By The Editor
Cross posted at GrodsCorp
The Age columnist and prime Bolt/Blair target, Catherine Deveny, might have bipolar disorder.
Timmeh shows sympathy and calls a ceasefire.
Deveny’s columns… are a frequent target here. No more. Assuming the above account is accurate—it’s unlikely someone would joke about a bipolar diagnosis—Deveny isn’t well.
Fair play, Tim. A credit to you. Andrew Bolt then agrees with Blair (surprise, surprise), albeit a little more crudely.
An unhappy columnist who writes what seems to me a plea for help, and who confesses she is indeed in trouble, should not be kept in harness by a newspaper hoping to win extra sales from her growing despair.
However, I can’t help thinking that Bolta (and to a lesser degree, Timmeh) are suggesting that Deveny’s assumed illness is somehow responsible for those opinions that the groupthinking duo so despise. Is it not possible that Deveny can have a mental illness and still have perfectly valid opinions, unshaped by that mental illness?
This is all assuming, of course, that Deveny does have bipolar.
ELSEWHERE: Darryl Mason deconstructs teh issue more detailedly.
288 Comments
18 August, 2008 at 3:08 pm
Two professional ‘journalists’ unable to use a telephone or e-mail before they publish gossip culled from a blog comment.
Perhaps there are bigger worries?
http://theorstrahyun.blogspot.com/2008/08/oh-shit.html
Blair on Deveny :
“Deveny’s tiring brain sometimes suggests that she relocate to where stupid people dwell…”
“Catherine Deveny is an idea-resistant bigot.”
“Catherine seems unbalanced enough to seek Keating-resembling facial modifications.”
“The woman is insane.”
She’s a professional comedy writer. I always thought she was mostly taking the piss.
The Professionally Outraged, however, need their lemming bait and Denevy has been generous.
18 August, 2008 at 3:26 pm
What? why have they stopped? It didn’t stop them attacking a herion addict with, god forbid, bad punctuation!
18 August, 2008 at 4:07 pm
They haven’t stopped at all. These posts are nothing but a transparent attempt to insult Deveney further.
As the Editor has surmised – both Blair and Bolt are clearly implying that Deveney’s previous views have been the product of a sick and mentally unhinged mind. In many respects their current columns are a transparent crowing by two cocks who’ve just been handed an excuse to paint an ideological opponent as mentally unsound.
Bolt’s crowing is particularly disgusting, given that he’s suggesting that Deveney’s alleged mental illness has been a factor in her employment. As though she was hired for ‘freak show’ value rather than due to the validity of her viewpoint.
He sinks to new depths on a daily basis.
18 August, 2008 at 4:26 pm
For Bolt to allow this his blog to be a vehicle for the despicable speculation about Deveny by his Haters, is vile.
Once again Bolt plumbs the depths – from below.
18 August, 2008 at 4:29 pm
This is one of those situations where the columnist/bloggers can give mixed messages. They secure the moral high ground by appearing to express sympathy, all the while knowing that some of their commenters will take the inference and go ahead and say what they couldn’t be explicit about.
18 August, 2008 at 4:32 pm
“For Bolt to allow this his blog to be a vehicle for the despicable speculation about Deveny by his Haters, is vile.”
yes it is. and especially when there’s no proof that deveny even has a cold let alone a mental illness. journalistic integrity be damned! somebody nominate these clowns for a wankley.
18 August, 2008 at 5:26 pm
Timmeh scoured the internet looking for “cancer gigglers” during and after his illness. He doesn’t have to look far for “mental illness gigglers” in this case — a fair few of his fuckwit commenters have already made some gags, despite the fact that a crack team of NewsLtd moderators has taken the place of his half-starved former watchdog, the cur Andrea Harris Administrator — yet, somehow I don’t think ol’ Timmeh will be rushing to bring these arseholes to the blogosphere’s attention this time around.
Interestingly enough, the last time Tim’s winged monkeys attacked someone with bi-polar on Tim’s incitement, he failed to step in — or even condemn the people involved, despite being given the opportunity to do so in this Club Troppo thread (link here*). He has form in this regard.
* Due to a spam-filter malfunction at Club Troppo, some of my previous comments in that thread went missing. Still, you should be able to make sense of what was going on if you want to read the whole lot.
18 August, 2008 at 6:59 pm
I just love this bit from the Grodscorp post:
(In a GrodsCorp first this post was jointly written by The Editor and Ant Rogenous. They will attend a movie together next week, followed by a romantic dinner the week after. The relationship will be consummated later that night after spag bol, two six-packs of beer, a bottle of red, half a bottle of Scotch, and a Rohypnol.)
I haven’t laughed so hard since I read some Catherine Deveney. Comedy gold!
18 August, 2008 at 7:02 pm
The Editor was allegedly really good in the cot, too. I just wish I could remember something — anything — after we toasted communism, evil, conceptual art and the demise of decent society as Andy and Timmeh know it.
18 August, 2008 at 7:04 pm
Like I said, comedy gold!
18 August, 2008 at 8:13 pm
I just got snipped on the Denevy post for suggesting Tara Brown might be suffering from the same alledged ailment as Denevy.
Tara seems to be very sad and crying before one edit then all the puffiness is gone and she is happy in the next edit…
I also asked why Tara always seemed to get the political hack job stories. That got snipped too.
Lucky I didn’t start up on Peter Harveys alledged “mailbag”. Firstly I see no bag then when he reads out people that wrote him letters from my suburb, the street doesn’t exist and the person doesn’t exist!!!! Show me just ten letters real people have actually wrote to you Peter – just ten I challenge you.
As you may have noticed I’ve had a 60 Minutes axe to grind for while.
18 August, 2008 at 8:35 pm
andy and timmy’s blogs have been down for a few hours now. maybe the ltd news lawyers started getting calls from fairfax. the heroes have been summarily summonsed to the bat cave……
18 August, 2008 at 9:04 pm
confessions what do you mean “down”. Do you mean the moderation has stopped?
18 August, 2008 at 9:06 pm
Pure class Bolt is. Never misses a story, no matter how sensitive, emotional, or factually ambiguous to exploit in order to have a go at one his perceived ideological enemies or to get up on his soapbox and deliver one of his rambling incoherent philosophical monologues. It’s utterly sickening the way he engages in this sort of behaviour.
On the face of it Blair’s wording is ok, Bolt however doesn’t even hide his intention to use the situation to have another go at The Age. As the editor has stated, its likely that both B1 and B2 see this as an opportunity to right-off anything Deveny has said in the past, knowing full well that their flock of mindless imbeciles will take the bait, at the same time attempting to assume a moral high ground. Bolt is particularly transparent in the way the manipulates situations like this, in order to encourage abuse whilst projecting an image of being a “compassionate conservative”
18 August, 2008 at 9:19 pm
“I just got snipped on the Denevy post for suggesting Tara Brown might be suffering from the same alledged [sic] ailment as Denevy.”
Windrider: You mean this comment?
What was snipped?
18 August, 2008 at 9:25 pm
right, back up again. windrider have noticed your comment on the deveny thread. did you post there or some other comment on the anti rudd, pro 60 mins thread?
18 August, 2008 at 9:32 pm
Sorry about off being off the topic, but here is my post from Bolt’s blog a week ago and all the replies it got. Unsurprisingly Bolt did not reply.
“Re the ‘stolen’ gen debate: To be fair to Manne Andrew you should comply with your own standards. Accordingly please publish a list of 10 Aboriginals who belong to the ‘saved’ generation. To be a ‘saved’ you must provide documented proof that (a) The Aboriginal was removed from a physically and/or mentally abusive environment; and (b) The Aboriginal was placed in an environment in which subsequent abuse was never experienced.
Satisfaction of the elements means the Aboriginal was ‘truly’ saved.
Manne cannot complie his list, can you? Cheers.
Junior Paulo (Reply)
Tue 12 Aug 08 (06:58am)
Macca replied to Junior Paulo
Tue 12 Aug 08 (07:48am)
Junior. Do some of your own research along these lines.
Grab yourself an Alice Springs phone book, start at the “A“‘s and conduct a phone poll.
You’ll find ten in no time, Junior.
Paul replied to Junior Paulo
Tue 12 Aug 08 (08:39am)
Macca, I assume that you know this because you have been though the Alice Springs phone book and can verify your claim ?
Or are you just making stuff up again as usual ?
claims replied to Junior Paulo
Tue 12 Aug 08 (08:50am)
The burden of proof is always on the person making the claims (in this case that there were from 25,000 to 100,000 Aborigines “stolen” from their parents simply because they were Aboriginal, in an attempt to “breed out” the race).
Lin replied to Junior Paulo
Tue 12 Aug 08 (08:51am)
O’Donoghue could head the list – she certainly seems to have benefited from being abandoned by her father and raised in a place where she was able to rise to a public and well heeled position, certainly above the majority of those who remained in Aboriginal communities. At one time such a success story would have been celebrated rather than subjected to endless complaints. If she were subjected to any abuse then that of course would be tragic, but she would not be alone in having suffered in an institution.
JP replied to Junior Paulo
Tue 12 Aug 08 (09:39am)
Claims: That’s my point excactly. Andrew claims they were all ‘saved’. He has to prove that claim.
Lin: Again my point exactly. If they suffered abuse they were not ‘truly’ saved.
C replied to Junior Paulo
Tue 12 Aug 08 (10:24am)
JP, you are being disingenuous almost to the point of dishonesty.
Macca replied to Junior Paulo
Tue 12 Aug 08 (11:06am)
Or are you just making stuff up again as usual ?
OK Paul, put up or shut-up. Your call son!
Lin replied to Junior Paulo
Tue 12 Aug 08 (04:17pm)
Not necessarily – it depends what their lives would have been like otherwise! Like Lois – living a nice life in a nice house and going to lots of taxpayer funded functions against dying young in a creek bed perhaps? Don’t you think it is worth while people learning to count their blessings instead of characterising themselves constantly as worthy of pity when their lives were little different to many other peoples?
jp replied to Junior Paulo
Tue 12 Aug 08 (07:48pm)
Lin I don’t disagree with you that people can be better off and I know which life I would choose or aspire to, but Andrew is on the record as arguing nobody was ‘truly’ stolen. My point is if Manne cannot identify 10 ‘truly’ stolen people, I want a list of 10 ‘truly’ saved people to prove that there was a saved generation. Not just a list of somewhat or substantially better off people, because by extension there will be people who became worse off. I just want the exact same standard of proof applied to both arguments.I did not set the agenda here and I cannot see how this is an unreasonable request. Until convinced my conclusion can only be that some Aboriginals were to varying degrees both stolen and saved.”
18 August, 2008 at 9:44 pm
“On the face of it Blair’s wording is ok”
chris, on the face of it this whole recount of deveny’s performance in dalyseford smells like comedy value. according to the intrepid commenter who has so captured blair/bolt, she talked of valium in her bag after being ‘possibly’ diagnosed with bipolar? what kind of medical person would do a ‘possible’ diagnosis? also it would be very unusual for a pyschiatrist to prescribe valium for bipolar. I can jsut see it now: “here you go dear, some valium for your possible diagnosis of bipolar disorder.” VERY unusual, and in the realm of Dr Death.
as i’ve said earlier this has the scent of a typical comedic routine by deveny misinterpreted by the commenter, and foolishly picked up on by 2 wankers eager to exploit whatever angle they can with an idealogical opponent.
click, click, click goes blair and bolt.
18 August, 2008 at 10:43 pm
Very nice work, Pablo.
19 August, 2008 at 6:53 am
Why am i not supprised, from the world of Bolt. This from the same fool that, when that poor baby was found in a ” green ” bag he puts the boot into the greens….don’t worry about the baby. Actually people got together in Shepparton so the baby can have a proper burial.
How does Bolt ( and his sheep ) doesn’t know that ( if she has bi-polar ) she’s not getting help and keeping on working is the best that can happen.
I’ve read some of the comments from ” his ” blog, i think it’s just a messure of Bolt and his fanclub. Thank god most are not like them.
19 August, 2008 at 8:20 am
oh for fuck’s sake. not content with giving unsuspecting viewers bolt on a sunday morning, now we are having timmy thrust upon us via insiders.
http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/timblair/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/unscheduled_appearances/#commentsmore
where are all the intelligent conservative voices?
19 August, 2008 at 8:58 am
This whole ‘Rudd the spinner’ thing that Bolt goes on about gives me the shits.
‘Spinning’, or presenting things to people in a way which benefits you, and makes your argument more convincing is what politics and buisness is all about.
The entire Right side of politics seem to have taken amnesia pills after the last election.
