October 12, 2004

NEWS BRIEFLETS

It's the crushing of assent! Someone wants to kill Liberal voters. He'll need lots of ammo.

A friend at Brisbane Airport just tried to access comments at this post using an on-site computer, and got the following message: "Access denied by CyberPatrol. This website's content is inappropriate. Category: drugs, alcohol, and tobacco."

INDC Journal, Ace of Spades, Michele Catalano and Frank J. discuss media credibility:

Frank J.: I heard from a credible source that Terry McAullife now has editorial control of every story in the NYT. I even have a signed document to prove it.

Michele Catalano: What font is it in?

Frank J.: It's crayon.

Evil Pundit remembers Bali. So does Mark Steyn.

What Canberra's press gallery misses, Terry McCrann does not. Read and enjoy.

Australian blogger Drooble has both a statement:

When a government takes power, with an increased majority, it actually does have a mandate to govern, and to implement its policies. We call that d-e-m-o-c-r-a-c-y.

And a question:

Is it wrong to love both "The Simpsons" and Wagner's Ring Cycle?

Both Drooble and Bilious Young Fogey are added at left.

Posted by Tim Blair at October 12, 2004 04:52 PM
Comments

Tim: Check Evil's link.

Posted by: C.L. at October 12, 2004 at 05:20 PM

I had a similar problem with accessing Yobbo's blog from the South Australian state library. Any attempt to connect to his blog resulted in a big red screen appearing instructing me that "certain sites, including chat and adult material, are not available from this computer". Conspiracy, anyone?

Posted by: Dylan at October 12, 2004 at 05:22 PM

Thanks for the link Tim, but it's pointing to a different story.

Interesting that you should mention the problem with the Internet filter rejecting your site. There's some concern that Family First wants to force all Internet traffic in Australia to go through such filters. This would be a disaster.

If the Coalition doesn't win full control of the Senate, bloggers may need to lobby the government to stop this happening.

Posted by: EvilPundit at October 12, 2004 at 05:30 PM

Oops! Link fixed.

Posted by: tim at October 12, 2004 at 05:59 PM

I don't think that the grafitti is real (especially if it's in Redfern), as all the words are spelt correctly.

Posted by: Richard at October 12, 2004 at 06:21 PM

Malcolm McKerras(?) was predicting 38 senate seats, maybe even 39 on radio national, (Michael Duffy). He got quite snaky about the suggestion that Howard was dippy enough to call a double dissolution as this was the election that would return him to a 38 for the senate.
One can only assume that the Canberra Press Gallery doesn't demean itself by listening to Duffy.
This election has been an unfortunate exposure of the "senior correspondents". It is clear that their power comes from their membership of the club and their standing in it. They have been bereft of insight and have provided no value for this whole 10 months of Latham. He is almost a cult figure for them. They seem to only listen to the "insiders" because I have no doubt many Australians tried to communicate the reality of what was out there in a range of ways.
That our media would publish a range of individuals who can only be described as bigots is also very disturbing.
The joy of the election is that democracy works, that the populous does make rational decisions, and from that order does emerge.
It is however concerning that one of the acknowledged bastions of democracy, the press is so very opposed to it for ordinary citizens.
They should not be silenced but there should be an evaluation of their role and their value. That space is a public space, not one by the communications powerful for the benefit of their tribe.

Posted by: Ros at October 12, 2004 at 06:43 PM

The FTA is in trouble. US clearly politely waited until election was over. My understanding at the time that our media congratulated the genius Latham on his great amendments was that apart from being a problem for the FTA the amendment re drugs was against WTO rules, can't discriminate against a particular industry. I also thought that Brazil's still wasn't underway because they had insisted on sugar. Now we have to get it underway before the awful possibility that the antifree trade man Kerry wins.
Is it possible that now that their man has lost our MSM might inform itself and tell the truth.

Posted by: Ros at October 12, 2004 at 07:05 PM

Here is a thought.

The MSM and the left deride Howard, but given their opinion now that Latham's campaign stalled back in March with the "troops home by Christmas" promise, how do they explain the timing of the election?

Obviously, to me at least, Howard did not want the second anniversary of the Bali bombing to be caught up and distorted in the last week of an electoral campaign.

As Tim has said CLASS.

