8 April, 2008...8:53 am
Andy finds helpful angle in incest story
By Mr Lefty
I was wondering how Andy would cover the Adelaide incest story. Obviously he’s not stupid enough to try to blame it on TEH EVIL LEFT (as at least one try-hard right-wing blogger has embarrassingly attempted), but he’s similarly not going to let it go through to the keeper. (You can’t be too picky when you’re trying to upload a post every fifteen minutes.)
Luckily, he’s found a target:
Why didn’t 60 Minutes tell us about that death?
…Was 60 Minutes just being slack in not checking this story further, or just irresponsible in withholding all the facts?
Andy has hated Channel Nine and 60 Minutes ever since they dared to start taking climate change seriously. Our, conservatives’, Channel Nine? Going with the hippies? WE THOUGHT WE COULD TRUST YOU!
And, with all the anger of the betrayed, he’s been happy to slam them ever since.
Someone should print up an Andrew Bolt “On Notice” and “Dead To Me” list, a la Stephen Colbert.
I’m not sure whether Nine has made it to “dead to me” yet, but it’s certainly on the board. And whilst 60 Minutes’ notoriously bodgy reporting has nothing to do with the left here, I suppose this will be a helpful piece of evidence when Andy needs to discredit them next time they dare contradict him on some other matter.
Meanwhile, Tim Blair appears to have been unable to find a lefty-bashing connection at all (is there any kind of South Australia/lefty connection? Not really? Bugger!), and has therefore declined to pass his witty judgment on the matter.
UPDATE: Andy’s commenters haven’t had any trouble finding a way to use the story to push their particular barrow. It’s certainly brought out the homophobes: “Yep. In post-Christian Australia if enough people demand incestuous relationships (and make a big noise about it) then Rudd will OK them.
Like homosexuality; why it’s so normal these days everyone should be one. [ANGRY EMOTICON]“
Andy warned us about the slippery slope, after all. Why didn’t we listen?
28 Comments
8 April, 2008 at 11:05 am
Babies born of non-incestuous couplings suffer congenital heart failure. Why is Bolta (among others) automatically assuming that this baby’s congenital heart failure was a result of incest?
8 April, 2008 at 11:17 am
Because it is much more likely to be the cause in the case of an incestuous union - like lung cancer is much more likely to occur in smokers.
Looks like the editorial meeting went something along the lines of:
‘What can we bash Bolt for today?’
‘He criticised 60 Minutes!’
‘Really? Unbelievable! Oh the horror, the horror.’
‘Let’s give him both barrels then.’
8 April, 2008 at 11:21 am
I’m mocking how easily he can turn anything into an attack against someone who’s crossed him.
8 April, 2008 at 11:36 am
Jeremy: he can turn anything into an attack against someone who’s crossed him
Isn’t the purpose of of this site to do the same to BoBlair?
It must be a slow news day on the Bolt beat!
8 April, 2008 at 11:49 am
I don’ t understand how Andy declares war in any media organisation wanting to tackle climate change while working for News Corp which is actively seeking to drop the world’s average tempurature by 1 degree and, as per a directive from Rupert Murdoch himself, aims to become a carbon neutral company.
Andy, while having a go at Fairfax about its obsession with Earth Hour failed to mention that News Corp staff at work were made to switch off all essential lighting.
That fucktard is crazy people.
8 April, 2008 at 12:18 pm
…Why on earth would any self respecting latte lefty care if bolta attacked 60 minutes? its got to be one of the dodgiest “serious” news journal shows in Australia. Touch 4 Corners or Foreign Correspondant and then we’ll pwn you.
It’s funny how the monkeys can twist anything into an attack on the homosexual agenda. I wish the Funny Buggers weren’t so prissy about railing against people like those who equate incest to homosexuality.
8 April, 2008 at 12:27 pm
exactly Clubwah. bolt will find fault with anything even remotely Fairfax related and shout if from the rooftop. strangely enough however he is happy to appear regularly on radio stations 3aw, 4bc and 6pr, all Fairfax owned. presumably he feels he is fulfilling some sort of civic duty by lending his opinions to an organisation he clearly despises. ahhh, hypocrisy.
8 April, 2008 at 12:29 pm
COBB: lending his opinions to an organisation he clearly despises. ahhh, hypocrisy
Ahhh, like Philcher ‘Phil’ Adams writing for Rupert.
8 April, 2008 at 12:51 pm
sd-bolt’s rants against Fairfax and its employees are now daily (sometimes more than once/day) and since earth hour have reached a deafeningly shrill crescendo, bordering on hysteria about religious cults and greenies infecting its ranks. in this context it is hypocritical for him to continue to rail against Fairfax employees, yet give his time and his opinions to the organisation.
8 April, 2008 at 1:03 pm
As I said, its a bit like having Adams write for News Corp. Please note Adams is a lot more intelligent and dignified than Bolt.
8 April, 2008 at 1:08 pm
sd-bolt’s rants against Fairfax and its employees are now daily
And rightly so. Their appalling handling of earth Hour coverage, as exposed on Media Watch last night, proves that they have NO journalistic integrity. They are a propaganda machine. The conflicts of interests are gobsmacking.
http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s2210313.htm
8 April, 2008 at 2:01 pm
Marc - your post is almost a mirror of Andrew’s.