Having safely erased from their memories John Howards spinning of the ‘children overboard’ for political gain and attempting to spin the arrest of Dr. Haneef for political gain, they are now free to criticise Rudd for being a politician.
The NERVE of the man. How dare he act like he won the last election.
19 August, 2008 at 9:35 am
Confessions…, in fairness to Timmaw, Insiders is more his bag than Q&A, seeing that he’s a columnist for a well-read metropolitan daily. His appearance could provide some good laughs too, seeing that he won’t be able to shirk difficult questions as easily as he did on the latter show.
19 August, 2008 at 9:57 am
confessions.. What is with the ABC and it’s bias to the left??? lol. If B1 and B2 want to continue to be pinatas to other commentators (“It’s been cooling since 98, see my graph”) then good for them.
19 August, 2008 at 10:57 am
we’ll see. but after his performance on q&a i’m not holding out much hope that he’ll provide any more useful commentary than bolt, ackerman or milne. but if annabel crabb can own him like she did bolt i’ll happily record for future viewing pleasure!
19 August, 2008 at 12:11 pm
The commentator at Blair’s…
So thanks for the late fit of decency pal – maybe your illness has made you think a little more reflective about how you’ll be remembered. But maybe we’d all be a little better off if you found another outlet for whatever’s inside you that propelled you in this direction in the first place.
Bravo
19 August, 2008 at 8:05 pm
As a conservative person myself, Andrew Bolt disgusts me with his ill-conceived views and his remarks regarding Catherine Deveny just shows what little class the man has.
“should not be kept in harness by a newspaper hoping to win extra sales from her growing despair”
That’s rich coming from the Herald Sun’s very own court jester. Why do you think they hang onto him, for his superior reasoning skills?
Good work and please don’t assume all conservatives are like Andrew Bolt – that’s the ultimate insult.
19 August, 2008 at 8:35 pm
Well said, Celetina. You are right that nobody should generalise from Bolt to conservatives in general – to do so would be just as flawed as his own caricatures of “the Left”.
19 August, 2008 at 8:46 pm
“please don’t assume all conservatives are like Andrew Bolt – that’s the ultimate insult”
quite right, and i hope that you don’t get the impression the comments here in any way generalise boltards as indicative of conservatives per se. i think we all agree that bolt worshippers are truly in a class of their own!
19 August, 2008 at 8:50 pm
“quite right, and i hope that you don’t get the impression the comments here in any way generalise boltards as indicative of conservatives per se. i think we all agree that bolt worshippers are truly in a class of their own!”
And equally, we shouldn’t assume this site is reflective of the Left.
19 August, 2008 at 8:50 pm
Very well said, Celetina.
19 August, 2008 at 8:51 pm
Editor’s note: Sorry about this having taken so long to get posted, Daics — it got caught by the spam filter for some reason and I only came across it now.
Bipolar disorder is an immensely sad condition for those who suffer from it and their family, friends and often colleagues.
Bolt is correct to say that Deveny’s condition (if true) should not be exploited by The Age (if indeed it is) – he is not saying she is unfit for employment, but rather that such a condition such as bipolar is so serious that it shouldn’t be fodder for the entertainment of column readers. Of course, this is ultimately Deveny’s choice, for she alone should decide how deeply her columns delve into her personal issues. Though with mental illness, often a person can have difficulty clearly deciding what is in their own best interests and as such, The Age, as her employer, must take extra care. That is what Bolt is getting at.
Now I agree that it would be better for Bolt to say nothing at all on the topic, to not allow his blog to be a “vehicle for those Deveny haters.” But the fact is Deveny and Bolt are long time adversaries. If her bipolar disorder was officially proven and Bolt said nothing, wouldn’t there be some at this very site demanding he make comment? Bolt’s blog means he lives his life in the ‘blogsphere’ – his opinions good, bad and indifferent feature on there, and to suggest he shouldn’t have something like this on there is naive – after all, Deveny has herself made it a public matter and they are old rivals. I imagine she wouldn’t want it any other way. The hysterics from the usual crowd ignore this.
Lastly, if Andrew Bolt were diagnosed tomorrow with bipolar, what would many contributors to this site make of it? Silence? Bouquets? A 24 hour moratorium for Richard Ryan? Come on.
I know Bolt’s bloggers can be woefully inarticulate and downright crass and ignorant. I also know that this goes with the territory. Personally, I don’t believe Bolt’s post invites this or encourages this. Of course, many may diagree with me on this. And surely will. I await your responses.
19 August, 2008 at 9:00 pm
“please don’t assume all conservatives are like Andrew Bolt – that’s the ultimate insult”
I certainly don’t. I don’t really even consider individuals like Bolt to be conservatives in the true sense of the word, however somehow or other, imbeciles like Bolt and his mindless supporters, have come to be seen as mouthpieces for conservative politics in today’s media.
Hence Bolt gets airspace in media forms other than his own blog, such as prominent television programs like Insiders, in order to supposedly provide a conservative viewpoint. In reality however, Bolt as his true self, simply engages in and promotes pathetically juvenile, tribal, divisive, nasty and logically bankrupt blurting, instead of rational, honest and adult debate and discussion of individual issues. Any objectively minded person, regardless of personal politics should see this.
I have regularly made the point on this blog, that despite personally being more left-leaning than conservative, I think it would be great to see more rational conservatives visit here, as I think that this site is best when it involves adult discussion amongst people of both similar and different political persuasions, who share a common revulsion for the utter useless dribble spewed out, by two-bit, childish columnist hacks, like Bolt.
19 August, 2008 at 9:04 pm
But what you’re hoping for, Chris of Brisbane, is for people of differing ideological bent to post here as long as they agree with the premise of the site. That wouldn’t result in a debate or discussion, but agreement. That would be pretty boring, wouldn’t it?
19 August, 2008 at 9:23 pm
“And equally, we shouldn’t assume this site is reflective of the Left.”
i’m not sure if your comment is somehow directed at me or if you are using my comment as a touchstone to reinforce your own sentiments. if the former, then of course not. i would of thought that anyone regardless of their sociopolitical leanings could ping bolt/blair for their irrational rantings. as i said it’s pretty clear (or should be by now) that bolt/blair sheep represent a particular sort of individual that transcends the rational.
19 August, 2008 at 9:29 pm
A nice little dig at Bolt from one of his own atnews.com.au
http://blogs.news.com.au/news/splat/index.php/news/comments/why_is_almost_all_great_literature_liberal_in_tone/
19 August, 2008 at 9:36 pm
“i’m not sure if your comment is somehow directed at me or if you are using my comment as a touchstone to reinforce your own sentiments.”
It was merely an observation.
19 August, 2008 at 9:37 pm
No they don’t have too necessarily agree with the premise of the site. Pretty much all of the regular posters here, have at one time or another praised Bolt when he has produced something of quality, or resisted his usual urges to manipulate any situation to have another go at his “the left”. Including more conservatives in the debate is likely to see that occur more regularly if anything.
Perhaps I didn’t describe what I would like to see properly, but sure I would like too see people from different political persuasions with a common revulsion for Bolt’s regular rubbish, but it would also be good too have people who regularly agree with Bolt debate here too. Infact I think it would be extremely healthy for many Boltists to remove themselves from that common unhealthy group-thinking cocoon and engage in an adult forum for discussion. I might find much of what they say to be absurdly idiotic, but at least they can be engaged on a level playing field.
Some of Bolt’s behaviour is indefensible regardless of where you come from though, and in my personal opinion, anyone who doesn’t think efforts of Bolt’s like his column linking neglect and murder of children with concern for the environment, should be given due condemnation and not applaud, probably isn’t worth engaging with.
19 August, 2008 at 9:47 pm
“Infact I think it would be extremely healthy for many Boltists to remove themselves from that common unhealthy group-thinking cocoon and engage in an adult forum for discussion.”
But there are many at that site that disagree or agree independently. Isn’t that all we can expect in an open society that embraces freedom of expression and pluralism? Within the bounds of accepted free speech, shouldn’t we tolerate the expression of even the strongest positions on either side? Both at Bolt’s site and here, and elsewhere?
19 August, 2008 at 9:50 pm
Thanks everyone for your comments, it means alot to me. I do agree with Chris of Brisbane, honest and open debate with people from all walks is always good but you won’t find that at Bolt’s site. Anyone with a dissenting opinion immediately gets a million and one insults and some appalling language thrown at them without even a bleep from Bolt, posters like Janine I and Rachel are constant victims of that. The odd thing is that most real conservatives I know, including myself, vote Labor and hate Workchoices. 99% of Bolt’s posters are not conservatives, they’re just extreme right-wing racists, anti-environment and rude. Bolt’s reference to green bags and dead babies was just sick – how did he not get in trouble for that?
19 August, 2008 at 10:08 pm
“But there are many at that site that disagree or agree independently”
Some do, but in reality most don’t, in a truly objective sort of way. In reality conservatives that regularly objectively weigh up Bolt’s musings and objectively criticise him for being idiotic, sloppy and dishonest are probably the smallest minority group at Bolt’s site. There are less of them even then the few token lefties who post there. I can only think of a couple who really deserve to be classed as such.
“Within the bounds of accepted free speech, shouldn’t we tolerate the expression of even the strongest positions on either side”
No we shouldn’t, for me the strongest side should always be the centre, universally condemning extremity from different strains, and not being blind to poor behaviour from those with whom we might regularly agree. Unfortunately we seem to be moving away from this in some capacity, and silly tribal tit-for-tat political teamism, is beginning to have way too much of an influence on political discussion in today’s media. At the forefront of this phenomenon are divisive idiots like Bolt, who attempts to shape absurd caricatures of those with whom he disagrees, creating zero-sum debates.
19 August, 2008 at 10:12 pm
Celetina you make me feel small and embarrassed for what I posted in revenge about 60 minutes. Not one of my better moments. I just get so frustrated when I read my local Courier Mail comments pages full of “Flummery”s and “Gaia”s some days I just want to get back at Bolty. He lowers the level of any conversation to the waving pitchforks and burning effigy’s level.
Thanks for posting. Sorry if I offended you with my post.
That Green bags post will be remembered.
19 August, 2008 at 10:20 pm
And you don’t get freedom of expression, pluralism or and open society at Bolt’s site Milkman, which is part of my point, the hilariously comical, one-sided moderation by Bolt’s monkeys sees to that.
Just out of curiosity, does anyone know how you become a monkey working the moderation machines at a site like Bolt’s? I have had the identities of two of these clowns revealed to me, and they both have the same juvenile, right-idiot politics that Bolt possesses. Is having a failed blog that no one visits, one of the prerequisites?
Is this something that you get paid for, or do you simply receive remuneration by your blogging hero through occasional praise in one of his columns? Do you get free Team Bolt merchandise instead? Finally what is the likelihood of Timmy Blair, getting a gig there sometime soon?
19 August, 2008 at 10:50 pm
“Anyone with a dissenting opinion immediately gets a million and one insults and some appalling language thrown at them without even a bleep from Bolt.”
And then due to their lunatically hypocrtical thought processes, Bolt will spew out something about “the left” being hatefull, and they will all chant in agreement.
19 August, 2008 at 11:12 pm
I wasn’t offended windrider – who hasn’t been pissed with 60 minutes. I’ve met Tim Flannery, he’s a nice man and I know he’s an easy target. Bolt loves to rant about Tim’s “dud predictions” when he knows fully well that Tim didn’t make predictions, he merely put forward worst case scenarios.
Very true Chris of Brisbane. The Boltites seem to have their own Kumbaya My Lord moments – Big Oil style.
20 August, 2008 at 6:58 am
I use to post on Bolts’ blog and everytime i disagree with Bolt or pointed things out to him that makes him look like he doesn’t do his ” research ” very well i am immediately bombarded with insults, with apparently, the OK from Bolt.
Celetina, i don’t paint all conservatives with the same brush, only the far right sheep from bolts’ blog.
While i’m having my morning rant :-)……why do Bolt and a lot of his sheep don’t call themselves ” rightwing ” anymore, they deny it……now they are conservative. Is it because there is and was a lot of rightwing dictactorships in the world?
20 August, 2008 at 9:30 am
There is a big difference between conservative and right-wing and, yes, Bolt and his bloggers falsely claim to be conservative because ‘right wing’ has become a dirty word due to past and present right wing leaders, politicians and lobby groups. Their true nature is right-wing because real conservatives don’t think what they think. I think you’ll find the real conservatives are those of the Labor Right. We know there is a stolen generation, that the climate is changing, that the environment is in trouble, that America has its faults, that public schools are great institutions, that not all Muslims are terrorists, that Israel is not blame-less, we know all this. However right wingers deny all this and that’s what Bolt and his bloggers are doing. They’re not conservatives.
