:: Saturday, 28 August 2004 ::
Election October 9.
:: Thursday, 19 August 2004 ::
Liberal Party campaign basis - 8 years of economic management making Oz the strongest economy in the Western World, trust us therefore for superior economic management and sincere Oz focussed work to prevent and punish terrorism. Plus wonder about Labor wall-to-wall across Oz vis a vis industrial relations.
Super hostile questioning re leadership, intentions.
Labor Party campaign - ladder of opportunity, rungs, early childhood education, HECS fee abolition, medicare not private, truthfulness, old v young, PM won't be leader the whole term, Labor will put downward pressure on interest rates, trust and truthfulness, future v past, opportunity v negativity, education, environment, Labor ready to lead, rungs, healthcare, education, hard work, national security (this last whispered with no pause before rungs gets another mention. And honesty. And rungs.
Hostile (not super-) re when will tax policy released? Soon. Latham - blah blah, no time for questions, where are the fucking journos? Bastard wankers let us all down when they won't do their jobs and hammer this pretender to leadership about where he's going to lead the country.
He's a babbling loon. He says Howard is in for 6 months only. And he, at 9 months as leader, makes him fit to lead.
He's talking right over the top of the journos. Blah blah blah.
Maybe one way to look at this is that the journos are doing us a favour letting this arsehole just blab his way through a press converence.
But really, I think the press is letting us down. If I had any faith they'd actually interrogate Latham about Latham's Labor and not about Latham's views about Howard's Liberals then maybe it would be a campaign worth focussing on. Maybe my concerns about Labor leading us into a shithole, which I believe is likely - Son of Gough in charge in all - would be assuaged.
Christ on a stick - the man is still talking - he's had more air time than Howard and less questions, less hostile questions. The man is a booby blabbermouth.
We'll be announcing policies, I'd like a debate, old fashioned town hall democracy, rungs, national security teams, ladder of opportunity, community services....he is still talking with no questions and no substance.
Then he stops.
If the press lets this man blab his way through 6 weeks of campaigning, Labor is going to lose lose lose.
Who could stand the sound of the man's voice after all that?
:: WB 9:05 p.m. [link+] ::
Another sensation Iraqi cartoon.
:: Wednesday, 18 August 2004 ::
And how good are those Iraq the Model boys? Damned fine. Stepping up to make their country great. If youse beat Oz in the soccer, well, you won't be the first or last I suspect.
:: WB 3:41 a.m. [link+] ::
:: Monday, 16 August 2004 ::
Had planned to go Scrafton myself but found the lovely Currency Lad has done the hard lifting. Top thorough stuff. And Bernie Slattery does some fine work too.
Kids were thrown overboard.
Not off every boat. And not by every adult on every boat. But they got thrown and the great Oz public knows it.
This whole debarcle is part of Labor's attempts to be elected.
Tonight the PM did Ray Martin's 6.30 show on Channel 9. He got his point across - Scrafton says x and I disagree with what he says. And no I won't be taking a 'lie detector' test (Cripes, loike we all live in an episode of NYPD Blue. In addition, Howard got the point across that Labour is going at this hammer and tongs when it might be better if they actually released a tax policy. Or some policy. Any policy.
The Daily Tele's impossibly handsome Malcolm Farr was on Sky News getting it, remarkably for Malcolm, half wrong, I reckon. He thinks this is a big deal and it has nothing to do with border protection - only to do with truth in government. He is only half right. It is a big deal. It is a big deal that Labor is just going Howard to cover for the fact they got nothin' in the way of policy. But Malcolm thinks it is a big deal that Howard is at risk, if Scrafton's argument bears out, of being "caught in a lie" or some such dramatic overstatement. I reckon that all this whole episode does is re-run border protection and remind everybody that Labor just has not got the heart to be stern in the face of badly behaved wogs who would spit on our laws by trying to get into the counrty without any authority at all.
As I say that as a wog who likeslikes wogs and wants more of them here. Just not illegally.
See, Howard singlehandedly put people smugglers outta business. And that is a good thing.
He put those worst-of-all-wogs, the people smugglers, outta business. And that means wogs who want to get into the country do not use those stinking people smuggling scum, which means the wogs are more likely, by sheer dint of circumstance, to come in legally.