Strangely he has not commented on his re-posting and involvement on the news.com.au stuff up about the Aboriginal Affairs minister in Arukun (not sure on spelling)
8 April, 2008 at 3:33 pm
Thats because Bolta only talks about things that are in the public eye, for if he imparts his wisdom on other things, and no ones there to hear it, how does he get his kudos? The sad fact is Australians (in general) hear something about how bad our indigenous brothers are, say some things about how we’ve tried to help them, then forget about it by lunch time. It explains why Windschuttle can get away with flat out lying about our history in this day and age.
8 April, 2008 at 3:40 pm
The sad fact is Australians (in general) hear something about how bad our indigenous brothers are, say some things about how we’ve tried to help them, then forget about it by lunch time.
I’m not denying the efficacy of some of Bolt et al’s propaganda, but I’m not sure you are entirely correct there AAW. Otherwise how would you explain the quarter of a million Australians who marched across the Sydney Harbour Bridge in 2000 for Reconciliation and who not only voted for a pro-Apology government but the many thousands who observed the occasion with great solemnity…
8 April, 2008 at 4:10 pm
“lending his opinions to an organisation he clearly despises. ahhh, hypocrisy”
Yeah like Mark Bashnich, who now works for the “Opposition Organ” (previously “the Government Gazette”).
“Why is Bolta (among others) automatically assuming that this baby’s congenital heart failure was a result of incest?”
- the person who wrote this also falsely believes that climate change skeptics disregard the science.
“I’m mocking how easily he can turn anything into an attack against someone who’s crossed him.”
- Failing to mention the previous child they had is quite an omission, and any reporter guilty of this ought to be taken to task.
8 April, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Great acts, and when we said sorry it was the first time in a long time i was proud of my prime minister. What i said may have been too general SM, and thank you for showing me that. I was wrong to say it in such a blasé manner. What i should have said was the flying monkeys who read Bolta’s blogtatorship don’t care.
8 April, 2008 at 4:22 pm
… the flying monkeys who read Bolta’s blogtatorship don’t care.
Ain’t that the truth…
8 April, 2008 at 7:58 pm
More than just flying monkeys in the bolt echo chamber. they’re like lobotomised sheep. or braindead crows. bolt tosses another carcass on the road and the flock come. his effort today on the army’s efforts to increase the number of aboriginal defence personnel is classic case of carcass throwing. somehow he completely turns what is an article about consultations defence personnel have undertaken about increasing aboriginal recruitment into another rudd bashing piece (rudd not mentioned at all in article). what happens next you ask? the sheep respond, bleating loud and long about rudd this, socialist that before things really degenerate into black this, racist that. B.O.L.T B.L.O.G: bloody oldies left to bleat long-outmoded garbage!
8 April, 2008 at 9:56 pm
the person who wrote this also falsely believes that climate change skeptics disregard the science.
Hey he bought up his fave topic in a completely different topic!
You leftist scum. Explain the mars warming!
And … so forth.
9 April, 2008 at 10:54 am
“Why is Bolta (among others) automatically assuming that this baby’s congenital heart failure was a result of incest?”
This is a legitimate question, Leon. The fact that you failed to actually address it just underscores that.
9 April, 2008 at 9:14 pm
Well Keri, let’s do an experiment where you start a family with your brother or father, and see how many congenital diseases your kids get.
10 April, 2008 at 4:11 am
This is a great example of what is known as a “strawman” argument.
Notice how Jeremy brings up Bolts question of;
“Why didn’t 60 Minutes tell us about that death?”
And then offers no incite on what appears to be a legitimate journalistic question. He then switches to his “strawman” of the whole “Dead to me” spiel which Bolt did not say and mentions nothing of.
If you are going to have a Boltwatch blog it would at least be honorable to address comments he “has” made rather than comments you “wish” he had made.
10 April, 2008 at 9:36 am
Leon - Alternatively, you could know what you were talking about and apply actual, proven science to the problem, profile the genes of the family and come up with an actual number, instead of speculation.
That number, by the way, IF the family has a genotype consistent with a recessive allelle on both sides is 25% of the children will end up as sufferers, and 25% will end up as carriers in the first generation.
But that’s IF the family has a history of genetic diseases, Leon, which not all families do.
10 April, 2008 at 10:57 am
Hey, Jeremy, a question from the semi-coloned one:
“Why is it that the latte sippers are such fans of American comedy?”
He’s got you there!
10 April, 2008 at 11:55 am
He sure does!
10 April, 2008 at 2:59 pm
He’s right you know Keri. How can you possibly offer an appraisal of incest until you’ve tried it?
It’s good to see some commonsense getting an airing on this filthy thread.
10 April, 2008 at 4:51 pm
It looks as though Andy Pandy might have been onto something with this story in that police are investigating whether or not 60 Minutes payed these sickos for their story.
Chequebook journalism is bad enough, but when it comes with a free ride for the protagonist then it’s completely unethical.
14 April, 2008 at 5:53 pm
Bolts take on incest was a golden opportunity for him to delved into his idea of depravity.
He just *had* to include gay people in his diatribe as well, hoping they’d be tarnished by the same brush.
Bolt is sickening.
Leave a Reply