Posted by: Just Another Bloody Lawyer at October 12, 2004 at 07:47 PM

Just a wee bit off topic but one of the more irritating furphies floated by the 'old' media, in the aftermath of Howard's stunning victory, was the insistence that the election was in no way a referendum on Iraq. This was the line pushed by both the Australian and the American commentariat. I was quite surprised, therefore, this evening when the PBS News Hour, which is re-broadcast by SBS Television at 5p.m., had a brief follow-up item on the Australian election result. Jim Lehrer's comments concentrated solely on John Howard's (and Australia's) support for Bush in Iraq and on Mark Latham's opposition. Mention was also made of Latham's threat to pull all Australian forces out of Iraq by Christmas (had he been elected). Are the sharks starting to smell blood in the water, I wonder?

Posted by: Boss Hog at October 12, 2004 at 07:52 PM

Bloody lawyer got it right. -right on.

Posted by: GeorgeBushisadouchebagbutimvotingforhimANYWAY at October 12, 2004 at 08:29 PM

I think the sign is in Redfern.
1)It looks familiar, opposite the undertakers.
2)i KNOW THE HOSTILITY THAT THE LOONEY LEFT WING OF THE LABOR PARTY EXHIBITS TO all who disagree with them.
3) These people want to keep the area in poverty and drug addicted to keep their power base and the pretence of being as my Aboriginal friends call them"white saviours"
I shit you not.
P.S.Gubba=white fella

Posted by: gubbaboy at October 12, 2004 at 08:34 PM

EvilPundit - We already have mandatory filtering. The legislation was tied to the previous Telstra sale, thanks to Senator Harradine. Fortunately, before it saw the light of day, the mandatory filtering was watered down to optional filtering, and then the mandatory availability of filtering software, and then the optional availability of filtering software, and then the requirement that ISPs inform customers that filtering software exists, or at least have such information available somewhere on their web site in case someone wants to read it.

The advantage the government has now is that even if they don't get the 39th Senate seat, they can go shopping for that extra vote, so it's much harder for one moonbat from Tasmania to hold the entire country to ransom.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at October 12, 2004 at 10:13 PM

Yes Pixy, it was pretty good the way the Government dealt with the last attempt at filtering in practice. However, FF is probably aware of this, and the same process may not work again.

Hopefully the Coalition won't need to deal with FF but if they do, I'd like to encourage them to trade off something else instead. The Internet is just too important to the democratic process.

Posted by: EvilPundit at October 12, 2004 at 10:38 PM

At work, we discuss tobacco by taking in code.

Posted by: Ron Hardin at October 12, 2004 at 10:57 PM

I've been reading the policy document from the Family First site, and it appears that on the subject of the internet and pornography (they know it when they see it) they are your typical ignorant luddite fundamentalist paternalistic buttinskis.

We have one key point in our favour: the filtering they propose is technically impossible. It would be better if we could head them off before they waste millions of dollars trying, though.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at October 12, 2004 at 11:47 PM

I was confused by that sign; I forgot "liberal" means "conservative" in Australia.

Posted by: Frank J. at October 13, 2004 at 12:02 AM

What ever happened to Bruce Haigh?

Posted by: julie at October 13, 2004 at 12:14 AM

TO: Tim Blair
RE: Keep The Info Coming

"It's the crushing of assent! Someone wants to kill Liberal voters. He'll need lots of ammo." -- Tim Blair

This is what I'm expecting to see happen here if Bush wins re-election.

And, yes, the leftists will need lots of ammo. Even more, they'll need better equipment than what the rest of US have and better training, as I think we out-number them in terms of NRA memberships and real military training/experience.

If it came to that sort of stupidity, it would resemble the Great Marianas Turkey Shoot of WWII fame. And I mean TURKEY....

Regards,

Chuck(le)

Posted by: Chuck Pelto at October 13, 2004 at 01:16 AM

Chuck(le): shouldn't that be a PLASTIC Turkey shoot? Followed by a nice long lunch with a decent Ozzie wine?

Posted by: Dr. N.O. Brain at October 13, 2004 at 01:36 AM

TO: Dr. N.O. Brain
RE: A Good Aussie White Wine

"Followed by a nice long lunch with a decent Ozzie wine?" -- Dr. N.O. Brain

I'm a fan of Rosemont's Shiraz. But I don't know of a good Australian white wine.

Can someone help me out here? I prefer something light and slightly fruity with turkey. Not too much tannin, please.

Regards,

Chuck(le)

Posted by: Chuck Pelto at October 13, 2004 at 01:48 AM

I second Chuck Pelto's request for info on good Australian white wines. Chardonnay is OK but I really miss Chablis (I'm boycotting, regretfully, the French stuff, and the Californian isn't nearly as good) so if you folks make it I'd be glad to buy.