And that is how I want 'em. And I am no wierdo. That is how all Oz wants 'em.
Legally, is all.
I think this whole episode is perfect for Howard. Everyone knows those boat wogs behaved disgracefully when the 'Pacific Solution' got implemented (and why wouldn't they freak out and behave like madfolks, having been thoroughly lied to by the real bastards, the people smugglers, about how Oz was easy to get into, no biggie, they'll just love youse all, matey peeps, gimme your money).
This brings border protection up all over again.
That's where Malcolm gets it wrong.
That and the fact he was on Channel 34 and not 46.
:: WB 3:18 a.m. [link+] ::
This guy says he called Howard to tell him he watched the video and did not think it showed the illegal entrants threw their kiddies into the water.
He reckons the video is not good enough to prove the illegal entrants threw their kiddies into the water.
That is the great 'truth'.
And for this we need another Senate enquiry? Why not a cheapa wog enquiry to be held at my Aunty's house with evidence to be taken from my cousins Rina Pina Lina Tina Maria and Angie about whether or not they would throw their kiddies clear from a sinking boat? Answer 'natch', by the way. And ask 'em also whether or not half-baked crazy illegal entrant wogs facing detention and deportation (instead of the round of applause their people smuggling bastard liars told them would be coming) would throw their kiddies off a non-sinking boat if it would let 'em get their kiddies saved by Oz rescuers? And this, after threatening to throw them over and over?
Answer again 'natch'.
The throwing happens in Italy, just like it happens in Oz.
You are not doing wogs any favours by apologising for their craziness.
Scrafton, you partisan wog hating turd. More on this later.
:: WB 2:51 p.m. [link+] ::
What is going in Caracas? Has Chavez won his 'no recall' referendum? Or not?
:: Saturday, 14 August 2004 ::
:: WB 2:47 p.m. [link+] ::
Mini Marxist Moos
:: Wednesday, 11 August 2004 ::
From the fab Franco Aleman Barcepundit comes this, about the Madman Castro, from the magnificent Carlos Montaner (subsctiption required I think) who I love because he is one the co-authors of "The Guide to the Perfect Latin American Idiot", one of my favorite books of all time.
Swaer to God. This stuff is fall down funny.
:: WB 6:47 p.m. [link+] ::
McGeogh is at it again
:: Tuesday, 10 August 2004 ::
His thesis? Americans know that Iraqi's are behaving badly and Americans are doing nothing about it. American's are aware of McGeogh's allegations concerning Allawi personally executing folks, and Americans are not doing a thing about it.
So it is all their fault.
They are baad.
This is a full-on spit by McGeogh that his incendiary work in Baghdad has come to nothing - he is appalled, and it is not the fault of the Iraqis. He hasn't the balls to threaten Allawi - after all the man's a killer according to McGeogh - but he will happily spit at the Americans who of course will not do anything to the man.
Plainly, ignoring journalists is the thing they hate most.
Have a read of the questions and feel yourself smothered by the self-importance of the questioner - in Washington I might add - safe as houses and as far from Baghdad as possible.
And note this:
But persistent questioning at a regular State Department press briefing in Washington last week revealed what can only be assumed to be a policy-driven refusal to investigate any excesses by the Allawi regime, even when Americans have witnessed the abuses - and may be complicit because of their refusal or failure to stop them.
Erm. It can actually be assumed to be the truth as well - after all an assumption is neither here nor there - it is an assumption without evidence.
Something with which McGeogh is intimately familiar.
:: WB 2:11 p.m. [link+] ::
Gubshite rubbish froma skippy academic....natch
"Envy in a wode brown land" is the article. Crapulous nonsense is the thesis. Slamming Oz and everyone in it is the go, you know. No linky goodness - Fin Review Friday 6 August.
...technologocial progress has led to insufficient emphasis on how we relate to each other..."
"...Alain de Botton's work [Status Anxiety] addresses this lack..."
"...the quest for love...can produce severe anxieties that affect our capacity to find contentment in life...
"...two hundred years of rapid progress has on average made our lives longer, healthier and immensely richer in term of possessions..."
"...Yet given these achievements why aren't we happier than we are? According to de Botton ...in order to feel good about ourselves we need to feel better than somebody else..."
