Iain Hall's SANDPIT

Home » Blogging » Humourless lefties

Humourless lefties

Why is it the case that the gormless lefties are so insensitive to anyone who has children? probably because most of them are at heart just pimply faced morons like the subject of this piece who  tries to defend the indefensible

THE Chaser’s War on Everything has been taken off the air for two weeks to allow the ABC to review its approval processes after the row over the dying kids skit.

ABC managing director Mark Scott made the decision with ABC’s director of television Kim Dalton after discussions with the Chaser team.

“We have decided that this is the most appropriate course of action,” Mr Scott said in a statement on Friday night.

“It gives the ABC an opportunity to complete a review of editorial approval processes.

“It also gives The Chaser a chance to regroup and review their material.”

ABC viewers flooded the broadcaster’s website with complaints after the satirical program aired a skit on Wednesday night that depicted dying children making deathbed wishes.

The segment, titled Making A Realistic Wish Foundation, ended with actor Chris Taylor saying there was no point in making expensive wishes come true as “they’re going to die anyway”.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said the Chaser team was guilty of extremely poor taste and should “hang their heads in shame”.

Mr Scott has apologised for the distress caused and admitted the skit went too far.

The ABC have done the right thing here because there are some things that are just in such bad taste that only the most demented lefty could find them funny. Such things have no place on the public broadcaster. Sadly the Chaser boys have reached their use by date and their stuff is just no longer funny. A wise comedian would realise when they have come to this state of affairs. That crowd are in that long African river and they have been spied by the hungry crocodile of public disgust.

Cheers Comrades

😉

On a side note that does not really need a new post of its own some time in the next day or so the hit counter for this blog will tick over the 300,000 mark so three cheers to all of my readers who keep coming back for more !

8)


76 Comments

  1. Geezus Iain, where’d you get the photos?

    Btw, I agree that Surname’s piece was rubbish and I said so at Grods but then again, he’s very young so probably it hasn’t sunk in yet that you need to show respect for others.

  2. Also, I think you’ll find most people regardless of whether they’re ‘left’ or ‘right’ were appalled by the Chasers latest piece of crap. The ‘good’ part is that it looks like finally bringing them undone.

  3. David Davidson says:

    Before criticising Chaser’s, I have tried to “suffer” it a couple of times, to give it a sort of balanced (at least for me) appraisal ?

    I find it neither funny, nor satirical in any way, just plain prehistoric and out way past left field somewhere.

    I don’t watch it anymore, and probably instead of criticising it, if we just tune out, and change the channel, then maybe the bigwigs will listen to logic, rather than some drugged out wacko somewhere telling them, that this is what “modern ” viewing audiences want ?
    🙄

  4. kevin says:

    What’s with the other attack blog Iain? Is it to try and strengthen your “respected commentater” image?

  5. Iain Hall says:

    Kevin
    I play the cards as they are dealt to me mate 😉
    David
    I lost all respect for the chaser ages ago they are like a lot of comics who don’t know when their jokes cease to be funny.
    Ray
    I say your piece on this subject and your comments on the dark side, you did good mate]
    oh and the photos were found on the net, amazing what people post ain’t it?

  6. Phill says:

    That the Chaser skit was in bad taste goes with out saying, but all this faux sympathy for the children concerned by conservatives, is beyond the pale.

    Conservatives have their share of benevolent millionaires who give to charity, that is beyond doubt.However let us not be under any illusion here.

    Conservative ideology has no room for ” The make a wish foundation ” or for that matter, the general health of the population as a whole, period.They want an American style system where if you have no cash, you get no treatment.

    They have been out to destroy Medicare, code for them being “socialized medicine” for years.Notwithstanding in its first year of operation, Doctors who are mainly for the conservative cause, were being charged with fraud regarding as it was then known as Medibank ,wholesale.

    The Chaser apart from this bungle,is a great show, it is most feared by conservatives because it exposes their faults and hypocrisy by the use of satire.

    It is not so many years ago that some of the children depicted in this skit would be working along side pit pony’s in mines, and treated with about the same level of disdain as the poor donkeys pulling the carts..

