Tim Blair

Gee Tim. A bad day? Can I buy you a beer.

the left is just so very bitter, perhaps it's a result of feeling impotent and ignored. it's a funny combination of shrill arrogance and petulance.
they can not laugh at themselves, which generally makes them unpleasant to be around for very long. i, however, am quite full of self-defecating humor.

Can I walk briskly with scissors?

Speaking of the left having no sense of humour, I sent the Socialist Alliance the following email on the 20th.

"Dear socialist alliance.
I agree, american invaders bad. my uncle runs jail in iraq, now america invaders come and say he bad and shut the jail down. now he has no job! what can i do to help the socialist alliance? allah akhbar!
-alla"

I have not yet received a response.

Maybe after we find one with a sense of humor, we can find one with compassion for other human beings. I have heard far too much cackling of glee over the war bogging down (whoops, now we won it after all), and denial that the fall of Saddam was a positive development, and other such things that suggest that all those people with supposedly bleeding hearts are in fact sorry that the torture has stopped.

Actually, what summed it up for me was the car I saw that had a bumper sticker that said "No War For Oil"-- next to one that said "Free Tibet." Display the right attitudes, and do absolutely NOTHING to bring about your goals, that's the Left approach now.

That was brilliant Tim and Mike G you are spot on, all rhetoric and no substance.

Sharp sense of humour you have Gary. Are you trying to prove Tim right?

Well, I see the site's usual lefties haven't received their faxed "instructions for response" from headquarters yet...

Well Tim, around about the time that the Iraqi Vietnam-quagmire evaporated - to the great disappointment of lefties the world over - I came across this collection of satirical war posters:

http://www.whitehouse.org/initiatives/posters/index.asp

Much to my surprise, I had a good chuckle at some of them. (If only I had the full set of T-shirts, I could have worn a new one on each day of the war and still had some clean ones in the bottom of the drawer when the unpleasantness was over.)

So I reckon some left-wingers are actually capable of being funny. The problem is, the humour is still based on sneering and agreeing with each other about the old established shibboleths. I still haven't found any die-hard lefties capable of laughing at themselves.

TFK

From David Brooks in The Weekly Standard:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/002/820yqhap.asp

Powerlessness corrupts.

The problem is, the humour is still based on sneering and agreeing with each other about the old established shibboleths.

. . . um . . . never mind.

Quick test for whether someone is a danger to self: individual does or does not possess sense of humo(u)r....check out politicians this way. NONE of them have any at all, therefore a great danger to us all.

Hey Mork,

Glad to see you could get out "...um..." before giving up. That makes you as eloquent as the smelly kid in the Che Guevara T-shirt who tried to sell me a copy of Green Left Weekly last weekend.

TFK

Good point, MommaBear.

American presidents with a sense of humor: Reagan, Johnson (sort of), Kennedy, Roosevelt (T.), Lincoln . . . who else?

Australian prime ministers with a sense of humour: Keating, Whitlam, Menzies(?) . . . anyone else?

Billy Hughes, John Gorton. Bill McMahon was funny, but didn't have a sense of humour....

Nah, Bob, just trying to avoid stating the bleedin' obvious, and pointing out the absence of self-awareness in a zealot is definitely that.

Mork I think you are mistaking Laughable with having a sense of humour. Lets face it, Our worst and second worst Prime Ministers. gough Witlam and Paul Keating were both complete jokes, but I doubt I would ever laugh WITH them. At them definately, with them, I sincerely doubt it.

As for those with a sense of humour, Bob Hawke had to have a sense of humour to put up with that prick Keating for any length of time. Howard is not really known as a party guy. The next prime minister Costello loves to laugh at Labor. Hey, it isn't that hard. And probably the Prime Ministers for at least the next 20 years will still be laughing at Labor.

It's hard to have a sense of humour when your bottom-line goal is to put a bullet into the brain of every single person who disagrees with you.

Todd is wrong. Ask the Canberra press gallery who puts on the best end-of-year party; most will say Howard.

Doesn't sound right, I know, but it's true.

You can think of it two ways.