"...A fairly meritocratic democracy maximises the number of perceived equals and as a consequence status anxiety is magnified. Envy is almost everywhere you look..."
"...In a modern meritocracy we are all taught the possibility of 'rags to riches', of successas entirely a matter of effort..."
"...the role of chance in the way society works has been minimised. Australian society is perhaps more afflicted by status anxiety than most..."
"Australia does not have the residual culture or customs of older societies that manage to check modern status anxiety (such as Europe..."..."
WHA'?! NO WOGS? ZIF.
"...unlike America...there is a sense of Australia as an accidental nation that has drifted into prosperity on the bounty of its natural resources. This lack of convincing origins and absence of a sense of mission haunt the Australian psyche. It can be found in a range of attitudes, past and present, including the persistence of fealty to the "mother country" the cultural cringe."
O. So now there ARE wogs. O, but I do not think the author is referring to them. Just Pommy Irish Scots Welsh fealty. So, really, there are still no wogs.
"...egalitarianism...tall poppy syndrome....'he thinks his shit doesn't stink'...lowest common denominator..."
"...Sadly the wealth frenzy in Australia over the past 25 years has seriously eroded the capacity of the egalitarian ethos to check status..."
"Another reason why Australia is more in thrall to this financial arbitration of status is because we are a migrant society..."
O, so now there ARE wogs. And it is ALL THE WOGS' FAULT!
"...For migrants, money can help measure whether the enormous sacrifices of leaving the familiar for a new life have been worth it. Big houses, nice cars and the success of their children are insulation against and compensation for the loss of language, prople, places and ingrained sensory worlds."
O, but wogs are sad little folks who weep into their pasta and wine of a night time over their terrible loss of little houses and no jobs prospects (helloo, Europe after WWII when most wogs came to Oz.)
And the solution ladies and gents?
Brace yourselves cos you are so gonna retch:
More public ownership.
I will let that sink in.
Like Gino and Santina used to wake up in the morning sighing and wailing "wither the Commonwealth Bank. And Qantas. And wither my Italianness. My friends who I visit in Italy every year."
Who is the jackass author?
A wog hating skippy academic of course.
Who esle could be such a turd about Oz? Who else could be so profoundly ignorant about wog life in Oz, and how it has nought to do with status - it has to do with getting good stuff that you applaude.
Why buy the $500 toaster - cos it is the best in the world. It heats your toast while you wait to eat it. Why buy an Alfa Romeo car? Because it is a fine vehicle designed by people who care.
This imbecile author, Edward Wright is a stinking marxist jackass who wants us all in little boxes made of ticky tacky, and swimming at the municipal pool, not living in a nice personalised house with a pool in the back cos we like swimming.
His idea of heaven on earth is prolly Le Corbusier's Brasilia [Sooo wrong - Oscar Neimeyer's Brasilia - mille grazie to those readers who wrote to correct me - W], a blasted wasteland of commie patronising architecture that left people helpless even to put up their own freakin' choice of curtains in their apartment cos it would spoil the Totalitarian design lines.
Sheesh. How can this shite be even thought, much less published?
I reckon de Botton is seriously off the rails with this status anxiety thesis. He completely and utterly fails to see that acquisition is an act of applause - it is a declaration of delight.
I buy things cos they are made by folks who want me to like them, and I do sometimes, and that keeps those folks designing, making, which keeps people employed, which enables them to educate themselves or not as they please, and live their lives free from disease and decay, or not as they choose.
I buy things other people own because I share the other folks' view that the things are good and worth having.
I buy things cos they reflect me. I am not a community person. I am me, on my own, living in the community. Everybody acts like me in this way, and we come together every minute of every latitude and longitude sharing what we have and displaying everything that is good.
Edward Wright wants us all wearing little Mao Tse Tung uniforms singing songs to the Beloved Community.
Silly fucker has never watched a World Cup obviously. If he had he would see a festival of community right there. Or just the AFL of a winter's weekend in Oz.
What an empty headed wog hating jackass. He cannot even see the wogs of Oz, living large because this is a great country that they happen to lerv.
He does not even see that it is not envy that builds a wog palace. It is wogness and disgracefully bad Southern Italian bad taste.