  7. Alan Jackson says:

    Well said Phill and for once I am in agreement with you!!! We should not kid our selves about the “critics” of the Chaser, they are not necessarily “holier than thou”. I cant stand those smug bastards who run “A Current Affair” and “Today Tonight”.

    Iain those mug shots in that other side are (in a word) “f–ing ugly” but is there really a need to put up pictures of people because you dont agree with their ideas, that sounds a bit weird mate.

  8. Toaf says:

    Back to what you do best, Hall. You never learn, you miserable little man.

  9. I think he has learnt, Toaf.

    If the photos were on the Internet then there’s nothing wrong with Iain using them in a critique of Surname’s article that appeared on Scott’s site. It’s just like for like isn’t it? And, apart from the ‘pimply face’ reference, there’s nothing insulting about it.

    It’s also a lot more satirical and a lot funnier than The Chasers’ stunt.

  10. Stupid PC righties. They should just get a sense of humour and stop intruding on our lives.

  11. Phill says:

    “Well said Phill and for once I am in agreement with you!!! ”

    No worries Alan, but don’t let Jethro read this, mein got! you will be off his xmas card list forever.

    Yes the shows mentioned were/are the biggest load of schlock to ever have been produced,of course as you know it was really dumbed down by that greasy piece of work Martin.

    As you know conservatives will never have any trouble finding half the working class to beat up on the other half, that is the way of it.It is how they attain government at all, that will have me in wonderment, to my deathbed.

    I don’t take them serious, their memory goes back to about last Sunday, the history of the world and the plight of the working class, the industrial revolution etc etc, has some how passed them by.

    I will know in the end, most of the worlds scientists, poets, musicians,and people of good intention to their fellow man, are of the left bent, and that will always trump their illusions of grandeur.It sustains me through the dark days when conservatives are in government.

  12. Alan, the “critics” of the Chasers are not limited to the conservative side, it’s fairly universal.

    These guys are not “edgy” or “subversive” or even “satirical”. They’re not even “left wing”, they attack both sides – but they do it badly.

    The only thing that drives them is publicity & attention and that’s designed to keep them in the news and keep their jobs. In the end they are self-serving little capitalists rorting the system for their own benefit which, if anything, puts them more on the conservative side of the political spectrum.

    Which kind of blows Two Ls’ theory out of the window. But what would a redneck posing as a lefty know about anything?

  13. Phill says:

    “Which kind of blows Two Ls’ theory out of the window. But what would a redneck posing as a lefty know about anything?”

    Well you would know Jethro.

  14. I wasn’t talking to the slime around here.

  15. Alan Jackson says:

    Ray I think you are wrong on this, most of the time the Chaser boys *do* get it right, but sometimes they go way over the top. Their skit at the “Vatican” was on the money, so was their bit where they showed up the APEC security (or lack of!) by getting inside, and their song about dead people was pretty much on the money. But I do agree they have fcuked up big time with this thing about the dead kids, but it will blow over in time.

  16. I think they’re finished, Alan. As for the Vatican & APEC, it just proves that they’re all about publicity – it’s not clever to crash big ticket items, it’s just dumb. These guys only go the obvious and/or soft targets. No real guts.

  17. Toaf says:

    “If the photos were on the Internet…”

    Indeed.

  18. David Davidson says:

    “indeed” what ?
    What’s your point Toaf ?

  19. Not sure what you mean by that, Toaf. It sounds like they were on the Internet … unless Iain paid for them!!

  20. I guess the inference in what Toaf has said about Iain being “back to what he does best” is that he’s exposed people’s identities. But if the photos were posted elsewhere on the Internet, he hasn’t really done that, and I can’t imagine how he would have got those photos any other way.

  21. Um, I just ‘heard’ that the photos are claimed to be private. I think I’ll bow out of this one.

  22. Iain Hall says:

    I guess the inference in what Toaf has said about Iain being “back to what he does best” is that he’s exposed people’s identities. But if the photos were posted elsewhere on the Internet, he hasn’t really done that, and I can’t imagine how he would have got those photos any other way.