Keating, Whitlam are a joke or they played a joke on Australia.

'Just hit the link, fatso?'

Wow, cool name for a blog.

This goes with the old cartoon "Humor section? We don't have a humor section, we're a feminist bookstore."

My lovely wife refuses to call herself a feminist because all the Women's Studies courses she had to take (for another degree entirely) were so depressingly non-humor oriented.

Hey, if people can't laugh at themselves they sure as Hell can't laugh convincingly at others. (see above "sneering . . . old shibboleths")

It seems as if "some things are too serious to laugh about" soon becomes "nothing is to be laughed about." Pity.

You know, I almost forgot Michael Moore's "Stupid White Men" and Al Franken's "Rush Limbaugh Is A Big Fat Idiot" -- neither of which (from the short excerpts I read) is particularly humorous. Sort of proves the point, doesn't it?

Anybody who has watched Question Time for any length of time would know both Howard and Costello can be funny, Costello in particular. I went to Question Time a year or so ago when I was in Canberra, and Costello was getting stuck into into Labor and everyone, EVERYONE - high school students to pensioners - was laughing. He's one funny bloke.

There aren't any hard left-wingers with a sense of humor because you can't not take yourself too seriously while laboring under the weight of a towering delusion of moral superiority. This is a rule of nature.

Harry says:

"There aren't any hard left-wingers with a sense of humor because you can't not take yourself too seriously while laboring under the weight of a towering delusion of moral superiority. This is a rule of nature."

LOL! ROFL! Actually, the same applies to the right, as well, but it seems there's about 1 righty with this affliction to every 100 lefties. What's that thing about the exception proving the rule...

I have to agree, the lefts sense of humor consists of sneering and looking down on us little people.

Saturday Night Live is a good example. I use to laugh myself silly over the way they portrayed the first President Bush although I was a big supporter..They made fun of him, but it was funny. Especially how they always had a little kid acting as Vice President, a shot at Dan Quayle. They never could bring themselves to make fun of Clinton in the same way..The Clinton impersonator usually portrayed Clinton as being the one making fun of others (minus one funny bit of Clinton jogging to McDonalds, than eating everyones food as he lectured them on starving people).

Bush was gracious enough to invite the guy who impersonated him almost weekly (Dana Carvey?? I forget) to the white house before he left office. Somehow I can't see a humorless lib doing the same thing. Although I can imagine a liberal sicking the IRS on the poor guy.

The "comedian" who did the impersonation of Clinton once said that since he supported the President, he couldn't bring himself to make fun of him. These people take themselves way to seriously.

Dana Carvey played the White House Christmas party in 1992 -- CSPAN ran it and it was f'ing hilarious.

Much of the far left isn't funny because they're view of the world is so brittle and the smallest snarky comment against their world order is to be rejected like a mismatched kidney transplant.

If there is one thing about the truly funny conservatives I know is that they are painfully aware that the world can damned well get along without them -- and that they aren't terrified (or so self-centered) to think that a joke at their own expense (or at someone elses) will capsize the ship of state.

Oi! take it easy on the lefties, people....
They don't have TIME for humour, not while they're grappling with huge issues such as ---
free childcare for palestinian orphans, EU guidelines for whalemeat mercury content playground timber contaminants lesbian construction workers' collectives gm food protests etc et-bloody-cetera.
Life is just so bloody SERIOUS! Don't you right-wing beer-swilling war freaks understand ANYTHING?? hmm??
Time for a xxxx. My head hurts.

I think "Harry" hit the nail right on the head (to wit: "You can't not take yourself too seriously while laboring under the weight of a towering delusion of moral superiority")

This would explain why the few leftists who were funny prior to 9/11, like Matt Groenig, Dan Perkins (aka Tom Tomorrow) and even Michael Moore(C'mon! The "Pets Or Meat" segment in "Roger & Me" was pure gold!) simply haven't been since 9/11. And not "not funny" in an "I'm so offended you said such a sacriligous thing" kind of way, they're "not funny" in a "Family Guy" kind of way.

I think your comments of all the leftists were a misrepresentation and presented out of context.

Oooh, getting to you is it?

