|
Post by angra on Apr 4, 2013 10:18:07 GMT 10
I've had four occasions in the last year when comments to the Bolt blog have not been published - presumably because they were critical of his 'journalistic standards'.
He regularly blocks comments from known critics. He uses selective quotes, and cut'n'pastes supportive comments, often completely out of context.
Is there no beginning to this man's genius as an agit-prop Stalinist 'journalist'?
Let's hear your personal accounts of News Limited's censorship and selectivity.
My freedom of speech!
|
|
|
Post by angra on Apr 4, 2013 10:48:04 GMT 10
Trust some get the allusion. www.saintsebastian.org/custom/index.cfm?id=92318"This freedom of speech, and from a person, too, whom he supposed to have been dead, greatly astonished the Emperor; but, recovering from his surprise, he gave orders for his being seized and beaten to death with cudgels, and his body thrown into the common sewer." Merely historical irony. (Note to self - Must press my old white shirts)
|
|
|
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Apr 4, 2013 11:00:19 GMT 10
I hadn't even finished with that screed. Sadly, there are real things to do.
He's at it with flannery again now. Life is too short.
|
|
|
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Apr 4, 2013 11:06:48 GMT 10
"I've had four occasions in the last year when comments to the Bolt blog have not been published"
It's why I won't post there. I don't trust him or his moderators to even reject or accept the post in its entirety - they're likely to edit it, and then reject any attempts by me to correct the record while letting others put the boot in. Based on comments from here and the old PP blog, I believe their moderating to be questionable. I refuse to give them the opportunity to slander me.
That business with the "ANTISEMITE!!!11" accusations summed it up beautifully - make a downright incorrect (and defamatory) claim about what I'd posted, leave the field open for the molluscs to respond with their usual witch-hunt diatribes and block me from pointing out the facts.
It's not about debate. It hasn't been for years. Once upon a time it WAS about debate, but now it's just filtered propaganda.
|
|
|
Post by jack on Apr 4, 2013 19:14:24 GMT 10
Here's something else that AB somehow "forgot to promote"... How’s this for a night out: the 70th anniversary dinner of the Institute of Public Affairs - "the voice for freedom since 1943" - with right-wing warrior Andrew Bolt as MC and none other than his boss, Rupert Murdoch, as special guest speaker. The swanky April 4 affair at Melbourne's National Gallery of Victoria is invite-only - and then it’ll cost you $495 to be there (there’s a $50 discount for all you IPA members).
But if it were us - and sadly nobody at Crikey was invited... we’d be digging deeper into the VIP package, which includes "exclusive pre-dinner drinks with Mr Murdoch and special guests and priority seating at dinner". A drink with Rupert will only cost $995 - or the cost of a nice bottle of wine for the media mogul himself. Security seems a little tight - "photo identification and entrée card are required for entry" - so we don't like our chances of getting in. But let us know if you’re going, wont you - we'd love to know what goes down.
www.crikey.com.au/2013/03/18/tips-and-rumours-840/ He's a Man of the People, is Andrew. Update: Oh, but look out! -- the ferals and barbarians are at the gates... www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/protesters-jump-on-lord-mayor-robert-doyles-car/story-e6frf7kx-1226612755290Update 2: Poor little Timmeh... Finally fed up with forgetful Andrew Bolt, 2GB has asked me to take over on tonight’s show with Steve Price at 8.00pm.
|
|
|
Post by angra on Apr 5, 2013 7:17:49 GMT 10
Compare and contrast.
Andrew in 2011 on the "ditch the witch" demo -
"IT took just one sign in a crowd of 3000 demonstrators this week to inspire two blowhard politicians into ecstasies of moralising hypocrisy...I was all they needed to slime the peaceful crowd as "extremists" and "fruit loops", and attack sceptics generally as mad and bad."
Andrew on last night's demonstration at the NGV IPA event -
"Of course, the arrogance, violence and authoritarianism are despicable,... See, the event inside, which I MC’d, was a celebration of freedom and the work done by the IPA to defend it. For several speakers, me included, the protesters served as a perfect demonstration of the totalitarian instinct to which we were opposed... The enemies of the Open Society are always with us, and have been since the poisoning of Socrates. "
I doubt if the Bolter has ever read Popper, or realised that one of his idealogical foes, George Soros, is chairman of The Open Society Institute, named after Popper's seminal work.
|
|
|
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Apr 5, 2013 8:47:16 GMT 10
Yeah, this line suggests that all that money, powerful people and adulation for A Job Well Done have gone to somebody's head: "The enemies of the Open Society are always with us, and have been since the poisoning of Socrates."Wow. Socrates. Come on, andrew - surely you can get a comparison with jesus in there somehow. Maybe that'd be too much? Maybe too obvious? And ... "Open Society"?!? Keep in mind that this is from the guy who leaked selected details from a classified document, shown to him by a government minister for that purpose, in order to discredit a whistleblower. A whistleblower who quit his job in protest against a war of convenience, a distraction from an ACTUAL threat, based on dodgy intelligence and false claims. A whistleblower who, it should be emphasised, was shown by history to be absolutely correct. You ain't Socrates, andrew. And I don't think you quite understand what "Open Society" means. I don't know if all the coverage is just leaving out half of the attendees, but judging by who HAS been reported as attending, that do was hardly about "freedom", it was just a big hobnob for the rich and right-leaning. The photos that the Hun chose to prove its point don't show a "violent, hate-filled" crowd. The two guys sitting on the car are clearly having a lark - they're smiling, for goodness' sake. Stupid maybe, but I don't think anyone was in any sort of peril. One person was briefly inconvenienced, sure. Those photos don't show any violence. But, then, these are the same people who think a comical over-reaction by the AFP to some noisy black people constitutes a "race riot". I think this sums up that protest rather nicely: ''They let our tyres down,'' he said.
