Tropical cyclone in a teacup. Do we really have nothing better to argue about than one grumpy old man and his tiny audience of rusted on listeners?

Cheers,

Tony

Morning all.

Intriguing observations.

@Shadow Minister. No, your arguments are still unconvincing.

Newscorp’s fabrications are plainly not “mostly on minute details”.

ACMA proves this. As do courts of law. Remember in the 2010 Guthrie matter the judge’s “reservations about a number of features” of the evidence of News Limited chief executive? “In my view Hartigan was an unreliable witness ...”

He was even more scathing of HWT boss. He “did not present as a witness that was confident in his testimony” and “the explanations given by Mr Blunden in evidence … do not survive scrutiny”.

No, SM, the corporation is riddled with liars – with exceptions in sports units.

No, the PM hasn’t “abandoned the media censorship board proposed by the Frankenstein report”. The report didn’t recommend censorship and the Government hasn’t contemplated it. Don’t let them suck you in, SM.

And it’s definitely not convincing when you try to avoid unanswerable questions with “Look over there! Craig Thompson!”

@KAEP: Vive la Révolution!”

@Cohenite: The AFR piece exposes the falsehoods in your Herald Sun piece, doesn’t it? But did you read what was actually claimed?

“As the first lawyer in the land, it is normal practice for the Attorney-General to brief counsel … it would seem likely Ms Roxon would have oversight.”

It would seem likely, Anthony. You cannot go further than that.

Hansard shows “material was provided to the Government Solicitor” in May. What remains unknown are: 1. Did Roxon see the texts in May, or some time later? 2. Did other MPs see the texts in May, or later? 3. If they all saw them in May, why was there no whisper before last week?

At this stage you have no smoking gun, Anthony [and SM]. Your blunderbuss is soaking wet and in several rusty pieces.

@Tony, we are making progress. Slowly. We have disposed of the S45D nonsense. We have eleminated Andrew Bolt. We've established that racism, misogyny and hate speech are restricted to the Macquarie network radio commentators. And we agree that the misogyny of Slipper, Jones and Abbott must be eliminated. Baby steps.

Cheers, AA

AA,

Any government appointed board that has the authority to interfere in editorial content and has the power to fine and imprison journalists is censorship in all but name.

Having spent a little time reading through some of your articles I am struck by their similarity to most conspiracy theories. There is a collection of a few factoids (i.e. that Newscorp in Australia has occasionally got it wrong) followed by logically deficient expansion to the general (i.e. All newscorp journalists must be lying all the time.)

As far as Labor having access to Slipper's texts, it is clear that Roxon's team defending the commonwealth and Slipper received these at the end of May. It is entirely possible that it took a few days to review and give a summary to NR. However, even if NR's office was wildly incompetent and NR only vaguely interested, it beggars belief that the content of the texts would not have filtered through by the end of June.

Given the huge personal involvement of Roxon in the case, the concept that Roxon or Juliar were unaware of these texts before they came out in October is so ludicrous that either you must believe everyone else in the country is really stupid, or you are delusional. Labor had no intention of removing Slipper and was caught with its pants around its ankles. Juliar's dummy spit was fury at having been beaten and exposed as a hypocrit.

Alan, it's a tossup in my mind whether you a genuinely gullible idealist or a partisan cynic.

When this mendacious, corrupt and destructive government is thrown out of power the RDA will be either removed in total or severely amended.

Good thing too.

Gillard will have to confront her past and answer possible criminal charges. While on Gillard do you believe she once said that married women are prostitutes? I can't find a reference to this; but if true it would have a wonderful symmetry with the Thompson saga.

A point you have overlooked is that women themselves can be sexist not only towards men but women as well; Summer's book God's Police and Damned Whores outlines this.

I think there is a pronounced hostility and even disdain amongst the alpha women in the ALP and Greens against women who conform to the traditional standard or role for women.

This is ironic given Abbott's relationship with his wife, who is a successful professional; also about Abbott, who I initially disliked but am warming too, his grace under pressure when he was confronted with the possibility that he had a son from a student relationship which turned out not to be true, was remarkable.

I thought he acted honourably, calmly and with immense respect to the mother who come across as being rather tawdry.

I can't think of any ocassion when Gillard has demonstrated grace under pressure; her 'spontaneous' speech against Abbott and sexism was as phony as she is.

Anyway, as with the Bolt case, there is no need persisting in discussing it with you; you have an idealogical position; good luck to you, I had it once; I grew up.

cohentite,

"...with immense respect to the mother who came across as being rather tawdry."

How so?

Hmmm, I have come late to this discussion but the whole campaign, and
surely no one can acknowledge it otherwise, to denigrate Alan Jones
and tie it to Tony Abbott talks like, walks like and looks like an
orchestrated labour party campaign.

A clever campaign because it has been designed to attract a whole lot
of fellow travelers.

It is a waste of time to engage in the execise as people will make their own mind.