Petulant little outburst, Timbo.

ahhhhh, Bon, Bon, Bon, yet another leftie still stuck in the 70's.

Bon has a point, doesn't he? Doesn't say much for a fella's sense of humor when a dead rock star can get under your skin.

Or maybe that irony is the point, and Tim's actually being meta-funny.

My head hurts.

If they really like you, they send you viruses through your email likk (and if i ever track you down, you dirt nibbler, I will dispense pineapple therapy to your brown eye).

If they really like you, they send you viruses through your email link (and if i ever track you down, you dirt nibbler, I will dispense pineapple therapy to your brown eye).

It is an outrageous thought that a war widow would be more deserving of (some) of this money than Jake Ryan. Outrageous. Damn that man to hell. Him and his bleeding heart values. Shout that man down. He exhibits undesirable characteristics. He's unAustralian. He has no sense of humour. He is a leftie. An idiot. Knuckle down and run with the mob, you hippy scum.

I expect you have donated your entire savings to her, Journo Dave, being that you are better than us and all.

No, what's "outrageous" is people who think, even for a nanosecond, that they have the "right" to tell others what to do with their own money or possessions.

The mob awakens!

Bon,...oh, whatever.

Journo Dave must be a plant, because he is the nearly the least funny person ever. Employ your wit in your journalism, much?

Because your writing. Sucks it. It exhibits undesirable characteristics. Like sucking. It's nearly unReadable. Take a creative writing class. Or something. Dang. Zzzzzzzz......

Journo Dave: The mob was always awake. It's just you've never bothered to notice.

Have you organised a means of donating to this woman, Dave? Devoted any time to collecting money? Established a website and used its influence to gather even one cent for her?

No?

Then shut up.

Keith, Keith, Keith. It's not time for a XXXX, it's time for an fair-trade, organic, soy-latte served in a recycled glass at a poetry reading by a visually impaired, refugee, transgender, person-of-colour...

Keith, Keith, Keith. It's not time for a XXXX, it's time for an fair-trade, organic, soy latte served in a recycled glass at a poetry reading by a visually impaired, refugee, transgender, person-of-colour...

Fidens: you're funny. Not that there's anything wrong with that...

Fidens, you oppressor you!

I'm glad you mention the rights of the lactose intollerant though you're obviously a 'Howard lover'.

have you no understanding of the complexity of issues that a lefty must deal with each and every minute of the day? The coffee may be fair trade, though it may come from a U.S backed facist Junta.

The 'glass factory' you mentioned is owned by a british multi-national, exploiting child labour and the visual imparedness of the 'freedom fighter' you spoke of was due to sanctions imposed on Iraq by the USA!!!

Have you no scruples at all??

Free speech a bad thing now Tim?

Exercise that free speech, Dave. Start a blog. People crave your wisdom!

We're crushing Dave's free speech! Aagh!

Here dave, free blogging sites for you to try out: Blogger; Blog City; Upsaid Web Journaling Service; and here's one I think so apropos: Dead Journal.

Tim's Forum. Open to all who agree with him. Don't dare post an opinion on something unless you've pursued it to the nth degree.

Journo Dave, more slippery than a tub of jello wresters. Sure, he's not as interesting...

Some of the more astute will notice I used the term jello wresters. Before the more pedantic among you call me to account for poor spelling I should point out that wrester is a common alternative to the more popular 'wrestler' on the internet. Any Google search will prove this.

And Dave, get back to your communication studies PhD you twat.

You know, Journo Dave, if you went and got your own blog, you could post whatever you liked, and you don't even have to have comments. After all, someone might contradict you, and you don't seem to like that.

Excuse me, Dave, but have I banned you lately? What's this crap about the comments only being open to people who agree with me?

If that's the case, how come I'm reading your comments?

I notice he doesn't leave his email even. At least Mork left his email.

By the way, my point about humourless lefties? Is that now gold-plated, or what?

Um, Tim, I'm not a leftie. Not everybody who disagrees with you is a leftie. Sometimes they're just people who have a different point of view. It's not part of the wider conspiracy.