Posted by: Annalucia at October 13, 2004 at 01:55 AM

Last msg doesn't seem to have a handle, but try a Lindeman's Sauvignon Blanc - available in most parts of North America. It's the biggest selling white in Canada. Top red in the country is Wolf Blass Yellow Label.

Too bad Canada doesn't take as enthusiastically to politics Oz style.

Janjaweed international at your service.

HAVE CAMEL, WILL TRAMMEL

Posted by: jlchydro at October 13, 2004 at 02:15 AM

No Frank, "liberal" still means "liberal" in Australia, but the Liberal Party is conservative. Go figure.

And the Labor Party is the only instance where we don't spell it "labour".

Posted by: Big Johnny at October 13, 2004 at 02:17 AM

Thanks, jlchydro. Will look for Lindeman's Sauvignon Blanc.

So Oz wines are big sellers in Canada? Glad to hear it. When I lived there thirty years ago it was all Andres Cold Duck ;)

Posted by: Annalucia at October 13, 2004 at 02:26 AM

TO: Annalucia
RE: Chablis For Thee

"I really miss Chablis..." -- Annalucia

Inglenook chablis is our house white. Goes down like sweet water. Makes a damn fine Kir too.

Used to like Paul Mason, but they started putting sugar in it. Reminded me too much of Kool Aide.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[In wine there is truth. -- Pliny the Elder]

Posted by: Chuck Pelto at October 13, 2004 at 03:01 AM

TO: jichydro
RE: A Fine White

"Lindeman's Sauvignon Blanc" -- jichydro

I'll look it up. Thanks....

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[You're not drunk if you can hang onto the floor without falling off.]

Posted by: Chuck Pelto at October 13, 2004 at 03:03 AM

The crayon joke was kind of funny... WHEN I DID IT!!!

Posted by: Jim Treacher at October 13, 2004 at 03:12 AM

TO: Jim Treacher
RE: Old Jokes

"The crayon joke was kind of funny... WHEN I DID IT!!!" -- Jim Treacher

...are still the best ones.

My crayon jokes relate to what color some clown has been smoking to come up with some stupid idea.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. What's YOUR favorite?

Posted by: Chuck Pelto at October 13, 2004 at 03:48 AM

"No Frank, "liberal" still means "liberal" in Australia, but the Liberal Party is conservative. Go figure."

Given that liberal mean believing in freedom and liberty what other party in Australia could even vaguely call itself liberal. Certainly the Labour party in Australia is very anti-liberal as is the Democratic Party in the US.

Posted by: mike.a at October 13, 2004 at 04:55 AM

TO: mike.a
RE: Sounds Like....

"...'liberal' still means 'liberal' in Australia, but the Liberal Party is conservative. Go figure." -- mike.a

...the same sort of logic as to why we drive on 'parkways' and park on 'driveways'.

Regards,

Chuck(le)

Posted by: Chuck Pelto at October 13, 2004 at 05:08 AM

"What's YOUR favorite?"

Teal Blue.

Posted by: Jim Treacher at October 13, 2004 at 06:08 AM

TO: Jim Treacher
RE: Teal, You Say?

"Teal Blue." -- Jim Treacher

Close. But I prefer infantry blue.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[God is alive....and airborne-ranger qualified.]

Posted by: Chuck Pelto at October 13, 2004 at 06:23 AM

God, I had forgotten how wearing Chuck's posting style is. Here, Chuck, I'll respond to myself for you so you don't have to, God knows that pixels are cheap as free but you have a way of making screen space feel like a wasted resource.

TO: Sortelli
RE: What I lack in wit I make up for in routine

Message text begins: [note, the following is a quote from the previous post to provide context]

"God, I had forgotten how wearing Chuck's posting style is."

[this is where the quote from the previous post ends. The following is original content]

Wanker!

[the following is my signature that I like to close all my posts with, just in case you couldn't tell who wrote this]

Regards,

Chuck(le)

[I'm funny, but in case you didn't notice that, that is why I put the "(le)" after Chuck. Get it? Chuck + le = "Chuckle!"]

Posted by: Sortelli at October 13, 2004 at 08:28 AM

TO: Sortelli
RE: Good To See Ya

Thought you might have dropped off the end of the earth down there.

How've ya been? Must be good, as I see you haven't lost your knack for focusing on the format instead of the message.