20 August, 2008 at 9:38 am
Well said Celetina.. There should almost be a new definition along the lines of “progressive” or the likes that captures the better parts of conservative views with social minded attitudes.
20 August, 2008 at 10:52 am
back on topic and deveny has published another comedy gold piece in the age today. with true professionalism andy and timmy could learn from she has not mentioned the bullshit of the past day or so.
good on her.
20 August, 2008 at 2:58 pm
i don’t think bolt is conservative. a good friend of mine (who’s both right of centre and doing a phd) described bolt as anti left. which is not a binary statement. for example his stupid ramblings on global warming because he percieves it as a left issue. what an idiot there is nothing left about it at all. and i can see a loose link between conservatives and conservationts.
also the reason right wingers call themselves conservative is the same reason why communists now call themselves socialists.
21 August, 2008 at 9:12 am
jesus, sorry bout that last one. it was bad even for my standards.
21 August, 2008 at 10:39 am
Nice post by Evan Maloney.
http://blogs.news.com.au/news/splat/index.php/news/comments/andrew_bolt_has_lost_his_tongue/
Mooncalf Bolt!!! What a lovely name. Bolt will never name 10 books. No way!!!
When Bolt gets cornered on an issue, with “true guts” he disappears like a wisp of smoke, then reappears with another “angry” spray (to stir up his idiot sheep, like Rad etc) on another issue.
I hear he gets $300,000 a year for his deceitful ways.
21 August, 2008 at 10:59 am
Catherine has shown what true guts is all about.
Timmy and Andy could learn a lesson (but won’t) from her.
21 August, 2008 at 11:01 am
yep she’s been a class act. best to leave timmy and andy in the gutter along with their bigoted hypocritcal rantings.
21 August, 2008 at 11:06 am
I agree notallright.
Bolt is not conservative. Anti left is a far better label.
21 August, 2008 at 3:41 pm
It’s not notoriety that drives Andrew Bolt…
Bolt’s site: New South Wales is the only state where more people search for Germaine Greer than Andrew Bolt.
…not much!
21 August, 2008 at 5:03 pm
Well there are some things we need to keep in mind:
1. bolt gets a lot of hits (the news.com.au website is now advertising this fact);
2. hits generates traffic, which in turn generates income from on line ads;
3. they are about making money.
21 August, 2008 at 5:20 pm
So Andy pockets $300,000 p.a and thats about it isn’t it.
21 August, 2008 at 7:32 pm
Meh,
All his bipolar stuff is just bullshit. Deveny is an unfunny dickhead and there’s an end to it.
Left Bank
21 August, 2008 at 7:40 pm
She’s no dickhead.
21 August, 2008 at 7:46 pm
left bank – what puzzles me is that everyone i know who reads her columns understnads that she is piss-taking and self-deprecating. only andy and timmy fail to see this. have you ever asked yourself why this is?
22 August, 2008 at 12:34 pm
No, Andy’s not a Dog-whistling Hansonite:
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/and_to_drink_an_aboriginal_beaujolais/
Andrew isn’t a racist – that’s being far too kind to him. Racists are ignorant and ignorance is forgiveable. Far worse is when someone hates in full knowledge of truth and compassionate understanding.
You are lying down with dogs, Andy.
22 August, 2008 at 12:39 pm
I guess that should be *denial of* compassionate understanding.
Sadly, I’m sure you know what I mean.
22 August, 2008 at 2:30 pm
I noticed our good buddy Andy Bolt was not published in todays Hun. Hmmmmmmmm……
22 August, 2008 at 3:13 pm
If you people are indeed Bolt watchers, you would surely know that he himself is off sick today.
Of course the correct amount of sympathy and understanding from you all will follow.
22 August, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Of course the correct amount of sympathy and understanding from you all will follow.
Sorry, we’d rather speculate on how the Hun can profit from Andy’s illness…
22 August, 2008 at 3:19 pm
Hun: Lack of Global Warming Cause of Bolt Winter Virus
22 August, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Hun: Bolt Hypothermic after Assuming Global Warming = Budgie-Smuggler Skiing
22 August, 2008 at 3:23 pm
“Of course the correct amount of sympathy and understanding from you all will follow.”
Why, is it something serious? If not why would you expect us to gush sympathy? If it is serious, myself and no doubt many other participants here would wish him well.
Therefore if it’s nothing serious (which I suspect) then you’re already witnessing the correct amount of sympathy (no sympathy required).
22 August, 2008 at 3:26 pm
It must be a ‘cold’ becuase if the globe was warming then no one would ever catch them… See even Andrew’s immune system can prove AGW is a fraud
22 August, 2008 at 3:27 pm
^ that post was sarcastic by the way ^
22 August, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Exactly the hypocritical reaction one expected.
How sad that a bunch of “adults” get togther and spend so much time simply trashing two men for holding views they cannot share.
This I fear is itself a sign of mental illness and I have great sympathy for you all.
Cheers
Husky
22 August, 2008 at 5:16 pm
Once again I find myself regretting the non-use of LOLs.
Let me therefore inform you in the traditional manner that I’m heartily amused at the posturing of the Sexy-voiced One.
22 August, 2008 at 5:22 pm
Is it possible we’ve witnessed the lamest Gotcha in blogging history?
22 August, 2008 at 5:27 pm
I’ll second that, Dean.
22 August, 2008 at 5:43 pm
Funny and ironic thing is. This very thread is about defending a person whose opinions and views have routinely been trashed by both Bolt and Blair.
And, further, I’d say that this site actually aims to provide an alternative view to the mocking, misrepresentation and smearing that characterises the B1 and B2 sites.
At worst, we’re playing the same game.
22 August, 2008 at 6:14 pm
Bipolar disorder v. bad cold. Obviously on the same level aren’t they Husky boy!!! Another dickhead boltstroker.
22 August, 2008 at 9:56 pm
I think last night Andy may have proof-read a new piece by Sally.
23 August, 2008 at 7:02 am
Maybe bolt was off doing some proper research instead of posting anything that pops into his head to please the far right that believe everything Bolt writes without question.
23 August, 2008 at 6:09 pm
Not likely Geoff, unless he was researching how to pwn teh left using distortion and lies with having to consider any other viewpoints whatsoever.
23 August, 2008 at 10:35 pm
Cool site. So funny! I’ll be back sometime.
24 August, 2008 at 5:12 pm
More classic Bolt:
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/declare_precincts_idiot_free_instead/
FIRST there were nuclear-free zones, then alcohol-free zones. Now gay-friendly Sydney is set to introduce homophobia-free zones
And the Boltites are off. Half-cocked of course. They’re outraged. A comment from one of em:
That would mean we could have homosexual free zones, doesn’t sound so PC then does it.
Ah…have a quick read again lovie…you seem to have equated a homophobia-free zone with a heterosexual-free zone.
Now why might she have jumped to such a conclusion do you think? And did anyone correct the misconeption…did Andy step in and right the record?
They’re so used to Andy setting up the targets for them that they just blaze away unthinkingly.
The AGW thread for the day is one of Bolt’s lamest…but he can’t allow the dogs to starve for a day, can he? Would be cruel.
24 August, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Off topic (again): I’ve checked out Blair’s site. Like Bolt, he was recently bragging about his hit count. Yet, have a look at the sparsity of the comments. Little wonder he’s been venturing over here recently, lamely trying to drum up some controversy and traffic apparently. Has Blair’s move to News Ltd killed off his Blog? Doesn’t look too good. How sad.
Perhaps this site will have to become the BoltAkermanWatch site – nah, who could stomach having to read Piers? BoltAlbrechtsenWatch? BoltHendersonWatch? BoltRadPWatch?
24 August, 2008 at 7:23 pm
Another comment from Bolt’s anti-homophobia-free zone:
And when is the first paedophile friendly zone
being created right next door to a primary school
And when someone objects:
Meaning….what, exactly?
He means that if one type of sexual preference gets a zone, why not give one to everyone!
It’s meant to sound bizarre, because this idea is bizarre.
Understand?
Yes, these are the people you attract, Andy.
You must be so proud.
24 August, 2008 at 7:32 pm
So Dean, which Rightard do you reckon is Bolts alter ego on the Bolt/Blair Project?
24 August, 2008 at 9:50 pm
Off again go the Boltards, chanting their idiotic rhetoric, resorting to their circular logic and completely missing the point. Many also revealing their true ugly prejudices in the process. On the Homophobia-free-zone post, Bolt himself however is rather subdued, and there is some logic in his rhetoric.
But again his pig-headed ideological servitude and inability to really see the world from the perspectives of those different from him, means he once again contorts the situation and straw-man others as being the really divisive ones. Contorting logic and turning a positive proposal to try to ease discrimination against a particular group within society, into something negative.
It is clear that that our society has still not reached the point where homosexuals individuals can be as readily comfortable too engage in public displays of affection with desired partners, as heterosexual individuals can, without fear of scorn, abuse, of potential assault. If creating an area where most homosexuals can go to comfortably engage in affection, in a way that most heterosexuals can, helps that situation, it’s a positive thing.
24 August, 2008 at 10:07 pm
The real revealing, idiotic and openly prejudiced stuff on the Homophobia free zone post has come from Bolt’s flock though
Boltard reverse logic: Devising any plans to help disadvantaged and regularly maligned groups of people is divisive and either racist, sexist, homophobic or a combination of each. When faced with topic of the discrimination received by certain groups within society, or practical proposals to help mitigate or ease its occurrence, the Boltard/Rightard attempts to hammer home this reverse logic, combining it with denials that the discrimination occurs at all, or massive understating and/or acknowledgement of its severity. This all culminates in a massive 180 contortion of logic, with accusations from the Botist/Rightard that those people who propose measures to reduce the discrimination are the real prejudiced.
For many Boltist/Rightards this stance is simply driven by ignorance and pig-headed ideological servitude. The reversal of logic and the denial also acting as convenient beliefs, allowing the Boltard/Rightard to avoids facing up to hard facts, and really viewing things from the perspectives of those different from them. But the Boltist/Rightard reverse of logic on discrimination also serves as a way of masking the real underlying prejudices of most Boltards. Regularly though one forgets to properly go along with the empathy masquerade and posts something completely disgusting like
“Chaz
Sun 24 Aug 08 (10:09am)”
“And when is the first paedophile friendly zone
being created right next door to a primary school”
The litany of similar comments, amongst Bolt’s follower and the lack of commendation by other Boltards, and from Bolt himself of such vile stuff, reveals a lot about the true nature of these people. Ostensibly the Boltists are just right-wing nuts.
24 August, 2008 at 10:38 pm
Other lovely posts allowed through by some of the vile right-wing losers who moderate Bolt’s site.
After poster “Strange days indeed” argued the homophobia free zone was a good idea, and argued that members of the gay community had added a lot to the entertainment district of Oxford Street
that has been ruined by fight seeking heterosexuals.
“MattR replying to strange days indeed.
Sun 24 Aug 08 (04:01pm)”
“And LOL at “fight seeking straits”. I’ll take a fight seeking strait to a lovin’ seeking gay, any day of the week!”
“Crapper Tez replied to strange days indeed
Sun 24 Aug 08 (07:13pm)”
“So you hang out in gay bars, SDI?
Maybe you should change your screen name to “Queer Nights Indeed”….
Then further down the page the standards of comments improve.
In response to poster Leonie, who once again demonstrates her futile grasp of logic, with a fallacial argument of which Sometimes Bolt Watch poster, and Bolt returnee loser Kiwi praises her for, again demonstrating his own inability to understand logic in the process.
“Rod of Singapore replied to Leonie
Sun 24 Aug 08 (07:27pm)”
“Leonie I’m all for poofta-free zones except we could possibly let in the odd (non-butch) lezzo couldn’t we?
They might let me watch!”
Then we get this quality addition from
“Andrew of Hawthorn
Sun 24 Aug 08 (10:27am)”
“I’m OK with this, so long as I get my heterosexual, Anglo Saxon, cultural supremacist enclave that is allowed to shut these morons out.”
And this lovely piece from
“Senate Watcher of Perth
Sun 24 Aug 08 (10:48am)”
“Otherwise known as an AIDS zone. Should have warning signs on the streets as well.”
and again on
Sun 24 Aug 08 (10:51am)
“I thought that lot liked a bit of S&M;now & again?
Don’t drop your bar of soap in the shower.
What a disgrace to this nation.”
And they continue and continue. Yep Andy it sure is “tef left” that are the real bigots. These are all your people remember.
24 August, 2008 at 11:24 pm
I just found this blog on Google and laughed out loud. You dedicated a blog to someone elses blog? Bwahahahahahaha!