Humourless? Dunno, you make me laugh.

So where is your blog, Dave? We want to visit and read all about your unique, individual point of view.

Why do I need a blog Andrea?

Did I use too many big words?

Lefty with sense of humour right here.

Andrea, explain to me why expressing a single opinion in a public forum means I have to go and start my own blog.

Dave obviously is about 17 years old, or is an actual jounalism student. I say: enough, already.

Oh, Dave, I won't criticize. That would be hating free speech, and I don't hate free speech. Dissent is the grease that lubricates the Johnson rods and lumber stretchers of democracy, etc.

Here's my brave dissent: I'm going suggest, going against the wishes of Andrea and Tim, that you don't get a blog. And I'm totally not saying that because you are apparently incapable of parsing simple English words.

Tim, have you considered the possibility that you have rather massively overreacted to a simple suggestion?

I looked back and this is the start point of the issue-

“Any chance of slinging a few bob Kylie Russell's way? I reckon she needs it a bit more than Jake Ryan needs a beer.”

Fun sucked? It was a simple question and hardly suggests not giving Jake a beer.

Left wing? The guy wants to see an SASR widow get a donation, not the act of the Socialist Green crowd.

An idiot? He didn’t suggest you pay her VA pension, just sling her a few bucks for fucks sake.

And then we get this response from you-
“We raise some cash so a survivor of terrorism can have a party; some fun-sucked sourpants says that a war widow is more deserving.
(Note to whoever that idiot was: we can raise a thousand bucks. That we can do. But the tens of thousands sought by the war widow? Sorry, pal; you’ve got “blog” confused with “gigantic government department”.)”

Sorry Tim, I think you are wrong and owe him an apology.

You seem to have had a bad day and lashed out at someone who asked a simple question, drawing some tenuous link between his suggestion and socialists to try and bolster a weak argument.

Bartcop is hateful. This is a funny lefty, hell, funny anybody:

www.thepoorman.net

Kev Metcalfe: I think you have rather proved Tim's point, at least about humorlessness.

Journo Dave: fine, don't get a blog. It's just that you seemed to have so much to say, and seemed to be so frustrated at Tim for not using his own blog to talk about/focus on the things you were concerned about. So I thought I'd help with a few suggestions of where to get a blog. And then you could come back and tell us all: "Haha! Now I have a blog and I have set up my own donation program for [insert cause]."

But I see that that is not why you post here. I daresay you don't really give two cow flops about that widow. You just thought that you'd show Tim up for being all frivolous and callous and whatever, and flog your moral superiority on his website.

Oh, excuse me, mustn't forget the [/SARCASM] tag.

Tims point about humourless leftists Andrea?, but I'm not a leftist, so how is his point proved?

Or did Tim make a point specifically about ME being humourless that I missed?

I notice that you haven't addressed any of the points I raised either. you seem big on playing the man, not the ball - a tendency I note that you have used extensively in your odd tirades against "Journo Dave".

Thanks Kev, you alone have got the point.

Andrea: I don't have any interest in having a blog. I'm sorry I made a suggestion here. It was just a suggestion. I have learned my lesson. I didn't know having a blog was part of the price of entry. I didn't realise that would get me shouted down as a leftie idiot party-pooper.

I wasn't trying to show Tim up. Until today I admired him greatly, but I've cooled on him somewhat. No doubt I'll get over it in time. All I did was try to make a gentle suggestion, based on the purest of motives. I didn't realise he'd get so upset.

To show not that everyone is as cynical and hard-bitten as Andrea I will make arrangements to make a weekly decuction to "that widow" from my pay packet and report back when I have done so.

I hope Jake and the boys enjoy their beer.

Kev: BECAUSE YOUR COMMENT WAS HUMORLESS.

Sorry to shout, but I thought that "you proved Tim's point, at least about humorlessness," was clear enough. I don't care about what side of the tennis court you sit on.

J. Dave: "...based on the purest of motives..." [HARD-BITTEN CYNICISM] Uh huh. [/HARD-BITTEN CYNICISM]

Journo Dave

"public forum"

Wrong!! Its Tim's forum just like if some came into your house and started telling you were to put your furnishings you would have every right to tell them to PISS OFF.