And it is not envy that makes a skippy get an architect to build a McMansion as he sneeringly puts it, near The Spit or down at Lorne. It is pleasure in sharing a bit of archiecture...with an architect.
Some people think too much.
And they are not very good at it.
:: WB 4:50 a.m. [link+] ::
Oh my. More giggles.
:: WB 4:43 a.m. [link+] ::
Swear to God, this has been making me laugh for over a week.
:: Sunday, 8 August 2004 ::
Scroll for cormorants.
:: WB 4:39 a.m. [link+] ::
Some top posts
:: Friday, 6 August 2004 ::
On Kerry cutting and running. Interesting analysis from Tactitus
Interesting and beautifully written ( as always) work from Nelson Ascher.
Matt Welch listy goodness about superlefty publishing.
:: WB 6:10 p.m. [link+] ::
Second big ol case of the day
And I am delighted at the 6-1 result that saw Julian Burnside lose yet another immigration case.
Long story short, Iranian guy sails into Oz with no permission to enter and gets collected and detained at Woomera. He is there for about a year, appealing his losing applications for a visa over and over again. Finally, in an act of extreme stupidity he makes a break for it (probably egged on by go goody wankers) and escapes only to be caught. Penalty for escaping detention is 5 years jail. Oh dear. Burnside, the bloke's hired mouth, has to come up with some argument to get his client out of having to go to jail for 5 years.
And Burnside's argument:
it is okay to escape detention if the conditions are not to your liking.
I shit you not.
6 judges said 'Get. Far. Away.'
One judge, Kirby natch, said "Hmmm. I think a man who has shown precisely no respect for any Oz law relating his presence in this country should be rewarded by grant of a permission to enter the Oz community because somewhere someone once wrote that they reckon Woomera is a 'concentration camp'."
Amemba the Spaniard and Englishman who set fire to the joint? Or was that Villawood? Whatever. Amemba the sewn together lips, the hunger strikes and throwing of the body onto the ground?
That behaviour is what made Woomera an awful cinderblock compound to be in. Nothing else.
And Burnside wanted to gather scads of 'evidence' of the 'inhumane conditions' at Woomera, which would doubtless include a bunch of Green propaganda, Terry Lane blatherings and some wankery from the UN High Commission for Refugees declaring all of Oz a rascist bigot central gulag with nazi overtones and Howard=Hitler yeeaah, you know the drill. It is prolly a good thing that he did not get that evidence together cos there would be extra evidence for sure of the disgraceful ways detainees themselves contributed to the 'inhumanity' and that might have even turned Kirby's mind.
As it is, 6-1 pretty much closes the door, although Kirby has his toe just blocking a full close. he really is insisting on Oz going down the lousy, in my view, path to using International Law - the wankiest and weakest practice known to lawyers - to change the makeup and jurisprudence of this, the greatest nation on earth......after Italy, of course, but only by a whisker.
If you can be asked do read the case and the one below. They are big deals.
:: WB 5:34 a.m. [link+] ::
It's a catfight. And on the High Court Bench too
:: Sunday, 1 August 2004 ::
Mr Justice McHugh has delivered a well deserved smackdown to Brother Judge Kirby as part of a 4-3 majority judgment on a critical High Court matter today.
Al-Kateb v Godwin is the sad case of a Kuwaiti born man of Palestinian background, never given citizenship in the country of his birth because that is how disgracefully Gulf Arabs and Arabs generally treat their Palestinian brothers when it all boils down. With no nationality he moved around the Middle East a little, and eventually, after doubtless being lied to solidly by disgusting peoplesmuggling scum, he arrived, doubtless after going through sundry safe havens on the way (not that he was fleeing persecution) on a boat into Oz with no permission to be here at all. Off he went into detention. He has played straight with the authorities after some waste of time claims to be let in, asking to be sent home, that is, Kuwait, or if that won't work to Hamas controlled Gaza.
But the Kuwaitis won't have him, pricks. And the Israeli's need another Palestinian in Gaza like they need a bomb on a school bus.
