho-hum and it appears that the public is tiring of them also if the polls are to be believed.

On the other hand, do we really have faith in a government that screwed up so badly on something as simple and finite as the insulation fiasco? So, as long as the Prime Minister keeps talking and ordering reports, we are probably safer.

Rudd has been eloquently described by Tony Abbott as ‘all hat and no cowboy’. He seems to be talking through it as well. To be honest, we could forgive him for not being appealing to women if he would just do something apart from talking all the time and pestering patients in hospital.