Look out Kev, we've upset the residents of Spleenville, population 2.

Gary, it's a public forum: it's open to the public. Tim has every right to tell me to piss off. He did. But don't be mistaken, I never TOLD anyone to do anything. I made a suggestion. the suggestion was rejected. Now take your blood pressure medicine.

Oh, I see Andrea, so except for the whole point of Tims argument (Houmourless Leftists), my supposed lack of humour (as defined by Andrea, who has yet to show any trace of wit) proves his point entirely.

Hmmmm.

Perhaps it would be best if you didn't try to help Tim in future Andrea, I'm sure he is capable of expressing himself way better than your shrill screeching ever will.

BTW, you still haven't told us why YOU think a suggestion to "sling a few bob" to an SASR widow lacks fun. (remember he never suggested not giving Jake a beer, just sending some money to her too).

or why trying to get a donation sent to an SASR widow automatically makes one a leftist.

or why suggesting a few bucks go to an SASR widow makes a guy an idiot?

The world waits with keen anticipation for your wit laden answers Andrea..

Uh, Kev? And Journo Dave? I host and maintain this blog on my website. The only persons who have any say in how this blog is run are Tim and myself. I can very well ban your IPs if Tim asks me to. No, Tim does not "need" me to "help" him, what a childish thing to say. We are not ten years old here, we don't need to taunt each other with "Ooh, he's being defended by a girl!" As I said, this is a blog on my server space -- NO, IT IS NOT A PUBLIC FORUM I DON'T CARE HOW MANY TIMES YOU INSIST IT IS -- and unless you are willing to fork over some serious cash to buy equal time on Tim's blog to spew (negotiate with him for the price) then you can sit back and take some criticism, or go grace some other blog with your presences.

As for your other "suggestions," if you and Journo Dave are so concerned about this widow, then you and Journo Dave can very well go and set up your own goddamn website for her and ask for donations. No one is stopping you, and no one was making fun of the the woman's plight itself, or suggesting that there was anything wrong with helping her. Only a humorless git (like, oh, who?) would think that was what was meant.

As for your, Kev's, continued hissy fit over being labelled a leftist, was Tim psychic? He was supposed to know your politics from what, your last name? The way you spaced your paragraphs? You acted just like a tight-sphinctered lefty here, so maybe the next time you decide to lecture all of us benighted heathens and you want to make sure we identify you with the correct political party you'll be so kind as to identify which one you belong to. I don't know about Tim but I know that when I insult someone I want it to be for the right reason.

Yeah, you've got to save yourself to entertain ME, right, honey?

[Sorry, database problems. The comment that was here I replaced the comment above Mork's last with. A.H.]

Mork, I told you: you and me, together... it just isn't meant to be. We are doomed to be two ships that pass in the night. Ooh, watch out for that reef-- (wince. Ew.)

Jesus Kev, we've got a real demon on our hands here.

Andrea, if you want to run a private website, put a password on it. If you run a comments forum on the internet, with a big bright link that says "click here to make a comment" you can hardly start complaining when people post comments in it, even if you don't like what they say. If you don't want people putting their toes in your precious house, shut the doors and withdraw the invitations.

Journo Dave - a comment on Kylie Russell's situation.

I preface my comments by saying that I an Ex-service person (10 years service) and I have had close friends killed and seriously maimed in the ADF (including the blackhawk disaster).

All ADF personel are given the opportunity to make themselves fully aware of the benefits that they and their families are entitled to if they are killed or injured while on duty. My experience of trying to educate my soldiers about their financial situation was that they generally weren't too interested. They thought they would be adequately cared for. Even when I explained the inadequacies few of them did anything about it. Mainly because as young soldiers they were more interested in having a good time - partying, travelling, buying high powered cars etc. Buying additional insurance wasn't really very appealing.

The fact was and still is is that the system does not provide adequate cover in the event of serious disability or death.