    Precisely right Ray
    the first three photos were posted so that “anyone may see them” on facebook and the last one of John’s pimply visage was originally posted at Grods they were in no sense private.

  23. Abu Chowdah says:

    “That the Chaser skit was in bad taste goes with out saying, but all this faux sympathy for the children concerned by conservatives, is beyond the pale.”

    Do you actually live in Australia? Doesn’t sound like it.

    “Conservatives have their share of benevolent millionaires who give to charity, that is beyond doubt.However let us not be under any illusion here.”

    Wait for it, wait for it… is he going to refer to the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”…? Let us not be under any illusions here about the evil baby-blood-drinking conservatives!

    “Conservative ideology has no room for ” The make a wish foundation ” or for that matter, the general health of the population as a whole, period.They want an American style system where if you have no cash, you get no treatment.”

    Wow, thanks for the warning about those heartless conservatives. That was close, I almost bought into the reality of this illusion we call “Australia”.

  24. Trevor says:

    Iain, I thought you were a decent bloke mate. Attacking a kid because he has pimples or a skin condition shows the persons (yours in this case) insecurities about themselves.

    It’s very jauvinale mate.

  25. Iain Hall says:

    Trevor
    I am “attacking” what he wrote because he is gormless fool with no empathy for anyone with a dying child. His unfortunate skin condition is just incidental.

  26. Trevor makes a good point in some ways Iain.

    I realise that when you called John a “pimply faced moron”, the main insult was “moron” and the addition of “pimply” was just to add colour to it.

    But it’s like when I called Sol Trujillo a “Mexican swine” a lot of people accused me of attacking his ethnicity when I was really just calling him a “swine” of a person and the “Mexican” bit was added for effect.

    So while referring to his acne problem is an understandable response considering how he has previously described you, why stoop to that level?

  27. Phill says:

    “Wow, thanks for the warning about those heartless conservatives. That was close, I almost bought into the reality of this illusion we call “Australia”.”

    Don’t mention it only to happy to help with anyone’s education.

    You will only improve in time, as I point out to you the inadequacies of being a conservative.A good start for you is to visit your local library, notice I said library and not Mac Donalds where most ignoramuses like you spend most of their time.

  28. David Davidson says:

    Trevor,
    I think Iain, as well as myself, were not criticising the kid for the large “mountain range” growing on his face, we have all been down that road, in our youths.

    If I get Iain’s drift, he is criticising the young mans inherent youth, and by this stunt, he and his friends displayed that youth, and with it lack of responsibility, morality, and maturity in his, and their choice for a quick “gag” ?.

    I don’t believe in censorship, of any kind, but in this case, that show is designed for a young audience, and in that, it has to be seen as acting responsible. In my youth, my parents watched the programs with us, and we learned what the society that we lived in, required as a basis for good taste. This program has a long history, of displaying bad taste, racist taunts and bigotry. I am surprised Auntie has let it go on for so long. Probably, to show the country, that it is truly independent from it’s Government masters ?
    i.e those that pay it’s bills ?

  29. Alan Jackson says:

    Rather than creepily posting piccies of the young fella to prove a point perhapas Iain could have a “whip round” and collect $1 each and we could forward the young chap a couple of tubes of Clearosil 🙂

  30. David Davidson says:

    boom boom !

  31. David Davidson says:

    I wrote this on Iain’s other blog yesterday Alan, much the same thinking as you I imagine ?

    “Perhaps rather than criticise the show, one should just buy them all a bulk order of “clearasil” and put it into the post.
    Have we gotten that old ????
    Sign, wish I could get these years back, that make this funny ?
    🙄 ”

    http://niceperson709.wordpress.com/2009/06/05/gormless-and-crass/#comment-27

  32. Alan Jackson says:

    Sorry David I did not see your comment as I didnt scroll down that far!! As they say “great minds” etc.