Then I saw that you have lots of hangers on posting about your posts, that are about someone else’s posts on another blog and I laughed out loud again. You lot are pathetic! Why don’t you idiots post on Andrew’s blog? Or are you scared of arguing with those bad old righties?
25 August, 2008 at 6:44 am
davo I……………..another troll from Bolts’ blog of shame…….HaHaHa
25 August, 2008 at 9:22 am
Hey someone has posted here about people posting about people posting on another blog…
Davo I – If you check out the history of this blog and others like it you would know why it is here.
Or do you hate the fact that there are shows like mediawatch or god forbid the movie show because all they do is comment about others work…
25 August, 2008 at 9:36 am
“Bipolar disorder v. bad cold. Obviously on the same level aren’t they Husky boy!!! ” (sic)
You’d know better than I John.
I still find it more than a little amusing that people who pretend to be against the trashing of people for expressing a view are here hundreds of times to trash people for expressing a view.
Dean’s idea that “At worst, we’re playing the same game.” is the very definition of a hypocrite.
“…the act of pretending to oppose a belief or behaviour while holding the same beliefs or behaviours at the same time.”
“an expression of agreement that is not supported by real conviction”
“insincerity by virtue of pretending to have qualities or beliefs that you do not really have ”
LOL is indeed apt.
25 August, 2008 at 9:56 am
Crhis says
“But again his pig-headed ideological servitude and inability to really see the world from the perspectives of those different from him, means he once again contorts the situation and straw-man others as being the really divisive ones. ”
But then they all use terms like dickhead boltstroker, boltard, troll and muse about having sites dedicated to trashing Akerman, Albrechtsen, Henderson et al.
But that’s not pig-headed ideological servitude or an inability to really see the world from the perspectives of those different from them is it — really? No because its from the perspective of the left.
Davo I this might be fun.
25 August, 2008 at 10:03 am
Oh I almost forgot
LOL
25 August, 2008 at 10:09 am
Husky you have hit the nail on the head.
25 August, 2008 at 10:21 am
Well, HushPlease_Jim, where is the evidence that you castigated Andrew Bolt for trashing Deveny? (You have a large range to select from.)
Unless you can produce it, you too are, by your definition, a hypocrite.
This game is fun.
25 August, 2008 at 10:25 am
This blog has been established for the reasons stated. If you little boys don’t like the topics and the reason for it – take a hike. Go back to Bolt. And please take the whining baby RadP with you. We’re willing to pay baby-sitters rates.
25 August, 2008 at 10:31 am
With complete ignorance, Dean proves Husky’s point by making this statement;
This blog has been established for the reasons stated. If you little boys don’t like the topics and the reason for it – take a hike. Go back to Bolt. And please take the whining baby RadP with you. We’re willing to pay baby-sitters rates
With comments like this Dean, you make a fool of your self when you ask this of others;
Well, HushPlease_Jim, where is the evidence that you castigated Andrew Bolt for trashing Deveny? (You have a large range to select from.)
Dean you spend your time on this blog trashing and name calling anyone who doesn’t hold your far-leftwing view of the world. You then have the audacity to attack commenter’s on Bolt’s blog who do the same.
When confronted with the truth of your actions, you oh so predictably launch into a name calling rant.
25 August, 2008 at 10:44 am
RadP,
Are you really this silly? Anyone can verify themselves what happened by reading the posts above. I have criticised Bolt posts. Husky_Jim, Davo and yourself have then attacked Chris and myself. If you don’t like criticism of Bolt, then don’t come to a blog that is established for that purpose – it’s a very simple concept. Goodbye.
25 August, 2008 at 10:49 am
Husky_Jim, Davo and yourself have then attacked Chris and myself. If you don’t like criticism of Bolt, then don’t come to a blog that is established for that purpose – it’s a very simple concept. Goodbye
Are you for real Dean?! This isn’t about people criticising Bolt. This is about the hypocrisy you have shown.
You are outraged by comments made on bolt’s blog, only to make similar comments yourself.
You are so obsessed with Bolt, that you cannot separate Bolt the man from the argument being put forward.
25 August, 2008 at 10:52 am
Well, RadP, go and establish a DeanLIsaHypocrite blog. I couldn’t give a rats testicle.
25 August, 2008 at 10:53 am
Especially seeing as you have two (very small ones) of your own.
25 August, 2008 at 10:54 am
Well, RadP, go and establish a DeanLIsaHypocrite blog. I couldn’t give a rats testicle
That’s been made very clear by you. That’s why I do not take your mock outrage of others seriously.
25 August, 2008 at 10:56 am
Especially seeing as you have two (very small ones) of your own
Oh Dean, you really are childish. Does thinking about the size of my testicals make you feel better? I hope you don’t spend your days obsessing about them.
25 August, 2008 at 11:01 am
That’s why I do not take your mock outrage of others seriously
Right, that’s why you’re trying so hard to prove I’m a hypocrite.
RadP, why don’t you face the fact that you can’t even string the simplest of arguments together without contradicting and making a fool of yourself? You are completely out of your depth. Seriously, go away.
25 August, 2008 at 11:06 am
You are completely out of your depth. Seriously, go away
I am?
Do you mean when the argument has been sent to the depths of the gutter when you start making personal attacks like this?
Well, RadP, go and establish a DeanLIsaHypocrite blog. I couldn’t give a rats testicle.
Especially seeing as you have two (very small ones) of your own.
25 August, 2008 at 11:12 am
I suppose you’re going to suggest that means you’ve won the arguments, Mighty Matt?
Well, your work is done then. Goodbye, Matt.
25 August, 2008 at 11:14 am
Sad you had to lie…twice! Not sure your Mum would be too happy about that.
25 August, 2008 at 11:15 am
I suppose you’re going to suggest that means you’ve won the arguments, Mighty Matt?
It’s that mighty matt card again. Once again you have proved another point which I made earlier.
25 August, 2008 at 11:17 am
That’s right, Matt. You’ve proven your point. What is there left to do.
Goodbyeeeeee.
25 August, 2008 at 11:34 am
A little comprehension test for the Boltites.
Here’s a comment from one of your own from BoltWorld. How many clangers do you see?
You do see them don’t you?
I became a skeptic the moment I saw Gore’s film advertised on the big screen. Reason? Gore is from the left. The left are liars, plain and simple. They will distort, invent or suppress facts to serve their ideology and agendas.
Since then practically every assertion made by Gore and other alarmists has been been countered and defeated or exposed for the exaggerations or lies they are.
25 August, 2008 at 11:43 am
Actually, the rest is worth admiring for it’s divine sense and clarity…and the mirror it holds up to the likes of RadP:
Yet not once have the alarmists here conceded those points let alone apologised for insisting on them. Never once have they apologised for trying to stifle the facts or for the abuse they’ve directed at climate realists.
What I do find coincidental is that climate fear mongers are almost exclusively from the left. Hence the prostitution of debate, censorship, lies and social engineering that has attended this issue.
Climate fear is plainly a political not environmental issue. It is just another attack on individual liberty and capital. When I wonder about the irrationality of the alarmists I always remember that it is a political campaign from the left. That is why the debate is corrupted by lies and when you see it as their attack on individual freedom you can at least appreciate the reason behind it.
Why do they continue to post, when their position is so neatly summarised here. No need to keep repeating it over and over and over and over…
25 August, 2008 at 11:50 am
Dean
As if you lefties can’t help it you seem determined to begin our friendship by hurling an insult. My deservance for this? Holding a view you don’t. Classic. Its not a steriotype when its in the DNA Dean.
To answer your question.
“…where is the evidence that you castigated Andrew Bolt for trashing Deveny”
When did he trash her?
When did I say anyone shouldn’t have?
Where is my website dedicated to the premise that trashing is wrong and full of content that trashes?
I’m still laughing.
At you Dean. Not with you.
25 August, 2008 at 11:51 am
Husky – You continue to use the silly argument about “the left”. Trying to incorrectly group everyone who has an opposing opinion to yours into one grouping.
To try and lump a diverse group of thoughts and feelings into a simple catchphrase shows the level of maturity (or lack of) in your arguments.
So Troll away….
25 August, 2008 at 11:51 am
Husky – Here’s a hint.. Scroll to the top of the page and read the blog subject and content. It might answer some of your questions.
25 August, 2008 at 12:05 pm
“Right, that’s why you’re trying so hard to prove I’m a hypocrite.”
No that’s why your proving it yourself pal.
I’ve been critical of your views Dean and your response (as it appears it is to all critical comment), abuse and insults.
What proof does one need.
I mean, to resort to genital size arguments? Really mature.
25 August, 2008 at 12:09 pm
Trolling, trolling, trolling…Boltards.
Head em up, Move em on.
Boltards!
25 August, 2008 at 12:11 pm
I’ve been critical of your views Dean and your response (as it appears it is to all critical comment), abuse and insults.
What proof does one need.
I mean, to resort to genital size arguments? Really mature
Exactly Husky. What’s laughable is that Dean thinks he can win the higher moral ground in a debate by referring to the size of his opponent’s testicles.
Even worse is that dean has the audacity to call his opponent a child when he has only moments earlier commented on their testicles.
25 August, 2008 at 12:13 pm
Exactly the hypocritical reaction one expected.
How sad that a bunch of “adults” get togther and spend so much time simply trashing two men for holding views they cannot share.
This I fear is itself a sign of mental illness and I have great sympathy for you all.
Is this where you’re “critical of my view”
HushPuppy?
Abuse and insults?
You twit. Go away.
25 August, 2008 at 12:14 pm
So Troll away….
So where do you call them what agrees with ya troll Dam Buster?
My point stands, and you make it for me. A lefty will insult his opponant at the first sight of his viewpoint being challanged. Its not because you are weak Dam, its because the leftist view won’t withstand any real critique and your only defence is to move the argument from the point to the personal.
Its why Keating was so loved by the left.
25 August, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Husky – Can you provide proof of the following:
“But then they all use terms like dickhead boltstroker, boltard, troll and muse about having sites dedicated to trashing Akerman, Albrechtsen, Henderson et al.”
Can you please list of every poster here and which names they have used in relation to each of the commentators.
25 August, 2008 at 12:15 pm
Trolling, trolling, trolling…Boltards
Another thing that I have learned about dean is that anyone he doesn’t agree with is labelled a troll or a Boltard* and when he can no longer keep up with the debate, he then calls the Mighty Matt and tells them to go away.
No who is the child on this blog?
* like name calling makes the debate go away.
25 August, 2008 at 12:16 pm
Sorry Husky – What view of mine are you disagreeing with?
I do not see any disagreement other than having a go personally.
And where did I mention Keating in any posts? What does that have to do with anything I have said.
25 August, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Dean
It is sad and I do have great sympathy for you.
Clearly you suffer OCD and have to have the lats word and win the argument no matter what. Its a common trait of the left on the net. Hundreds of posts using abuse all the while protesting that a diversity of views should be heard and that trashing is wrong unlees its a trashing of the “rightards”.
Its just about the funniest thing in town.
I am so glad I found this site.
By for now Dean.
25 August, 2008 at 12:24 pm
Sorry Husky – What view of mine are you disagreeing with?
Oh I don’t know Dam, the idea that this site is Ok because it trashes opposing views juxtopposed to the idea that those two who have the views are evil for critiquing the left.
Geneally your hypocricy. I don’t agree that.
25 August, 2008 at 12:25 pm
Shonky_Jim can’t handle having the truth revealed that he started the trolling abuse.
And RadP backs another winner.
Twit and Twat.
25 August, 2008 at 12:28 pm
LOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOOLOL
25 August, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Geneally your hypocricy. I don’t agree that.
Incoherent idiocy.
We’re so grateful you stopped by.
25 August, 2008 at 12:30 pm
Shonky_Jim can’t handle having the truth revealed that he started the trolling abuse.
And RadP backs another winner.
Twit and Twat.
Pure gold Dean. You just cannot help yourself can you, even though your abuse further strengthens husky’s point.
But be careful Dean, hate and abuse cannot be good for the soul. You need to learn not to hate so much.
25 August, 2008 at 12:31 pm
LOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOOLOL
That’ll be the adult behaviour and maturity previously mentioned no doubt.
A gold medal performance…if only clowning were an olympic sport.
25 August, 2008 at 12:32 pm
That’ll be the adult behaviour and maturity previously mentioned no doubt.
A gold medal performance…if only clowning were an olympic sport.
Pot, kettle, black.
25 August, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Can you please list of every poster here and …………………….commentators. (Dam Buster)
Incoherent idiocy Dean????????
25 August, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Be careful husky. Dean is about 3 comments away from calling you Mighty matt followed by a go away.
25 August, 2008 at 12:37 pm
That’ll be the adult behaviour and maturity previously mentioned no doubt.