The fact also is that life and disability insurance is available (well it was last time I checked in 2001) to service personnel to cover them even for act of war. Most insurers won't, but through the then Army Health Benefits Fund, now called Defence Health Benefits, you could take additional cover. And it was at reasonable rates.

If SGT Russell, who as a SGT in the SASR is considered the best of the best, decides that he will take the chance that he won't buy the farm and not provide additional insurance should there be so much wailing and gnashing of teeth about the poor compensation? Individuals need to take responsibility for their own actions and in actions.

Of course there is the argument that the system should adequately provide. And I support that push too, but what happens if Australia moves to a high level compensation system and then we have a conflict where we actually take a lot of casualties? It could easily destroy the Federal Budget.

One other thing about the SGT/Kylie Russell situation is that all the focus has been on the amount of compensation that she and her children are entitled too. At no time has anyone bothered to publish how much she got from his superannuation. I accumulated in excess of $100,000 in the time I was in for 10 years and I'm sure SGT Russel would have been in for longer and probably on higher rates of pay than me. Superannuation is part of the whole estate and to exclude this from the total compensation package is handling the truth casually.

Thank you, Razor, for explaining the situation. I hope Journo Dave reads it.

But I am not sure he will, as per his last diatribe to me. J.D., you say "If you don't want people putting their toes in your precious house, shut the doors and withdraw the invitations." Just what do you think "I can ban your IP" means? The only reason you are allowed to comment here is because you are allowed to? Get that? Allowed. If you don't like it, that's too effing bad.

Oh, and I love the man-to-man "get a load of this wacky chick" asides. Oh, you're a belly laugh, both of you.

All fair points Razor. It didn't seem right to me and I was just trying to be helpful since she seemed to have been forgotten. I'll make some inquiries on whether she still needs help and see if I can contribute. As Andrea and Tim have pointed out, the idea is not something that will be persued here.

"...the idea is not something that will be persued here."

Certainly not on your orders, big boy. And it's spelled "pursued."

Andrea, you're right, there is no right to free speech here.

Go ahead, apply that gag, ban my IP.

"The only person who has any say in how this blog is run is Tim Blair and myself. I can very well ban your IPs if Tim asks me to."

Not winning the argument based on facts so you play the censorship card?

You have every right to, but it doesn't say much for your ability to argue your point does it Andrea.

"How schoolyard of you; what, are you ten years old? "Ooh, lookie, Tim's getting defended by a girl!" But as long as I am the owner of this domain and I have not had a specific request from Tim himself I will say what I want to anyone I want."

Classic strawman argument - where did I mention ANY of the above Andrea - be specific, I just pointed out that he can defend his position way better than your sad attempts.

And we are so glad that you do choose to join in, it so raises the tone doesn't it..

"This is not a "public forum," no matter how many times you repeat it -- it is a personal website. Yes, whether you like it or not, I consider personal websites to be like homes. And I would prefer this one not to descend to the level of virtual crackhouse because some people can't take being contradicted in any way. "

Well perhaps you should raise that issue with TIM, Andrea - he is the one who went off the deep end calling Journo Dave a socialist and an idiot for the crackhouse level crime of suggesting a few bucks be slung to the wife of a man who volunteered to join the army, then volunteered to serve in SASR and was killed in action, fighting to protect us from the very threat that injured Jake.

Have you actually read the original suggestion Journo Dave made Andrea?

Damn his crackhouse ethics...

"Otherwise, if you can't take criticism, you are welcome to grace another blog with your presences."

You are the one whining here, it seems to me that you don't take to having the flaws in your argument (I use the term loosely) pointed out, so you resort to threats.

" Only a humorless git would think that was what was meant. "

Playing the man, not the ball Andykins - you don't seem to be posting any factual content and going big on the insults, do you have a point?

"As for your, Kev's, continued hissy fit over being labelled a leftist, was Tim psychic? He was supposed to know your politics from what, your last name? The way you spaced your sentences? "

I'm assuming that you are not actually this stupid Andypoos, that you are just desperately flailing about for a response to use.

Tims post was ENTIRELY about HUMOURLESS LEFTISTS, you in your desperate need to support his rant against Journo Dave leaped in and said that my post proved his point, except for the leftist bit.