Sooooo, long story short, all the way to the High Court comes this critical case - is it lawful for the Oz government to detain a person who has no right to be in the Oz community for an unknown period of time for the purpose of sending him elsewhere, when the situation as it stands now is that the two 'elsewheres' where he might be sent have refused to take him, leaving him detained without light at the end of the tunnel that can be seen right now?
The answer is yes according to 4 out of 7 judges.
Because the detention is wholly lawful and because the statelessness of the individual is not a reason for release. Detention stays until you can be released. Full stop. And no amount of whiny 'morality arguments' will change it.
You know what needs to happen, don't you readers? Yes. You and I know. Sadly Justices Kirby, Gummow and Gleeson do not know. What should happen is that this poor bastard Al-Kateb should be made a cause celebre by all the "free the unlawful entrants" wankers to pressure Kuwait, the nation where he was born for goodness' sake, to take him back and grant him citizenship.
Instead, the do-goody folks, even those learned folks on the bench (and they are learned - I have huge respect, even for Kirby, cos whatever their conclusions they always back their arguments well) make fundamental errors of judgment when it comes to dealing with wogs. They think they are doing wogs a favour by gymnastically contorting Oz law, the Oz constitution itself, into a hat stand on which to hang every halfbaked international concept they can get their hands on to help the poor widdle wogs.
But being a 4-3 decision this is not going to shut down arguments of this type. But it might, just might, get the folks who make these claims thinking more carefully about who has done them wrong - and it ain't Oz.
It ain't Oz.
:: WB 3:57 a.m. [link+] ::
Five tips on how to live a more ... life
I found this seering shite in the SMH Sydney Magazine.
"Five tips on how to live a more ethical life" and it literally said nothing to me.
I saw the words on the page and the sound in my head was "zhshhhzzzhshhhhh, whooooooo" closely followed by Creedance Clearwater Revival's Green River, cos it in in my headset these days.
And here are the tips:
1. Cool global warming by insulating your home, buying compact flourescent lights, using public transport and cutting hot water consumption.
2. Reduce your ecological footprint by buying locally grown fruit and veg, printing on both sides of your paper, composting your waste and reusing shopping bags.
3.Before you buy something new consider whether the product is ethically made, renewable, biodegradeable, energy efficient, water efficient and organic.
4. Bear in mind Dr Seuss who said "Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing's going to get better, it's not."
5. Remember that, according to "New Scientist", the path to true happines lies in desiring less, helping others and having friends you value.
Wipe your mouth, you got some puke bits still there. I will let you clean up and then you can come back to this.
Can you believe the emptiness, the crushing 'good will' and wankery in all this? I can hardly believe it. These dickheads, Mike Hanley and Adrian Monck, think that we are none of us living ethical enough lives. We need to be more ethical. And 'ethics' in their empty whitebread world is all about the environment. And about 'caring'.
I mean, puhlease. The first 3 points are like a pathetic politically correct description of an old wog's house:
1. ever bin in an old wog's house? It is cold. Cold like a fridge. Why? Cos they are too stingy to put the heater on anytime. Plus, most of them are wearing like eight layers of clothes, you know the dress and the apron and the cardigan and the second cardigan.
2. hello, tomatoes growing in the front garden of a terrace house.
3. who buys new? The mogorav is old, the frigo is ancient, the pots and pans come from Nonna and Nonno and everything is ethical and biodegradeable cos it's gonna all be left to the kids - that is what ethics (family) and biodegradeable (it breaks on someone else in the family's watch) means.
And the last 2 points are just pathetic attempts at social reengineering to castrate us all and turn us from individuals who love our culture and history into walking shame buckets who pretend we like folks when we actualy wish they'd all f-f-fade away. I mean:
4. Seuss? You call that poetry? Now, Orlando Furioso. That is poetry.
5. New Scientist? Wha.? Jesus, more like. And even he wasn't right about everything. You gotta look out for yourself and your family sometimes, most times, you know?
I reckon what is needed is less ethics and more wogs. More woginess:
1. Global warming is bullshit. The only warming you need is in your pants and on the Monaro first thing on a winter's morning.
2. Grow your own vegies, not because some wanker thinks its fun, but because they gotta be ready for botting sauce day and it is important that Zia Laura does not win again this year.
3. ask yourself - is it made in Italy? If it is, buy it.