Sorry Dean its the only way I have for expressing the humourous, and completely involluntary, reaction i am having to your “point making” (for want)
25 August, 2008 at 12:37 pm
What is a mighty Matt?
25 August, 2008 at 12:38 pm
I was wondering which primary school Rad and Husky attend? Are you both in the same grade?
25 August, 2008 at 12:40 pm
What is a mighty Matt?
Might matt is what the call you when they can no longer defend their point of view. It’s a mythical troll they have created so that they can label anyone who they debate with so that they can run from the debate.
25 August, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Ha aaaaaa
Oh you guys need to cut it out its just too cruel to make a man my age laugh so much.
Pleas stop it its hurting my ribs.
25 August, 2008 at 12:44 pm
Thanks Rad.
How positively sad and hilarious at the same time.
Don’t you find these guys like a train crash? It is just so tragic, but you can’t help but watch.
25 August, 2008 at 12:46 pm
http://www.mightymatt.net/
;-)
25 August, 2008 at 12:48 pm
Don’t you find these guys like a train crash? It is just so tragic, but you can’t help but watch
Exactly. You should hear them when they go off on rants about Climate change. It’s truly a religious experience for them and god for bid, you say something negative about Gore or flannery. That really sets them off.
25 August, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Mighty matt is the perfect strawman for them.
25 August, 2008 at 12:51 pm
http://www.mightymatt.net/
;-)
OMG. They have ripped off some kids internet name for their own purposes. now that’s low.
25 August, 2008 at 1:03 pm
Oh global warming eh? They’re fundamentalists then.
How do they feel about this stuff?
I had a google for some information on the reliability of climate models models.
It was written by Julie J. Rehmeyer on April 24, 2008, so it is reasonably current.
She’s clearly of the faith, but her whole argument hinges on this statement.
http://stats.org/stories/2008/can_trust_climate_models_apr23_08.html
“…..the models are very reliable about some things and not very reliable about others. Here are the things they’re good for: They’ve shown with great certainty that the increase in average global temperature is caused by increased levels of greenhouse gases. They’ve also shown beyond doubt that even if all further greenhouse gas emission were stopped, the world would still continue to warm up for some time, and that greater levels of continued greenhouse gas emissions will lead to great warming.”
The critical issue there Dale is that we continue to add CO2 and if the models have “shown beyond doubt”…..”that greater levels of continued greenhouse gas emissions will lead to great warming,” then there is a serious issue, because the world is not warming. It hasn’t for ten years and it may even be …..cooling. How Dale? If the models are accurate enough to show beyond doubt that CO2 emissions must cause warming, then why is it not warming?
Its not rhetoric Dale. Its a scientifically demonstratable phenomenon.
Do you continue to stand by the models?
She also acknowledges that;
“….even the modelers themselves seem to agree with the skeptics. Climate models are nowhere close to being able to fully simulate the physical processes of climate, according to David Stainforth, a climate modeler at the University of Exeter in England who is an author of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports. As a result, he says, “there’s no compulsion to hold that the projections of even the best models can provide useful probabilities for the future of the real world.” ”
Enjoy
25 August, 2008 at 1:08 pm
BTW Dale is a blogger with whom I have serious debate without any name calling. He’s the exception that proves the rule of the left, though he’s got the AGW bug pretty badly unfortunately. He’s basically a good bloke with a logic problem.
25 August, 2008 at 1:14 pm
That’s a good link husky.
But you just wait. They are more interested here to smear a sceptical scientist than debate the issue being put forward.
I raised the issue regarding the missing AGW signature, which is the hot spot in the mid-troposphere. All the likes of dean and other could do was debate the debate the definition of what a rocket scientist is in reference to David Evans.
They are in denial here of the facts like, the missing AGW signature, the fact the planet has not heated in 10 years …etc
There is even one guy here called DbD who has convinced himself that being a AGW sceptic equal to being evangelical.
25 August, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Husky “Can you please list of every poster here and …………………….commentators. (Dam Buster)
Incoherent idiocy Dean????????”
You made the statement to start with so you should provide the evidence to back it up.
I noticed you have dodged the other questions I asked. If you are a serious debator why do you avoid the point and start off on other tangents Jim?
25 August, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Husky – For your off topic post relating to climate change. Are you trying to use Bolt’s flawed theory that that the world is now cooling bacause 1998 was so hot? You are kidding right?
25 August, 2008 at 1:25 pm
The climate models are designed to model the signal (e.g. CO2 forcing) not the noise.
Arguing that because the models don’t map the temperature noise (that is there historically for all to see) is similar to arguing that because a weather model doesn’t show you how the wind gusts throughout the day, it’s of no use.
25 August, 2008 at 1:30 pm
I raised the issue regarding the missing AGW signature, which is the hot spot in the mid-troposphere. All the likes of dean and other could do was debate the debate the definition of what a rocket scientist is in reference to David Evans.
It’s very easy to verify this is a lie by reading the relevant thread.
I went back to the source of Evans’ article and showed it be false.
Now you’ve shown for all to see that you’re a liar, RadP.
25 August, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Are you trying to use Bolt’s flawed theory that that the world is now cooling bacause 1998 was so hot? You are kidding right?
That’s not what bolt argues. His main point is that the world has not warmed in 10 years.
25 August, 2008 at 1:36 pm
I went back to the source of Evans’ article and showed it be false.
Now you’ve shown for all to see that you’re a liar, RadP
No you didn’t dean. The cooling in the stratosphere alone does not satisfy the AGW signature. The AGW signature also required a hot-spot in the mid troposphere.
You also attacked Evans for referring himself as a rocket scientist because he has a PHD in electrical engineering. This doesn’t change the fact that the IPCC AGW signature is missing.
25 August, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Dam its not Bolt’s theory.
If you cannot be accurate then you can’t play.
Dean
The temperature “noise” of global warming would need to be getting louder for the theory to be correct surely?
This statement is made by a PRO model, PRO AGW writer.
Imagine if a cop with a radar booked you for speeding and you said “How accurate is the radar?” and her answer was “They’re very reliable about some things and not very reliable about others..”
For climate models to be useful they have no need to be able to predict the microclimatic events, but they do need to be able to at least predict trends. They have predicted trends towards higher and not lower global temps. In reality they have predicted a win and the horse has come last.
Rad
Dare I ask for one name of a stolen person?
Mann might be too chicken, but one of these fellows will put up surely?
25 August, 2008 at 1:42 pm
“I went back to the source of Evans’ article and showed it be false.”
Incoherent idiocy Dean????????
25 August, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Rad
Dare I ask for one name of a stolen person?
Mann might be too chicken, but one of these fellows will put up surely
LOL.
I also tried to explain to them the theory of Chaos and how climate is subjected to it. Also I tried to educate them on the falsification principle in science and how both these factors feed into the whole AGW debate.
Of course, with fully predictability, they label me as a denialist for suggesting such heresy.
25 August, 2008 at 1:50 pm
The king of the non-existent gotcha.
RadP, the child I was talking to knows exactly what I meant.
Even if he disagrees with what I contend that I showed RadP (and it is here on this site), it still has proven that he lied just a few posts ago:
All the likes of dean and other could do was debate the debate the definition of what a rocket scientist is in reference to David Evans.
RadP is a liar. He knows it, as do others here.
Sad.
25 August, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Husky – Can you provide proof of the following:……………………………………
Its all in this very thread Dam.
Posted by you and Chris and Dean and Geoff. All there above.
Are you a goldfish?
Do you prefer Dam or Buster?
25 August, 2008 at 2:00 pm
RadP is a liar. He knows it, as do others here
You just keep telling yourself that dean but I suggest you go back and read the threads.
25 August, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Of course, with fully predictability, they label me as a denialist for suggesting such heresy.
Denialist. Skeptic. Why do the left use these as insults. One who denies the earth is flat or is skeptical that Peter Foster’s tea helps weight loss would never be so insulted. When AWG is naught but theory and there is some pretty solid science to suggest it aught stay one, why are those that heed the skeptical science so admonished?
Surely skeptical inquisition is the very fabric of science?
25 August, 2008 at 2:03 pm
Husky – again you avoid the original question.
Can you show where I have called the commentators you have listed the names you suggested?
Obviously you cannot. So do not make statements that are incorrect.
Husky – you can call me what you like… But isn’t it you who is complaining about name calling???
You guys are silly for following that call relating to the last 10 years. It has been shot down a number of times. Based on that same premise the Australian stockmarket will be worthless in a couple of years because shares have gone down over the last year.
You should have a look at the blog and commentary on this very site that has numerous links blowing RadP’s argument out of the water..
25 August, 2008 at 2:03 pm
“The AGW signature also required a hot-spot in the mid troposphere”.
Rad, could you please direct me to the exact page in the IPCC report where this is supposedly a major requirement for AGW. I have tried very hard but cannot seem to be able to find it.
25 August, 2008 at 2:03 pm
Oh they do the “anyone who disagrees is a liar” debate stratergy here too. How can Buster say that lumping all the left into a single behavioural basket is an error?
25 August, 2008 at 2:07 pm
Can you show where I have called the commentators you have listed the names you suggested?
Can you show where I said you did Buster?
But isn’t it you who is complaining about name calling???
So calling you by your tag is ok with you or name calling? Which is it?
25 August, 2008 at 2:07 pm
Husky “Oh they do the “anyone who disagrees is a liar” debate stratergy here too. How can Buster say that lumping all the left into a single behavioural basket is an error?”
Who are you addressing? Yourself?
Have I said you were a liar?
I presume when you say “here too” you are relating to Bolt’s and Blair’s site?
25 August, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Husky I will repeat my comment from earlier you avoided:
Husky – Can you provide proof of the following:
“But then they all use terms like dickhead boltstroker, boltard, troll and muse about having sites dedicated to trashing Akerman, Albrechtsen, Henderson et al.”
Can you please list of every poster here and which names they have used in relation to each of the commentators.
You used the term ‘they all use’. You still did not answer the question.
As for name calling:
husky “Are you a goldfish?”
Can I call you H-J?
25 August, 2008 at 2:11 pm
Surely skeptical inquisition is the very fabric of science?
Exactly. It adds to the falsification principle in science.
Denialist. Skeptic. Why do the left use these as insults. One who denies the earth is flat or is skeptical that Peter Foster’s tea helps weight loss would never be so insulted. When AWG is naught but theory and there is some pretty solid science to suggest it aught stay one, why are those that heed the skeptical science so admonished?
I tried to explain to them how ridiculous the term “Denialist” was in reference to AGW. You can not deny something that has not been fully proven beyond reasonable doubt. Especially when you are talking about a science which humanity have a very low understanding of.
You can be a denialist of the Holocaust but you cannot be a denialist of a computer model prediction which is subjected to a science which humanity is far from fully understanding.
25 August, 2008 at 2:12 pm
You just keep telling yourself that dean but I suggest you go back and read the threads.
I’ve addressed my last comment to you RadP. We don’t need to go back to the other threads (which you know will verify what I have said), you have been shown to be a liar in this thread.
What a low-life.
25 August, 2008 at 2:12 pm
Dam Buster & Dean – You’re wasting your time, you’re giving the trolls what they want, you’re feeding them.
25 August, 2008 at 2:13 pm
I’ll try again!
“The AGW signature also required a hot-spot in the mid troposphere”.
Rad, could you please direct me to the exact page in the IPCC report where this is supposedly a major requirement for AGW. I have tried very hard but cannot seem to be able to find it.
25 August, 2008 at 2:14 pm
John 51
http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/articles/DavidEvansmissingsignature.pdf
25 August, 2008 at 2:17 pm
RobJ,
I was willing to tolerate RadP’s trolling but when someone blatantly lies like this, that’s it.
Trolling is one thing – being a lying little turd is another.
25 August, 2008 at 2:19 pm
The theoretical signatures come from the latest big report from the IPCC, which is the
most authoritative document for those who believe carbon emissions caused global
warming. The IPCC Assessment Report 4 (AR4), 2007, Chapter 9. Figure 9.1, in
Section 9.2.2.1, page 675, shows six greenhouse signature diagrams.
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_Ch09.pdf .
In each diagram the horizontal axis is the latitude, from the north pole (90 degrees
north) through the equator to the south pole (90 degrees south). The vertical axis
shows the height in the atmosphere, marked on left hand side shown as 0 – 30 km (and
on the right hand side as the corresponding air pressures in hPa). The coloured regions
on each diagram shows where the temperature changes occur for each possible cause
(red +1°C, yellow +0.5°C, green −0.5°C, blue −1°C per century).
25 August, 2008 at 2:21 pm
RobJ – I know HJ is starting to argue with himself.
25 August, 2008 at 2:22 pm
No Rad,
Going the David “rocket scientist” Evans website will not do.