So if we remove the leftist bit from Tims post, what exactly do you think is the point of Tims post little Andrea?

Enlighten us.

I see you also have chosen not to respond to why YOU (as opposed to Tim) think a suggestion to "sling a few bob" to an SASR widow lacks fun. (remember he never suggested not giving Jake a beer, just sending some money to her too).

or why trying to get a donation sent to an SASR widow automatically makes one a leftist.

or why suggesting a few bucks go to an SASR widow makes a guy an idiot?

You leapt to the defence of an argument you didn't understand and are left looking a little foolish and pretty reliant on the "it's my bat and ball, do as I say or leave" defence aren't you Andrea.

It's a big internet, I'll live without reading one blog if you ban me dear.

(When I said "both of you" I was referring to Kev and Journo Dave, not Razor and Journo Dave. I want to make that clear.)

Andrea, does Tim want us banned? It is his blog after all. Is censorship one of the values for which he stands?

"Journo Dave - a comment on Kylie Russell's situation."

So we blame Kylie because her husband didn't make provisions for her?

And if her Husband remained on DFRDB (looking to do 20 years) rather than MSBS his super is not worth anywhere near that figure.

(Why I changed over to MSBS).

Kev, sweetums, I'll just address one of your points: "he is the one who went off the deep end calling Journo Dave a socialist and an idiot" --

Um... where did he do that? You just accused me of misconstruing what you said. Then you come out with this whopper. Actually, since I am still able to use all my faculties, I can read that all he called Mr. J.D. was a "fun-sucked sourpants." His "socialist" remark was obviously not directly referring to anyone. Here it is if you are too addled to reread the post: "The current lefty voices here are almost parodies of the modern 'don’t run with scissors' socialist." I've even bolded it so you can see it through the smear of Dudgeon Sweat glazing your spectacles.

Now see the only thing you can get your moral outrage meter peaking over is his lumping you in with lefties, but I have already pointed out to you that there is no way he could have known your political identities, or that of Journo Dave, without you saying so. Considering that you got all hotted up over the selfsame things the lefty trolls are always twisting themselves into pretzels over, I do think that it was an honest mistake on his part. Perhaps you should put a signifier in your posting info from now on, since it is so important to you that you keep harping on about it. Say, "Kev Metcalfe, (insert whatever your political affiliation)." Mind, I don't give a rat's rectum who you vote for, but it seems to be the center of your being, so I'm glad to help.

Oh yes, and to the constant squeaking about "censorship" -- yawn. I have already: pointed your way to a several very easy ways to get your own website, you don't have to know jack about html even. There you can post whatever you like whenever you like. But if Tim says he doesn't want you commenting here, you are not going to be commenting here. And if you do set up your own site I would honor your rules, whatever you make them to be. Call it censorship if you like. I am not preventing you from saying anything you like anywhere else. Do you go into strangers' homes and drop ashes all over the floor, take a crap on their carpet, harrass their pets? Why do you think that someone's webspace should be any different? You don't pay any money to keep this site up.

Andrea - didn't think you meant me! Cheers

Kev Metcalfe - You support my point precisely. You took responsibility for your own situation. DFRDB was great if you did the 20 years (before they changed the preservation age to 55) otherwise MSBS was the thing. (And didn't all those high rankinng officers do very nicely when they introduced MSBS, converted to MSBS from DFRDB, and then retired - made a killing (Financially of course!)).

Keep your head down buddy - these guys seem to mean business and you might get your IP taken out.

OK Andrea, how much would you like to charge me for the right to express opinions you disagree with on Tim's website? Any other rules you'd like to impose?

"When I said "both of you" I was referring to Kev and Journo Dave, not Razor and Journo Dave. I want to make that clear."

Incisive argument, clear facts and a well thought out position on the issues such as the above will no doubt see you through this one Andrea.

You don't get it do you Andypoos, an IP ban from someone who can't argue their position any other way doesn't scare me - I don't read your blog, I read Tims and its a big internet, he's hardly the only right wing blogger in the world.

I'm so glad you are here to defend Tims honour!