Amoung this waffle Flint actually comes up with a point, it may even surprise the author, yes I know I usually don't agree with this man on anything, however when I think back.....

I can remember then PM Hawke being grilled by investigative journalists the like of Michael Schulberger Ch9, Richard Carlton, then ABC, Mike willissie Ch7, Jana Wendt CH9 I think from memory, and the like used to give old Bob a good going over, on a regular basis.

However I can't recall PM Howard ever recieving the same treatment, so I agree with Flint on one thing, investigative journalists are well hidden, and have been for the previous 10 years, odd that.

As for the other waffle, old news, old writer, insignificant in the current political climate, but feel free to empty your bowel Dave, if it makes you feel better, and well may we say, 'GOD save the Queen,...because nothing will save the Governer-General"

How can you all be so callous? Surely Davo is entitled to national treasure status.

He's gone to all this trouble to provide us with a scintillating example of thoroughly-researched, unbiased writing on a roolly, roolly important issue (Mark Latham). Where's the gratitude?

As something of a paparazzi magnet himself, Dave has unfailingly allowed all segments of the press into his personal life because he has nothing, absolutely and utterly nothing to hide. In fact he sees it as his duty to queen and Country to be open, honest and consistent. Don't you Dave?

I'm just glad the aliens returned me in time to catch his wonderful piece of impartial and disinterested wisdom

Remember this pearler from Lawsy,

JOHN LAWS: "I attended a dinner party on Tuesday the 28th of November, in the year 2000, with friends. The subject of the ABA, not surprisingly, came up and I made some mildly critical comment of the effete pretentious posturing professor, that being Mr Flint.

Alan Jones happened to be at the same party and he turned on me very quickly and said I should be very careful. If it weren't for David Flint, God knows where we would be. But Alan Jones then went on to say: "in fact I was so determined to have David Flint re-elected that I personally went to Kirribilli House and instructed John Howard to reappoint David Flint or he would not have the support of Alan Jones in the forthcoming election".
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2004/s1096848.htm

Oh dear.

I am somewhat disappointed that OLO still publishes the professor's sour musings. Not for his views - we all know what they are - but for the ever-lower quality of the ramblings themselves.

There's always at least one classic piece of hypocrisy to keep and to treasure though, and this one has several. I particularly like the reference to Latham's "generous, taxpayer-funded, very early retirement on the grounds of ill health", which has absolutely nothing to do with the press, or the FTA.

It was just a gratuitous cheap shot, using the flimsy excuse of Latham's recent tantrum with the photographer.

But coming from someone who adulates the memory of one K Packer - and who no doubt intends to attend that man's taxpayer-funded memorial service - it is just the teensiest bit precious, n'est-ce pas, professor?

Oh, you're all just being mean now, attacking one of Australia's finest legal minds for his grasp of fact, argument and logic. And unfair, too. He used at least one fact – the price of PBS drugs is set by the government. Or at least he used half a fact. The government indeed sets the price to the consumer. Flint just happened to ignore the other half of the fact – that the price at which the PBS buys drugs is lowered by the existence of cheap generics.

So yah sucks boo to all you nasty people: his grasp of argument and logic is fine too. He has used sophistry and misdirection – standard rhetorical techniques. That he used them incompetently and transparently is neither here nor there. The amazing thing about a dancing bear is not how it dances, but that it dances at all. And boy, does David dance.

This little para sez it all:

"Apart from the editorial writers in The Australian and The Australian Financial Review, most journalists seemed unable or unwilling to examine the issues, some openly offering the excuse that it was all too complicated".

(Code for 'not you my fellow Tory mates in the Packer/Murdoch hack stables, I am forever yours)

So which journo's/writers are you accusing David? Come on, be daring and name names and publications. Is it the people who write your local Independent rag or school newspaper,neighboorhood watch alert, trading post, your latest edition of Royal Family or Corgy Breeders International? Being an ex ABA man you should know that you need to be accurate in reporting.