You go to the IPCC report page yourself and come up with the goodies.
25 August, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Dam “Have I said you were a liar?
I presume when you say “here too” you are relating to Bolt’s and Blair’s site?”
No Narcissus you didn’t call me a liar (read the thread) And you presume too often.
Can you please list of every poster here and which names they have used in relation to each of the commentators.
And I will repeat myself Dam. Its all above in this very thread.
English comprehension not a strong suit Dam?
How about this for now?
RobJ
25 August, 2008 at 2:12 pm
Dam Buster & Dean – You’re wasting your time, you’re giving the trolls what they want, you’re feeding them.
“Can I call you H-J?”
Please do.
And Dam, a question “Are you a goldfish?” is not name calling. That comprehension thing is going to cause us some issues I see.
25 August, 2008 at 2:23 pm
I was willing to tolerate RadP’s trolling but when someone blatantly lies like this, that’s it.
Trolling is one thing – being a lying little turd is another
Dean, you need to go back and read the threads.
25 August, 2008 at 2:24 pm
No Rad,
Going the David “rocket scientist” Evans website will not do.
You go to the IPCC report page yourself and come up with the goodies
John read the second post. It has a link and chapter refernce
25 August, 2008 at 2:25 pm
Just for john51
Section 9.2.2.1, page 675, shows six greenhouse signature diagrams.
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_Ch09.pdf .
25 August, 2008 at 2:27 pm
Rad
Waste of time mate.
These guys would still believe in AWG if Al Gore stood up in their cornflakes in the morning and showed them all the outtakes of an in convenient truth and said he invented AWG as well as the internet.
25 August, 2008 at 2:33 pm
These guys would still believe in AWG if Al Gore stood up in their cornflakes in the morning and showed them all the outtakes of an in convenient truth and said he invented AWG as well as the internet
That’s true. They have even been shown this and I am still waiting one of them to denounce Gore for his obvious deceptions.
http://newparty.co.uk/articles/inaccuracies-gore.html
Yet they will get all wound up in mock outrage when they think someone with a PHD in electrical engineering states they are a rocket scientist.
25 August, 2008 at 2:35 pm
But seriously to get back to the issue.
Andrew appears to be feeling better today and I think Tim’s health is better now though i don’t follow him that closely. So you fellows need not be too worried any longer.
Can anyone tell me, coz I’m new here, why it is that St Peter hasn’t posted a new thread since the 18th?
25 August, 2008 at 2:36 pm
Here’s what RadP said above:
I raised the issue regarding the missing AGW signature, which is the hot spot in the mid-troposphere. All the likes of dean and other could do was debate the debate the definition of what a rocket scientist is in reference to David Evans.
Below is one of many comments I made in reference to RadP’s assertion at:
http://blairboltwatch.wordpress.com/2008/08/04/where-its-not-due/#comments
As I said, anyone has the right to disagree with a contention but to lie like he has here is disgusting and he knows it.
RadP has been proven to be a liar.
You’re a low-life RadP.
DeanL
6 August, 2008 at 10:42 am
I suspect Evans is relying on the older paper by Douglass, Pearson and Singer which was debunked…or for Matt: falsified
No, Evens is relying on the IPCC’s latest report.
In actual fact, I was wrong about my suspicion – Evans’ source is the referenced US Climate Change Science (CCS) Report which does not rely on or base it’s findings on Douglass, Pearson and Singer.
I’ve downloaded and had a look at the report and in particular, the section containing the figures that Evans is referring to – Chapter 5, page 116.
This section compares the zonal (latitudinal) temperature trend through the troposphere of 4 US models with the HadAT2 radiosonde temperature data record (1979 to 1999).
The CCS report says the following in relation to these figures:
The pattern of temperature change estimated from HadAT2 radiosonde data is broadly similar, although the transition height between stratospheric cooling and tropospheric warming is noticeably lower than in the model simulations (Figure 5.7E).
Another noticeable difference is that the HadAT2
data show a relative lack of warming in the tropical troposphere,66 where all four models
simulate maximum warming. This particular
aspect of the observed temperature-change
pattern is very sensitive to data adjustments (Sherwood et al., 2005; Randel and Wu, 2006).
Tropospheric warming in the observations is
most obvious in the NH extra-tropics, where
our confidence in the reliability of radiosonde
records is greatest. Note that some of the details of the model fingerprint pattern are quite different. For example, GFDL’s cooling maximum immediately above the tropical tropopause is not evident in any of the other models. Its maximum warming in theupper tropical troposphere is noticeably large than in CCSM3.0, PCM, or GISS-EH. While CCSM and GFDL CM2.1 have pronounced hemispheric asymmetry in their stratospheric
The first thing I note is that Evans has not included the temperature scale at the base of the figure. This makes it hard to compare the temperatures associated with the IPCC model figure Evans provides for comparison, which also doesn’t have a tempature scale and uses different colours.
Going back to the original figures in the CCS report, you can see, as pointed out in the text, that only 1 of the models actually has the very strong warming signature (0.4 to 0.5 c/decade) at around 300 hPa. The other 3 models all show a much more benign trend at and around the 300 hPa level which is actually quite consistent with the radiosonde data. Guess which model Evans chose to use?
What this report actually says is that the warming signature in the troposphere is there but, in the radiosonde data (only) it isn’t as marked as the models suggest/predict.
A key point is that the radisonde data does show the statospheric cooling which is also the CO2 warming signature. Evans ignores this.
So to say the signature is missing is untrue. To say it’s not as marked as what the models would indicate is reasonable. However this is based on only the one data set – from radiosondes, which are notoriously subject to various biases, errors, discontinuities and quality issues. Hence the Realclimate error analysis showing that, when taking into account the uncertainties with the radiosonde measurements, they don’t contradict the models at all.
25 August, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Husky – Well with your dodgy at best arguments constantly shifting and dodging without answering or providing more than a modicum of proof I would not be pointing the finger too much.
As for English:
Husky @12:24pm “Geneally your hypocricy. I don’t agree that.”
25 August, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Sorry about the formatting. But it doesn’t matter.
RadP is a proven liar and, unless he admits it and apologises, I suggest he is banned from posting.
25 August, 2008 at 2:40 pm
Can you please list of every poster here and ……
This you repeated more than once Dam.
Be very very careful.
25 August, 2008 at 2:40 pm
Dean he should not be banned for sensible arguments which RadP has put up now and again. It is the repitition that follows with no addition to the argument that is the issue.
25 August, 2008 at 2:41 pm
Husky I repeated that question becuase you have avoided it after making a rash generalisation about all posters on this website including RadP and anyone else here.
25 August, 2008 at 2:44 pm
Dean
Hubris does not become the left. It the whole gulag thing you know. You guys need to stick to the dread locks, bongs and the cheese cloth up at Nimbin and Byron Bay because whenever you start to attempt to play with any authority you just come off as bullies. Castro, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot et al.
25 August, 2008 at 2:46 pm
No, DBoP. It’s the lying that is the issue.
All the likes of dean and other could do was debate the debate the definition of what a rocket scientist is in reference to David Evans.
This is a lie. There’s no two ways about it.
The thread is here:
http://blairboltwatch.wordpress.com/2008/08/04/where-its-not-due/#comments
25 August, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Husky I repeated that question becuase you have avoided it after making a rash generalisation …
He’s still not getting it is he?
Praps it should read
Can you please provide a list of every poster here and ……
or
Can you please list every poster here and ……
but
Can you please list of every poster here and ……
Anyway my issue was not with your question, but with Dean (coincidentally the name of the dud Waugh) suggesting that typos mark ones argument as Incoherent idiocy. The irony that he made one himself was lost on both you and he. You see Dam he didn’t accept your argument as Incoherent idiocy when you made a typo….which is my point about the left as i recall.
Really fellers if I have to explain ironies to you and jokes and stuff……is it worth the argument?
And you were going to call me H_J I thought.
Three minutes pass and …..forgotten. R U A goldfish? Its not a criticism Dam. I blog with a fellow who had a couple of strokes and has STML or is a “goldfish”. It makes it easier to debate him if you realise he’s not remembering anything you or he said an hour ago.
25 August, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Well HJ as YOU never answer a question that would be an easy debate.
25 August, 2008 at 2:59 pm
The thread is here:
Where’s the lie?
25 August, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Well HJ as YOU never answer a question that would be an easy debate.
But I did.
Its in this thread. Read it.
25 August, 2008 at 3:09 pm
OK, HJ, I’ll humour you once. See the comment:
DeanL
6 August, 2008 at 10:42 am
It outlines my summation on analysing the source for Evans’ paper.
It has nothing to do with arguing about Evans being a rocket scientist and RadP had no real answer to it.
As I said, you’re welcome to disagree with what I wrote but this proves RadP’s lie.
25 August, 2008 at 3:12 pm
You yourself called Bolt and Blair bananas Dam,
(Dam Buster of Preston 19 August, 2008 at 9:57 am )which one conceeds is not YOU calling them dickhead boltstroker, boltard, troll but it is an example of “……terms like …….”, which was my point wasn’t it?
25 August, 2008 at 3:16 pm
As I said, you’re welcome to disagree with what I wrote but this proves RadP’s lie.
So if I disagree, and you’re wrong and he’s right, he’s still a liar?
When are you in the left going to understand that one may didagree with you and do it honestly?
Marr and Singer and Adams all resort to the tag lie to any argument they cannot any longer logically oppose. Its like to old church term heretic. As soon as someone had any understanding that the church was at odds with they simply trotted the accusation out.
25 August, 2008 at 3:18 pm
Unbelievable!
25 August, 2008 at 3:20 pm
Oh ok Dean I see.
Sorry! Your proof that he lied is in your post from the 6th.
Is anyone else alowed to prove their own assertions here or just you?
25 August, 2008 at 3:20 pm
HJ – Yes I did. In the context of their on going group think “Are you thinking what i’m thinking B1?” “I think I am B2, It’s Groupthink Time”
HJ “Be very very careful.” is that a threat?
I know my English is crap. So what? You are the one who tried to claim higher moral ground by stating I had a poor grasp of English. I was just highlighting to you that, if you are going to call others hypocrites that you should at least read what you type before hitting the “Submit Comment” button. Or do I need to explain the irony to you???
25 August, 2008 at 3:27 pm
All I found Dean was your assertion that he was Mighty Matt and his denial which you accepted and said you would not call him again.
But you do call him that here. Today.
It appears there is proof of a lie here, but not by him.
25 August, 2008 at 3:29 pm
That’s true HJ. But I have decided I don’t believe him. He’s just been proven a liar, so perhaps you can understand why.
25 August, 2008 at 3:31 pm
I debated him honestly and took the time to search for the info. He lied.
25 August, 2008 at 3:36 pm
HJ “Be very very careful.” is that a threat?
Advise.
Good advise.
You are the one who tried to claim higher moral ground by stating I had a poor grasp of English.
Comprehension Dam. Which is self evident.
My comments were not directed at you Dam Buster (mind if I call you DB?), but at DeanL. I’ve explained this to you already, but as it was more than 4 posts back I expect you have forgotten buy now.
(here I go explaining irony to this dude again)
I was not suggesting that you were stupid DB, but questioning if Dean thought you were because you, like me, made a typo. He of course then obliged and made one too, focusing the irony still further.
You appear not to be able to comprehend this kind of thing so i assume that the faith thing is all you really have and that others with more smarts lead you to think things you have no idea why you think.
Even the B1 B2 thing was someone elses idea as it turns out.
Sad really.
25 August, 2008 at 3:45 pm
I have decided I don’t believe him.
Oh LOL gold.
11/10 degree of difficulty 5.00.
You are the winner.
The proof that you win? Well you just get to “decide” that you have.
You get to call people a liar because you choose not to believe them. That’s so wonderful Dean.
Do you do a course and sit an exam for that or can you simply decree yourself to have the right to do it.
Have you made your horse a senator yet?
You make a promise and when you “decide” to you simply state that you don’t believe what was said and what the promise is based on, and you get to break the promise.
BRILLIANT!!!!!!!!
You really are a lefty and a bloody good one too.
Do you speak Menderin by any chance?
25 August, 2008 at 3:53 pm
So who or what is Mighty Matt, HJ? What’s the history? You must be able to answer this to have made a judgement.
25 August, 2008 at 3:54 pm
That’s true HJ. But I have decided I don’t believe him. He’s just been proven a liar, so perhaps you can understand why.
Rad is right, everytime Dean is stuck in a whole over his argument he calls people mighty matt.
All I found Dean was your assertion that he was Mighty Matt and his denial which you accepted and said you would not call him again.
But you do call him that here. Today.