  33. David Davidson says:

    no probs, it wasn’t on this blog, so you may not have seen it, but sort of explains the level of humour doesn’t it ? Were we ever THAT YOUNG and on appearances anyway, that irresponsible ?
    🙄

  34. Isn’t it just dumbing down the debate to focus on the acne? It’s hardly the main point.

    Alan, you seem to have gone full circle since you said, “is there really a need to put up pictures of people because you dont agree with their ideas, that sounds a bit weird mate.

    As for the pics, I see nothing wrong with Iain posting them (putting aside the ‘controversy’ as to how they were acquired) but to then ridicule their personal features is overkill.

    As they say, a picture speaks ….

  35. Alan Jackson says:

    Sorry Ray I still think publishing peoples pictures on your web site without their permission (which Ian didnt seem to have) is “wrong” unless you have a valid reason for doing so, and disagreeing with their ideas is not a valid reason. As for my acne joke I am sorry, “I was wrong”, you shouldnt mock people with acne or dying kids 🙂 🙂

  36. Iain Hall says:

    Allan
    John and I have , as they say, “a history” and while I concede Ray’s point that publishing his pictures is descending to his level (at least a bit) in terms to our previous argy bargy this is very small beer indeed.
    The mention of his acne is peripheral because the gist of the post is just how gormless that he looks in the photo’s and how that gormless look fits right in with the gormless commentary on the Chaser skit that he published.
    It is simple mockery using his own words and imagery.

  37. Abu Chowdah says:

    I don’t see how you could be offended by the use of photos of John Surname (or whichever Grods fool it was), but not be offended by the Chaser cancer sketch.

    Funny old world.

    Abu

    PS. Hey, Phill, loved your snappy comeback. What a zinger. Hate to see you riled, it must be quite something. Now toddle off and get some quality hours in wearing your tin foil hat. There’s a chap.

  38. Alan Jackson says:

    Abu if that comment was directed at me then I never said that I “wasn’t offended by the Chaser cancer sketch” so would you be kind enough to point it out to me where I did say this?? Also I have no idea who this John Surename is. I just think it is poor form to be putting someones piccy about the place, no matter how ugly they are. That is my opinion and I stand by it, those who dont like it can consume excrement 🙂

    Iain, no problem, expalanation understood.

  39. Abu Chowdah says:

    Alan, it was an observation. Not directed at anyone. A comment. In a comments thread. One of many.

    Carry on.

  40. Trevor says:

    So you gents are attacking this Surname persons appearence instead of debating his topical issue about the chaser.

    How I read it is that you are hypocrites on this one.

    Because you attack someones skin condition which may require (like my daughter) some serious medication but you are acussing him of agreeing with a skit about sick kids with medical conditions.

    Does you see the irony?

    Iain you are the gormless one here mate.

    I

  41. Iain Hall says:

    Trevor
    Surname’s unfortunate skin condition is a very small part of my criticism of his post…

  42. Trevor says:

    Look I just read it as I see it. I don’t agree with the Chasers skit. It was in very poor taste.

    But you didnt debate your enemies opinion on it you just posted an articale written by some one else which has nothing to do with the Surnames opinion piece.

    You used the sick kids skit to attack an enemy which is just as bad if not worse than someone making fun of a sick joke.

    If you read the Surnames opinion which I did from your link he doesn’t say he agrees with the skit he says it was a bad joke that failed and if the joke had have been a good one like The Onion skit that worked (it had a terminally ill kid in it) then no one would complain about it.

  43. Phill says:

    “PS. Hey, Phill, loved your snappy comeback. What a zinger. Hate to see you riled, it must be quite something. Now toddle off and get some quality hours in wearing your tin foil hat. There’s a chap.”

    I seem to have misplaced mine somewhere can I borrow yours? Of course I may have to inflate my head to make it fit.

  44. Alright Trevor, I’ll comment on Surname’s opinion, as I have elsewhere:

    The moral outrage this morning is the result of the sketch failing to make anyone laugh. As a result, everyone missed the point and it appeared as though the humour in the sketch came from lambasting dying children, which it wasn’t supposed to.