Regards,

Chuck(le)

Posted by: Chuck Pelto at October 13, 2004 at 08:35 AM

Sortelli:

Bwahahahaha! Thx. :D

Posted by: Andrea Harris at October 13, 2004 at 09:25 AM


OZ voters have some big differences to the GOP demographic.
(Trying to put it neutrally)....the very religious have little traction here...sure there is perhaps a 3% welded vote, but the idea of the equivalent 40 million serious hand waving evangelicals making up a large part of the conservative vote as in the US is beyond our ken.




Posted by: TT at October 13, 2004 at 10:24 AM

TO: Andrea Harris
RE: Greetings

How's it going for you? Still practicing political correctness?

Regards,

Chuck(le)

Posted by: Chuck Pelto at October 13, 2004 at 10:30 AM

P.S. Hope your place in Florida wasn't demolished by the storms.

Posted by: Chuck Pelto at October 13, 2004 at 10:33 AM

TO: Chuck Pelto
RE: Lindeman's Wine

I had a Lindeman's Shiraz last night. I normally do not drink a lot of Shiraz, but enjoyed it throughly.

Posted by: Anthony at October 13, 2004 at 10:36 AM

can someone help me out here? I prefer something light and slightly fruity with turkey. Not too much tannin, please.

Regards,

Chuck(le)

Try a Chardonay Pinot Noir, a lovely one-Maglieri Extra Brut- great with chicken but- hint: drink it as pre dinner drink as well as with the meal-and hint 2- don't eat savoury or oily nibbles before the meal kills the flavour and flattens the wine - you will find the meal tastes better also.
Another wonderful drink with turkey and we think better than a white is a GOOD sparkling Burgundy

Posted by: Rose at October 13, 2004 at 10:46 AM

Must be good, as I see you haven't lost your knack for focusing on the format instead of the message.

TO: Pot
RE: Color

You're black!

Regards,

Kett(le)

Indeed, Chuck, I have been well and I hope you are doing good also. Someday, I also hope to see your wit stand on its own.

Posted by: Sortelli at October 13, 2004 at 12:19 PM

Okay, Chuck, for insulting me again, you are banned. Also for your dumb comment structure, which may waste a minimum of bandwidth but is simply annoying to look at. Oh -- and don't bother emailing me with a whiny complaint like you did last time. I have set anything coming from you to go straight to the Trash folder.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at October 13, 2004 at 12:27 PM

Ahh... haven't banned anyone in a while. So that was the feeling I was missing.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at October 13, 2004 at 12:29 PM

Sortelli,
you give me plenty of laughs when I see your responses to fools. Absolute magic!

Andrea,
enjoyed hearing that people bleat to you via email, "Please, please let me back, I'll be good" and as soon as they're back they become smart-arses once again. They never learn, which never ceases to amaze me, and I love it! Your posts as you're smacking them back out into the desert of despair are quite touching! I wonder where these clowns post now?

Posted by: Lofty at October 13, 2004 at 01:11 PM

Shame we don't have any Comment of the Week kinda awards around here...Sortelli, that last response was absolutely brilliant.

Posted by: PW at October 13, 2004 at 01:25 PM

Lofty: actually, it's usually more like: "How dare you ban me! You are crushing my dissent!" And I'm also a totalitarian fascist bitch, who is also PC, and who can't take it when anyone "contradicts" her, is oversensitive and immature, and so on. So you can imagine my eagerness to unban these people.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at October 13, 2004 at 01:32 PM

Well, I thought he was adorab(le).

Posted by: Jim Treacher at October 13, 2004 at 03:16 PM

Time to way in on this Blair Wine Site. Jeez! 1st thing though in the USA, due to California (dreaming) wine rules, Chablis has nothing to do with that varietal grape and the French wine of that type - Chablis is any white wine, including blends, that does not meet the CA varietal rules for, say, chardonnay. In a similar way red wine is called Burgundy for the same reasons (no relation to Burgundian wines). Lots of both come in boxes.

Now Shiraz/Syrah is another matter. It's an Oz specialty. The '02 Black Swan is very good and very cheap (has Dallas Gold Medal). But the real and still reasonably priced Shiraz is Lindeman's '03 (in the US about $8-9). Double Gold at the San Francisco Int'l Wine Competition. The second gold is awarded if the Judges are unanimous. Really, Really Good! Do not sell or recommend to Green's.

Posted by: Gerry at October 13, 2004 at 03:39 PM