4. Bear in mind Floyd Podgornick. He spent too much time with skippies.
5. the path to true happiness lies in the taste buds for food, wine and coffee, the hands for caressing, the balls of the feet for accelerating and the heels for breaking, the voice for laughter, arguments, storytelling, singing and communicating with those you love, wog and skippy alike.
But mostly, the secret to how to live more woggy is your life lies in the food and wine and cars and making love.
Pretty simple really.
:: WB 1:26 a.m. [link+] ::
Agger is a Bitch
Michael Agger, that is, "writer" with the New Yorker. Christ, if I had a job like that I'd kill myself before I got beaten to death by the Wanker Elimination Squad.
Why do I consider Agger a bitch? Well, have a read of this hitpiece all about nice little M. Night Shyamalan. Breathtakingly loony in its hatred and derision of a perfectly competent film maker.
I once met a man who had a pathological hatred of Lee Marvin. Lee Marvin, eh? You would have to be mad crazy to bother hating him, right?
And check out this nasty little spew all about, of all people, harmless Ashton Kuchner. Why?
And how bout this classic Agger-archness in which he spits blood over Will Farrell and misuses the word "irony".
Give you three guesses who Agger respects, but. Robert Altman of course, the man who hasn't made a decent movie since California Split and Nashville in the mid-70's, and do not bother me with the Come Back to the Five and Dime Jimmy Dean Jimmy Dean nonsense because it is earnest unwatchable crap about women you would disown if you were sad enough to be related to them. Although I think Vincent is good work, but not cos of Altman. Cos of John Hurt.
And Agger just loves indie delight Mr Robert Redford, whose best turn, in my opinion, was also back in the mid-70's with The Hot Rock, The Sting, Jeremiah Johnson, The Great Waldo Pepper and All the President's Men.
Get this for sheer puke inducing film luvvie emptiness:
Altman was relaxing with a cup of tea, and he reminded Redford of a television show that they had worked on together some forty years ago. Redford replied, “I can’t remember yesterday, but I remember when I met you then, and you said, ‘I just saw the movie that has changed my life.’”
Altman smiled and said, “What was that?”
“It was ‘La Dolce Vita.’”
At the memory of Fellini, Altman looked thoughtful. Redford continued, “‘81/2’ is better.”
“Well, ‘La Dolce Vita’ was my virgin experience,” Altman said.
Redford laughed and left to get dressed.
A bystander reminded Altman that “La Dolce Vita” is where the word “paparazzi” comes from, as Paparazzo was the name of a photographer in the film.
Agger was there. He was there, and in his unerring judgement, as in unerringly wrong, he imagined this useless wankery worthy of reporting to you and I. Worthy of our attention.
Milo, give us strength, eh?
You will notice the pathology at work, here, as I think I have written about before - cannot be asked to check the archives - the pathology that cannot praise anyone without reference to something else. Shyamalan ain't no Hitchcock you know. Ashton Kuchner is no Michael J. Fox (seriously) and Will Self is not Jack Black. And Altman and Redford are Gods so anyone who is not them is in trouble.
It really is a disease. In the SMH teevee guide we get this rubbish, this contempt week in and week out. Right now, Gretel Kelleen, fresh from finishing on Big Brother, has become the de rigeur objet du ridicule, in today's case for Robin Oliver in his review of something called "Regency House Party", which is just Big Brother in Britches only Oliver is too stupid to make that simple connection and instead gives the Regency folks a good review while implicitly giving the Big Brother folks a retrospective bad review.
You loser, Oliver.
Why this overwhelming urge to compare everything to everything else, and always unfairly, always find it wanting?
And a bitch streak a mile wide, that is why.
And a fair whack of good old fashioned smothering paternalism and racism rolled into one - witness Agger's loathing of the little wog, Shyamalan from Philly, and Oliver's disgust at that Queen Killeen of the Proles. And Altman's sophomoric affection for Fellini's emptiest film.
Agger should quit because he is no good at his job. And Robin Oliver should just crawl off into the mountains and die because he would not know quality teevee if it fell on him out of the back of a Bing Lee truck.
And Altman. Urgh. Can't you just smell the crap he's making now? October release. Yippee.
:: WB 1:26 a.m. [link+] ::