    He loses it right there. That’s an attempt to say there was some other (mysterious) point to the sketch, which is ludicrous.

    Surname contradicts himself by suggesting that the point of the skit was to satirise “the way we treat them” (dying kids), clearly implying that the ‘Make a wish foundation’ is something to be held up to satire.

    Well, what exactly does he think is wrong with the “make a wish’ foundation? Huh? And what did Chasers think is so wrong with it that it deserves to be sent up?

    In short, it was the wrong subject matter and of course no one laughed. It was plain disrespectful.

  45. Alan Jackson says:

    Ray call me crazy but I have always thought that it makes more sense that the millions of bucks donated to “Make a wish” might be better spent on cancer research, doesnt it make more sense to we try to get LESS kids dying from cancer rather than sending the ones who are dying on holidays to Disney Land? May be that was the point the Chaser boys were making. Dont get me wrong I think it came across in a shit way and was not at all funny.

  46. May be that was the point the Chaser boys were making

    We lead the world in cancer research, Alan. Despite that the fact is some kids get cancer and there’s no way of curing it for them. So do we begrudge their dying wishes for the sake of others?

    Also, if the people making those donations want it spent that way then what business is it of the The Chasers (or anyone else) to suggest it should be spent elsewhere?

    The logic doesn’t stack up. Why donate to bushfire victims, wouldn’t we be better off to put that money into more research of bushfire prevention? That’s what your argument amounts to.

  47. Alan Jackson says:

    No it doesnt, you are talking crap. You can do something for a bushfire victim to get their life back on track, you cant do much for someone who is DYING, except put all your efforts into finding a cure for what is killing them, not sending them off to some theme park and then (after a week) theyre still DYING. And we might lead the world in cancer research but that doesnt mean we have enough resources “on the job”, if we did then why do they constantly have appeals for the RCH and Peter Mac?? The money would be better spent on finding how to cure this disease but thats my opinion.

  48. I’m not “talking crap”, Alan, I’m talking an opinion. Sheez, have you been reading too many Two Ls comments?

    And btw, the donation is not just about the dying child, it’s about helping the parents get their lives “back on track” too.

    There’s more than one worthy cause to donate to and saying money going to one should be diverted to another is like playing God.

  49. Alan Jackson says:

    You are talking crap mate when you compare “apples with oranges” to twist what I meant, cancer and bushfires have got nothing to do with each other. And I reckon the best thing we could do to help the parents is to make sure their bloody kid doesnt die in the first place!! But you are right, there is only so much $$ to go round and its hard to say where it should go, but my view is that it should go towards saving lives and research that will help achieve this.

  50. Phill says:

    “I’m not “talking crap”, Alan, I’m talking an opinion. Sheez, have you been reading too many Two Ls comments?”

    You’re always talking crap Jethro.

  51. Is there an echo in here?

    Calm down Alan, I haven’t twisted anything you’ve said. And cancer & bushfires DO have something in common – they both have victims and those victims attract public donations.

    My point is it’s not up to us to say where people should donate their money.

  52. Iain Hall says:

    Trevor

    But you didnt debate your enemies opinion on it you just posted an articale written by some one else which has nothing to do with the Surnames opinion piece.

    This post is about the Chaser Skit and the subsequent two week suspension of the program because they have gone too far. It’s focus is clearly there, the link to my other blog “Still being nice, even to the undeserving” was little more than an aside meant to show that those defending the skit are idiots who don’t give a toss about sick kids or their anguished parents. To achieve this aim I satirised Surname with his own words and image. now I have hardly heard a peep from any of the Grodites about this post or the one at “Still being nice, even to the undeserving” which is most amusing because usually they are very keen to denounce me for the most innocuous things that I do. But if you want to see me argue, in detail, with something else written by Surname read the other posts at “Still being nice , even to the undeserving” His attempts to argue for AGW are a real hoot.

  53. Abu Chowdah says:

    “I seem to have misplaced mine somewhere can I borrow yours? Of course I may have to inflate my head to make it fit.”

    Yes, well, that would be on account of your microcephaly, my pinheaded friend.