''We had to go and get them re-inflated but we’ve done that and I’m not going to let them (the protesters) stop me attending.'' Oh, the humanity!
|
|
|
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Apr 5, 2013 9:07:44 GMT 10
"Anti-capitalism protesters attempted to disrupt the event."
When did "capitalism" ever require a cozy relationship of mutual financial interest between an ascendent political party, sections of government, selected business interests, the majority of a nation's press and a church?
"Melbourne Lord Mayor Robert Doyle had his entry briefly disrupted when his car's tyres were slashed"
That's a big claim, because it requires that one or more people approached a car which contained a harassed politician, a car surrounded by harassed police, and produced one or more knives. I suggest that would have gone quite badly for those involved, and there'd be quite a bit of evidence for it.
"Some reports suggested his car's tyres had been slashed."
Well, yes. The australian reports that. Because the australian works for the people who were in that room. If they could get away with it, they'd claim that the crowd tried to burn down the reichstag.
|
|
|
Post by jack on Apr 5, 2013 9:34:23 GMT 10
Rank and file anti-hemlock advocates cower terrified behind police lines, lest the barbarians let down their hairstyles.
|
|
|
Post by jack on Apr 5, 2013 14:13:36 GMT 10
|
|
|
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Apr 5, 2013 17:10:46 GMT 10
Oh dear. Gosh. Reefs recover
Remember the old scares? Well, well. More evidence the alarmists should say sorry: AUSTRALIA’S isolated Scott Reef lost almost all its corals to bleaching when ocean temperatures rose and scientists thought it would take decades to recover.
But it’s made a quick recovery, suggesting new corals can be recruited from local sources when fish are plentiful and reefs are not disturbed.
...coral cover still increased from nine per cent to 44 per cent across the entire system in 12 years. Erm ... That story says that the reef recovered faster than anyone expected. The article is very keen to emphasise that. But it seems less keen to make clear that the reef recovered because the temperature increase was localised and temporary. Nothing in that story says that reefs will just sail through a permanent increase in temperature. All it says is that they can recover if temperatures return to normal. So what is it exactly that "alarmists" need to apologize for? The "alarmists" are concerned with a permanent change in conditions. That story has nothing to do with it. This is barely even cherry-picking. He might as well be holding up a picture of chewbacca and declaring that it proves "alarmists" need to apologise.
|
|
|
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Apr 5, 2013 17:18:24 GMT 10
This superannuation thing ...
As near as I can tell, all it does is return a few of the most well-off to the rules that applied before somebody eliminated taxes on benefits as a pre-election bribe budget measure.
Retirees still use public services. They'll start using them even more as they age. Why shouldn't they be paying taxes, if they have a steady income? (particularly an income which exceeds the national average) People who DON'T have enough to retire will certainly be paying tax on their income. They certainly won't get a free ride.
|
|
|
Post by jack on Apr 5, 2013 19:32:36 GMT 10
I may have this wrong, but the Time Magazine 100 Most Influential List seems to me... pure genius!
Being on it sounds like it must be a good thing, right?
Well, no. Candidates are chosen on the basis of their influence in the world, whether for 'good' or 'ill'.
I don't know to what extent readers' votes will determine the outcome. But I suspect that the more votes a candidate gets (ed: I mean, either Yea or Nay), the better are their chances of being selected by the editors for the final list.
Recall on Wednesday that Julia Gillard's vote was, according to AB, 61% for JG to be on the list, and 39% against.
Since Wednesday, a further almost 10,000 votes have been cast either way, more than doubling the number of votes. Over half of those were No votes, thanks presumably in no small part to AB's revving up his droogs to keep Gillard off the list. Consequently, since the titanic struggle over Gillard's place on the list began, she has inched further up the results list (based on number of votes).
True, the No vote overtook the Yes vote for a while, but the Yes vote is now resurgent.
Thing is, whichever side may apparently be 'winning' at any given point, this may provoke a further fit of voting by the other, in a kind of whacky feedback loop.
Just a thought, but if I were an editor, I'd be looking at both the number of votes AND the degree to which those votes are polarised, as one way of divining a given candidate's 'influence'. See, there's a reason voters are given the choice "Absolutely" or "No Way".
So... congratulations Andrew Bolt! With your vindictive, reckless, deranged hate campaign, you've practically guaranteed the GillardGillardGillard's place on the Time Magazine 100.
|
|
|
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Apr 6, 2013 8:41:32 GMT 10
|
|
|
Post by angra on Apr 6, 2013 9:01:23 GMT 10
Anyone notice the recent hagiography (by the usual suspects) of Blessed Rupert of the Pontifical Equestrian Order of St. Gregory the Great, is rather similar in tone to that of the North Korean media to the supreme leader Kim Jong Un?
|
|