It appears there is proof of a lie here, but not by him.
Husky_Jim, I agree with you mate. This dude Dean is the only liar. He promises not to call Rad mighty matt, then he goes on doing it, even when it has been proven that mighty matt is a kid as you pointed out.
25 August, 2008 at 3:57 pm
HJ – I never claimed the Banana’s idea as my own.. Again with your assumptions.
Again an incorrect assumption HJ @2:23pm “English comprehension not a strong suit Dam?” you claimed first.
Oh and i think you might mean ‘advice’ not ‘advise’. Advise is the action, advice is the thing.
If you are going to type something as I previsouly stated you might want to check it.
As i said earlier HJ, you can call me what you like if it relates to my name here. DB is fine.
25 August, 2008 at 3:57 pm
So who or what is Mighty Matt, HJ? What’s the history? You must be able to answer this to have made a judgement.
give it up dude. this is painful to watch. You are making a drongo of yourself.
25 August, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Mighty Matt is a past commenter at AnonymousLefty that was banned for trolling.
25 August, 2008 at 4:04 pm
According to this link mighty matt is some kid that has died. You may wanna stop calling people by the name of some dead kid. It’s all a bit sick if you ask me.
http://www.mightymatt.net/
25 August, 2008 at 4:24 pm
So who or what is Mighty Matt, HJ?
Yes I am quite familiar with the assertion that “I won’t refer to you as Mighty Matt again. ”
But now you’ve decided not to keep that promise. OK, but who’s the liar?
“English comprehension not a strong suit Dam?” you claimed first.
Yes DB “comprehension” being the word. I have no issue with your typing, and couldn’t give a flying flip about your spelling either, but you might want to ask Dean why he thinks any error in either renders you an incoherent idiot.
25 August, 2008 at 5:05 pm
I make no apology for disbelieving liars.
As I said, trolls are only marginally better.
25 August, 2008 at 5:24 pm
I make no apology for disbelieving liars.
As I said, trolls are only marginally better.
mate, you must be suffering with no credibility given that you are calling people liars and trolls. that seems to be your white flag of defeat.
25 August, 2008 at 6:01 pm
DeanL has been comprehensively owned.
25 August, 2008 at 6:08 pm
Thanks Rad for the links.
A great post above DeanL about the troposphere issue. Well done.
25 August, 2008 at 6:35 pm
You make no apologies for inventing liars where they don’t exist?
25 August, 2008 at 8:29 pm
Reading section 9.2.2.1 in total, taking into account all the possible forcing effects, seems quite reasonable.
Are you suggesting Rad that the IPCC made a big oversight here or are deliberately misleading?
The following is a good read, Rad.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/satellite-measurements-warming-troposphere.htm
26 August, 2008 at 7:02 am
I say ignore the trolls and they will go running back to Bolt with their tails between their legs like good little sheep that they are. LOL LOL LOL
26 August, 2008 at 7:26 am
Are you suggesting Rad that the IPCC made a big oversight here or are deliberately misleading?
I am saying that the AGW signature is not there. This means that their computer models are wrong and they need to start again. Given this it is also wrong for governments like the Rudd government to be releasing climate change policy based on the IPCC report which has been proven to be flawed.
The missing AGW signature brings into question the whole consensus that CO2 is causing climate change. This shows that the REAL climate is not conforming or replicating what the IPCC computer models predict.
26 August, 2008 at 7:29 am
I make no apology for disbelieving liars.
As I said, trolls are only marginally better.
But do you apologise for calling fellow bloggers the name of a dead child. As Ron has pointed out, it is quite sick of you to do that.
According to this link mighty matt is some kid that has died. You may wanna stop calling people by the name of some dead kid. It’s all a bit sick if you ask me.
26 August, 2008 at 7:40 am
Hey Rad, They are talking about this Mighty Matt
http://thinkerspodium.wordpress.com/2007/10/23/right-wing-christian-australias-war-on-liberal-democracy/#comment-12598
Do you apologise for using the name of a dead child to try to score cheap points on fellow bloggers?
If you google Mighty Matt, there are hundreds of them you dill…..
26 August, 2008 at 7:50 am
Do you apologise for using the name of a dead child to try to score cheap points on fellow bloggers?
I am assuming that this is mean for Dean. Your post is a bit confusing gezzam.
26 August, 2008 at 9:28 am
You’ll all be happy to know that AB is still ill and the report on AW this morning was that they are “hoping” he’ll be well enough to do his Tuesday spot next week.
That doesn’t sound like a cold to me.
Of course you’ll all be concerned for his health and be on the Bolt blog wishing him your best. Especially given the subject of this thread.
26 August, 2008 at 9:30 am
Rick – I noticed a comment about the Blubber for Brains thing on the daily forum where Bolt apologised for the ‘accident’ and had sorted it out.
You cannot tell me some of the posters there did not take the opportunity to “acquire” as many email addresses as they could?
Now the BfB blog is back up.
26 August, 2008 at 9:37 am
Rick
Where did the info re the bloggers come from?
26 August, 2008 at 9:42 am
I find you an amazing creature, Rad.
You get your arse kicked twice in one day, and yet return, with reinforcments to continue spouting your disingenuous bullshit.
Nice that you have a friend though..
Mondo, you were right about Rads response to getting his arse kicked. “But you know that Matt(Rad) will refuse to accept it, and will do so by vomiting several sentences of total gibberish, don’t you?”
And Dam Buster, you were right about how he would do it “…Deflect the argument somewhere else or not post at all and try again next week.”
You are getting predictable Rad.
26 August, 2008 at 9:51 am
You get your arse kicked twice in one day, and yet return, with reinforcments to continue spouting your disingenuous bullshit.
LOL. This coming from the one that thinks that being sceptical of AGW equates to Climate Change evangelism.
DbD, you need to take a good long hard look in the mirror.
26 August, 2008 at 9:58 am
HJ – The info came from Bolt himself.
An article form a few weeks ago relating to some of the ‘funding’ of AGW science.
http://www.watoday.com.au/opinion/who-is-behind-climate-change-deniers-20080802-3ou6.html?page=-1
26 August, 2008 at 10:02 am
DB – Bolt emailed this info to you?
Can you link to where Bolt posted this please?
Not that i don’t believe you, but I am a skeptic you know.
26 August, 2008 at 10:05 am
DBoP are you a smoker by any chance?
26 August, 2008 at 10:07 am
HJ – He mentioned it himself on his blog as Rick has stated. So if you commented in there your email may well have been released to anyone else who was posting or reading the comments.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/forum_saturday_august_23/P40/
As you can see he released the information and then pulled the blog to stop posters from being able to see the email address.
26 August, 2008 at 10:10 am
RP – No sorry you will have to get your supplies from somewhere else.
26 August, 2008 at 10:15 am
Interesting link DB, but what would you expect David McKnight’s opinion to be on this issue.
It seems apretty typical smeer job to me.
If one examines the research funding sources for pro/AGW scientists you’ll discover that there are lots of green, socialist, alternative energy and government $$$ to be gained for a scientist with pro AGW “findings” and not so many for the skeptics.
The hocky stick is still in the IPCC report. Its a fraud and exposed as one and yet the IPCC tinkered with things to continue to include it.
26 August, 2008 at 10:18 am
RP – No sorry you will have to get your supplies from somewhere else
I don’t smoke either. I just find it interesting that people try and link the tobacco industry refusal to accept the links to cancer with AGW sceptisim.
The two are completely different.
I also find it interesting that people harp on about the tobacco industry conspiracies while so many people today continue to smoke, even now that the tobacco industry accept the cancer links to smoking.
BTW DBoP. Do you believe that the science around the missing hot spot in the mid troposphere (The IPCC AGW signature) was fabricated by the oil industry?
26 August, 2008 at 10:18 am
Thanks DB. What exactly is your problem with this?
26 August, 2008 at 10:26 am
HJ – Would you be happy to have your email address available for anyone to access?
You have seen some of the comments posted in Bolt’s blog. If you had posted something there that was contradictory to what others had said and they threatened you (and don’t say a threat has never been suggested in there) would you like them to have your email address?
26 August, 2008 at 10:31 am
If you had posted something there that was contradictory to what others had said and they threatened you (and don’t say a threat has never been suggested in there) would you like them to have your email address?
DBoP, what exactly can someone who has threatned you do if they know your email address?
26 August, 2008 at 10:48 am
RadP are you that silly?
A number of people use their real name in the email address. The posting of the emails is in direct contradiction of the news website privacy policy.
It has happened before as some vindictive people have done it to Jeremy from this website when he was anonymous. One Tim Blair has posted personal things about Jeremy that were not in the public arena.
26 August, 2008 at 10:55 am
DB – Yes I would be happy to have my email address available for anyone to access. What have I got to hide? My name and address are in the phone book everyone I send an email to has that address and can forward it to anyone that they like.
Why are you lefties so afraid people will know who you are?
I have never seen a threat made in the Bolt blog. Its a moderated blog and they do a pretty good job of stopping that kind of stuff. Unlike here.
However I have no issue with being threatened by small minded internet characters. They invariably bave poor barks and poorer bites.
The only time I have ever felt threatened on a blog was when a leftist decided to post what he thought was my private IP address. He was wrong, but it showed me that these guys don’t like being argued into a corner.
26 August, 2008 at 11:01 am
This was a BIG FUCK UP ON BOLT’S PART—very comical though, blubber for brains was the forum. A mistake on his part will we ever know, me thinks he will lose a few bloggers over this sorry saga
Rick you are making the assumption that this is Bolt’s fault. Even though it is possible, it is also very possible that it is an IT problem or even a mistake made by one of his employees at the Herald Sun. There are a number or reasons why this happened, so it is wrong for you to state that it is a This was a BIG FUCK UP ON BOLT’S PART
26 August, 2008 at 11:03 am
Rick.
Big stuff up.
Get over it.
Big stuff ups happen.
He (actually they, as I doubt AB has the access or the IT savy to do it so HUN IT would have fixed it) fixed it as soon as the problem was realised and I just bet not many of us here saw, or bothered to record if we did see, anything.
26 August, 2008 at 11:05 am
ALSO I would like to hear our Editor’s views on this Bolt blog breakdown on protecting bloggers security—this is a scandal that will not go away too soon.
At best it is a scandal at the Herald and Weekly Times IT department.
Rick you just seem way too hungry for Bolt’s blood to be genuine about your outrage.
26 August, 2008 at 11:19 am
Praps Rick you could point us to where Bolt isn’t taking full responsibility for this?
26 August, 2008 at 11:20 am
It’s Bolt’s blog, the buck stops with him. Surely we are not going to start the blame game, and say it’s Rudd’s fault, and if that don’t stick, say The Blair/Bolt Watch Project are to blame–don’t laugh they will try and pin this BOLTGATE SECURTY SCANDAL,on some poor innocent lefty
OMG Rick, you are starting to turn rabid with irrationality.
It may be Bolt’s blog, but it is owned and serviced by his employer. So any IT problems are the responsibility of the owner of the ip address.
26 August, 2008 at 11:21 am
HJ – You are more than welcome to release your information. But it is not up to the moderator or the owner of the site to do it if they have a privacy policy that states they will not do it.
It is not all about you and your details.
“Why are you lefties so afraid people will know who you are?”
Then why dont you post under your real full name rather than HJ?
And if you and RP take the time to READ what Bolt himself typed in his blog HE was the one who copied and pasted the information.
26 August, 2008 at 11:29 am
And if you and RP take the time to READ what Bolt himself typed in his blog HE was the one who copied and pasted the information.
Can you please provide the link to where bolt sates that he copied and pasted the email address* that were published. I have read the post of bolt’s and I cannot see where he states this.
This is what I have read on Bolt’s site;
There seems to be a glitch with reading the comments on the “Blubber for Brains” thread. I’ve copied them below for those who are interested, and have asked the guru to fix it when he can. Apologies for the lack of formatting
With the post’s he has copied looking like this;
Can’t seem to access the comments in the Blubber for Brains article. Is it just me?
Leonie (Reply)
Sat 23 Aug 08 (04:07pm
No e-mail addresses there.
* I am making an assumption that you are referring to this. If you are not then please clarify what you are referring too.
26 August, 2008 at 11:43 am
I have just gone back and read the second update where he admits to accedentally posting the e-mail addresses.
UPDATE 2
Even more apologies for inadvertently revealing email address in doing the above. Profound apologies, in fact. Everything removed now
He has given an appology for the error, while he removed it as soon as he noticed it.
26 August, 2008 at 11:45 am
DB my real name is Jim Hosking when i was a school boy in about 1678 one of the other boys hit me in the larynx with a tennis ball and for a couple of days my voice went funny ergo Husky_Jim. It stuck. My wife calls me Husky, as may you.
Its not all about me DB, but you asked the question “Would you be happy to have your email address available for anyone to access?” So surely you must accept that the answer will be about me?
By admitting he copied and pasted it (something we all must have the smarts to realise he can do)isn’t he accepting and admitting it was his fault?
But I can’t see where he makes that admission either sorry.
Why are you knickers so twisted by this?
He made a mistake he fixed the error, admitted the error and apologised for it. If more than 10 people saw it I would be astounded and if anyone took note of it I would suggest it was one of you guys who hate him so much.
26 August, 2008 at 11:46 am
UPDATE 2
Even more apologies for inadvertently revealing email address in doing the above. Profound apologies, in fact. Everything removed now.
Refresh your page dumb-ar*e.
Widdle Wad has found some widdle fwends to pway with.
26 August, 2008 at 11:47 am
RadP – That post has to be the best bit of BS I have seen in ages.. It is laughable. Scroll down 4 comments.
And you say you read through all the IPCC reports?
26 August, 2008 at 11:51 am
Why are you knickers so twisted by this?
The reason why they are getting their knickers in a twist is because they are more excited with the idea of scandalising Bolt than they are outraged at e-mail addresses being post by mistake.
I am certain that if this blog site did the same, they would not be screaming for blood and scandal. Their motives are too transparent.
26 August, 2008 at 11:55 am
And you say you read through all the IPCC reports?
Are you disputing the missing IPCC AGW signature?
If you are then read this:
Section 9.2.2.1, page 675, shows six greenhouse signature diagrams.
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_Ch09.pdf
26 August, 2008 at 12:00 pm
echo echo echo… RadP….. echo echo echo
So you can find a gem in the IPCC reports but miss the fact that at least 3 people posted on Bolt’s blog over a period of time stating that the email addresses were included. along with the other posters who suggested there was something wrong with the blog.
echo echo echo
26 August, 2008 at 12:02 pm
@7.43 you couldn’t access it and @ 8.23 someone said there were emails visable. 10 minutes later it was fixed.
3 posters complained.
Scandal?
26 August, 2008 at 12:04 pm
not at least 3 DB.
max 3
26 August, 2008 at 12:05 pm
So you can find a gem in the IPCC reports but miss the fact that at least 3 people posted on Bolt’s blog over a period of time stating that the email addresses were included. along with the other posters who suggested there was something wrong with the blog
And your point being? Have you read what I have written?
26 August, 2008 at 12:14 pm
@7.43 you couldn’t access it and @ 8.23 someone said there were emails visable. 10 minutes later it was fixed.
3 posters complained.
Scandal?
God forbid if the milk runs out in the tea room at work. Rick and DBoP would have a nervious breakdown.
26 August, 2008 at 12:34 pm
This thread is about admonishing Bolt because he was suggesting that a sick woman’s employer should stop profiting from her illness. The editor then make a thinly vailed suggestion that the woman isn’t actually sick.
But the scandal is that for 7 minutes on the last Saturday night of the olympics, when every woman and her dog were watching the action from China, 3 people reported seeing email addresses they should not have seen.
Life should be so good.
Not even said editor St Peter has bothered to go to the keyboard to thrash Bolt with his usual sprig of wet lettuce.
26 August, 2008 at 12:55 pm
For God’s sake Dean and Dam – what are you still doing here?
What part of our last encounter with Matt leads you to believe there will be a different outcome this time? You’re both vastly more masochistic than I thought possible.
Matt’s identity will be exposed, one way or another, in the fullness of time. Perhaps when Lefty returns from OS he will be able to compare the IP addresses and expose the little liar.
Until then – well, do yourselves a favour!!
26 August, 2008 at 12:59 pm
Matt’s identity will be exposed, one way or another, in the fullness of time. Perhaps when Lefty returns from OS he will be able to compare the IP addresses and expose the little liar
When that happens mondo, and the truth comes out that I am not this mythical mighty matt person, will you apologise for deceitfully using the mighty matt card?
26 August, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Mondo,
RadP will not be addressed by me again. His blatant lying has been proven by me here:
http://blairboltwatch.wordpress.com/2008/08/18/backhanded-sympathy/#comment-8590
The Might Matt stuff is irrelevant.
When you debate with someone in good faith and they lie about it like that to smear you, their credibility is gone.
He’s a lying little rodent and he knows it.
26 August, 2008 at 1:08 pm
When you debate with someone in good faith and they lie about it like that to smear you, their credibility is gone.
He’s a lying little rodent and he knows it
LOL Husky has already exposed that myth dean. You are the won lying and not debating in good faith.
You initially say that you will stop calling me mighty matt, only to then decide that you will break that promise & start calling me mighty matt again
I’m afraid that you are the lying rodent Dean.
26 August, 2008 at 2:36 pm
Of course he’s a liar Dean – he would have nothing to post if he didn’t routinely misrepresent everyone else’s argument. It is beyond question that you have done far more to address Evans’ argument than simply debating his credentials as a rocket scientist, and it is equally beyond question that Matt’s response seeks to distort this obvious truth.
Matt cannot argue in good faith – it has been proved time and time and time again. That’s why he was banned at Lefty’s, and it’s why he will eventually be banned here too. You and I, however, need not play any further part in his silly games – others can beat their head against the dense concrete that masquerades as his brain.
26 August, 2008 at 2:56 pm
Rick – It is in breach of the news.com.au privacy policy to disclose personal details without consent.
“11. When you provide us with your content News will collect certain personal information about you. For details of the information we collect and its uses, please see our privacy policy. Despite anything in that policy, however, we will not use your personal information collected in relation to you sending us your content to contact you with marketing offers, nor pass that information to our related companies for that purpose, however we may contact you for other reasons relating to your use of our site or the content you have submitted.”
From the Privacy Policy webpage:
Public Information
“Any information posted on bulletin boards and/or communicated in chat areas becomes public information. While NDM strives to protect and respect your privacy, we cannot guarantee the security of any information you disclose in a chat room or bulletin board.”
Key word there being ‘you’, i.e. the user.. what about if news or it’s employees or agents disclose your personal information?
26 August, 2008 at 4:15 pm
I rest my case!
Clearly its a case of Bourbon and now empty.
Hickup Rick on the juice again.
26 August, 2008 at 4:18 pm
DB (dumb bastard);-)
He’s acknowledged the error and apologised.
If he was commit subucu over the shame of it, what the hell would you do all day?
The topic is Catherine’s bipolar, or St Peter’s accusation that she’s not suffering it.
26 August, 2008 at 4:32 pm
HJ – What happened to Jim??? Or will we be getting ‘Husky of OG’ soon?
Again with the name calling HJ. The right never cease to lower themselves to the gutter.
Will you be asking for RadP’s head on a platter for bringing climate change to a discussion thread about bi-polar as well?
Rick was commenting on the allegation he raised about what happened on Bolt’s blog, I was replying to it.
26 August, 2008 at 5:14 pm
Different PC DB.
I see you’ve been “researching”.
Ha haha. Poor lefty.
And its not name calling “again” DB it was the first time and it was just a joke hence ;-), but I forgot about the left and the no sence of humour thing. Won’t happen again I know jokes cause you chaps anguish.
The right only need to get into the gutter to be on eye level with you chaps in red DB. Check out St Peters latest where he just goes to town on the name calling.
Red never brought climate change to the thread. He simply mentioned that the mention of it upset you blokes. You and that DeanL chum did the rest. Complete with name calling BTW.
27 August, 2008 at 10:03 am
Won’t happen again I know jokes cause you chaps anguish.
Ahhh – the penetrating wit of the rightard. Calling someone a “dumb bastard”, yup that’s champagne comedy right there.
What a monumental fuckwit.
27 August, 2008 at 10:15 am
What a monumental fuckwit.
Mrock, why are you so verbally abusive?
27 August, 2008 at 10:20 am
Mondo – You should have put ;-) after you called HJ a ‘Fuckwit’ so it is a joke.
27 August, 2008 at 2:41 pm
Mondo – You should have put ;-) after you called HJ a ‘Fuckwit’ so it is a joke.
I thought about that – but I don’t want to give Jimbo the wrong idea.
27 August, 2008 at 3:29 pm
Mondo :-) thanks. made my day by that comment.
27 August, 2008 at 4:13 pm
Glad to hear that our interaction with these guys is giving you something to smile about!!
27 August, 2008 at 6:43 pm
LOL!! schwwweeeeet!
27 August, 2008 at 6:59 pm
Totally schweeeeeeeeet.
Schweeeeeeet. Schweeeeeeeeeeeeeeet.
Ha-ha. LOLOLOLOL.
Comedy gold. Schweeeeeet.
Ha-ha. You said it. LOLOLOLOL.
27 August, 2008 at 7:04 pm
no, i wrote it. but please feel free to repeat if it helps you feel your making some contribution to this thread.
lol!
27 August, 2008 at 7:07 pm
Bolt accidently re-read Sally’s next piece.
27 August, 2008 at 7:19 pm
“no, i wrote it. but please feel free to repeat if it helps you feel your making some contribution to this thread.
lol!”
Ha-ha. LOL! Comedy gold!
28 August, 2008 at 10:03 am
Isnt one of Mondo Rock’s hist called Cool World?
Of course you fellers on the red benches won’t see the irony or the humour, but I’h havin a giggle.
28 August, 2008 at 10:41 am
Check out Bolt’s post on Rudd’s speech on education/school reform.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/rudd_delivers_substance_on_schools/
Nothing wrong with Bolt’s analysis of the speech and the underlying intentions.
What’s revealing is the last sentence:
Has Rudd at last revealed the Prime Minister he wishes to be? Conservative, reforming, pragmatic…
Conservative…reforming. See how outdated these terminology are?
Bolt has tried so hard to characterise Labor and Rudd as “Leftist” – only because it’s derogatory in his eyes – it’s the easy way out when you don’t have an argument. The term “Leftist”, in the context of Australian politics is practically meaningless.
Labor has been a government of reform in the 80s and early 90s and looks like being so in Rudd’s term (no chickens to be counted yet though). Rudd is pretty much a Tony Blair carbon copy and the best way to describe Blair is probably “progressive”.
Bolt and his ilk need to get over the childish notion that if an idea looks good it must come from his side and can therefore be labelled “conservative” (which is not to say that the Liberals didn’t want to reform education in the same or a similar way). It’s an inane argument.
There is nothing wrong with making people accountable for their earnings and their work as individuals. Equally, there is nothing wrong with applying the same principles to business and corporations. And that’s not leftist, rightist, conservative or liberal – it’s progressive.
28 August, 2008 at 10:48 am
There is nothing wrong with making people accountable for their earnings and their work as individuals. Equally, there is nothing wrong with applying the same principles to business and corporations. And that’s not leftist, rightist, conservative or liberal – it’s progressive
Dean you are forgetting one very important fact about this policy, it was Coalition policy back in 2005 when Brendan Nelson was pushing for it.
28 August, 2008 at 11:31 am
“Dean you are forgetting one very important fact about this policy, it was Coalition policy back in 2005 when Brendan Nelson was pushing for it.”
Did you forget that Dean, or was Rad just divining what you were thinking with his mind reading abilities, the same way he does when explaining to us all what Bolt ACTUALLY meant to say?
He has strange powers this Rad Pipper…
Frankly, who cares if it was Coalition policy if it is a good idea?
I suppose that some people are so totally ideologically driven and welded on to one political party they can never admit that the other side have had some good ideas, but i thought these kinds of closed minded ideologues were a product of ‘the Left’, not at all what you would expect from a middle of the road conservative like Rad.
28 August, 2008 at 11:36 am
I suppose that some people are so totally ideologically driven and welded on to one political party they can never admit that the other side have had some good ideas
I never said it was a bad idea. I was responding to Dean’s comment that the idea is not a conservative idea.
I was pointing out the fact that the policy was first put forward by the conservative political party in Australia, the Libs. Given that they were the party to produce this policy, it is safe to say that it is a conservative policy as they created it.
28 August, 2008 at 11:38 am
DbD,
I wrote this (which is not to say that the Liberals didn’t want to reform education in the same or a similar way).
It’s just a continuation of the distortions and lies of an idiot.
It is best not to respond to him at all – which is the policy I think everyone here has adopted.
28 August, 2008 at 11:48 am
Of course the policy was announced by the Liberals in 2004.
Did they do anything about it? Nope
Just words announced by one Dr B Nelson.
As Rudd said yesterday “it is time to do something about it” (or something like that).
28 August, 2008 at 7:53 pm
Bolta is he really sick,or is his job on the line?
28 August, 2008 at 7:54 pm
Rick why do you wish him silenced?
Comments are closed.