  54. Iain Hall says:

    Boom Boom! Abu!

  55. Phill says:

    “Yes, well, that would be on account of your microcephaly, my pinheaded friend.”

    Well Sabu as yours is big enough to run Chippendales circus under, I guess anything would look small to you.Hoever, you are at least not in denial, and have admitted having one, this initself for a conservative, is progress indeed.

  56. Abu Chowdah says:

    Still dog-paddling in circles, my little microcephalic friend?

  57. Ray Dixon says:

    Nice to see that Two Ls manages to offend people equally from right across the political spectrum. The ‘mouth’ that knows no boundaries.

  58. Phill says:

    “Nice to see that Two Ls manages to offend people equally from right across the political spectrum. The ‘mouth’ that knows no boundaries.”

    Hey Jethro, I least I keep offending people that talk nonsense.In your case of course, you offended your parents when you were born.

    Hey Sabu I don’t doggy paddle, it’s called the Australian crawl.You may like to try it some time, if you get over your Sotos syndrome.

  59. Trevor says:

    Hey I love The Crawl. Have all their records.

  60. Ray Dixon says:

    Trevor makes more sense than you do Two Ls.

  61. Phill says:

    Trevor makes more sense than you do Two Ls.

    Jethro give it a rest.Why do you want to keep trying to impress me with your asinine comments?You just aint got it, get it?

  62. Abu Chowdah says:

    What’s this “Sabu”, shit? Some sort of sneaky insult?

    Figures.

  63. Ray Dixon says:

    Two Ls, it’s you who can’t tolerate or ignore the inoccuous comments of others and constantly respond with insults.

    But you can do it if you try. Go on, be a man and shut up.

  64. Alan Jackson says:

    This blog post should be renamed “Humourless Commenters”!!

  65. Phill says:

    “Two Ls, it’s you who can’t tolerate or ignore the inoccuous comments of others and constantly respond with insults. ”

    Jethro you are having a laff, and as usual you make my day with you little attempts at wit. Anyways sunbeam you are not insulting me that would be an admission you actually think.Besides winding you up is indeed a rare pleasure, you are so easy to get.

  66. Phill says:

    “What’s this “Sabu”, shit? Some sort of sneaky insult?”

    Nothing sneaky Sabu, tee he.

  67. Ray Dixon says:

    Hmm, more ‘humourless comment’ from ‘the mouth’. Let’s see if he can resist responding for once, wouldn’t that be novel?

  68. Phill says:

    Hey Jethro are you some sort of retard? You have responded to all of my comments, what’s more calling me a xxxxxx racist xxxxxxx, and then it’s me who should shut up.

    What a unique sense of logic NOT!

    For the first time for me and using your words. Blow Me.
    (edited by siteowner to remove uncivil language as promised in a previous thread)

  69. Ray Dixon says:

    Ha ha ha. Who gets easily wound up?

  70. David Davidson says:

    Just on the news, the guy in charge of comedy, just got the bullet from the ABC.
    Guess it wasn’t that funny after all ?

  71. Abu Chowdah says:

    It was a gal, not a guy.

    She was given the arse for lack of judgment. I think the lack of judgment is on the head of whichever Chaser tool wrote the sketch in the first place.

    They’re not “boys”, ABC, they’re adults in their late 30s.

  72. Alan Jackson says:

    I reckon The Chasers should be replaced by a show like The Two Ronnies, starring our own Phill and Ray Dixon 🙂 Although it would probably be taken off the air after the first week because one of them has knifed the other.

  73. Abu Chowdah says:

    How about something FUNNY, like Flight of the Conchords?

  74. Ray Dixon says:

    Two Ls could play the sick kid.

  75. Phill says:

    Of course Jethro could play, well Jethro could just play himself.

  76. Ray Dixon says:

    I’d have to write the material, your jokes suck.

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the Sandpit

I love a good argument so please leave a comment

Please support the Sandpit

Please support the Sandpit

Do you feel lucky?

Do you feel lucky?

%d bloggers like this: