Iain Hall's SANDPIT

Home » Blogging » Blog of the month » The 3 musketeers week of yawn

The 3 musketeers week of yawn

It’s been a busy week over at the Crikey blog dedicated to proving the ‘intellectual dishonesty’ of Andrew Bolt. Lets have a look at the last 5 posts:

1. Tubbys post on 13 July “Andrew Bolt and the great gerrymander conspiracy” attracted a total of just 22 comments including 2 from Iain with the rest mainly responding to him. Not a good start. 

2. Daves post on 14 July “A little bit of inaccuracy” at least diverts away from the usual topic of ‘Mr Bolt is wrong’ by focusing on some minor errors of fact in the Sydney tabloid the Daily Telegraph. The DTs editor is no doubt whipping himself to death following the stunning response of 16 comments agreeing with Dave that yes indeed the paper got a couple of things wrong.  

3. In fairness to Dave the commenters were all over at Tubbys little pearler of a post also written on 14 July titled “Pulling apart Andrew Bolt’s anti-Islam crusade”. This cutting piece of writing attracted a whopping 74 comments to take out the Pure Pwned gold star for post of the week. I hear Bolt is still licking his wounds. 

4. Things then went pretty quiet at Pure Pwned for the next 48 hours (ie status quo) until Dave realised if you cant beat em join em and struck back with yet another anti-Bolt post on 16 July “Operation Torture”. Alas this post took out the wooden spoon for the week with only 12 comments proving conclusively that Daves trainer wheels are permanently welded on. 

5. It was then left to Tubby to salvage something from another slow news week to inspiringly come up with yet another “Weekend Talk Thread” on 16 July that as of right now two days later has attracted just 26 comments. Despite yesterdays big news (something about an election) there is a lot more about you-guessed-it (Andrew Bolt) in the comments than about Julia & Tony. 

So there you have it. Five posts for a total of 150 mainly sycophantic comments. And four of the five posts focusing mainly on you-know-who. Crikey must be rapt with the performance of the Three Musketeers. I dont know how they keep up the pace.

(PS: Missing in action this week was Boltwatcher extraordinaire Jeremy whose last missive  on 7 July lecturing The Age on their failure to recognise the importance of his beloved Greens Party really brained them with a whole 42 comments. Come back Jeremy, Pure Pwned needs its Three Musketeers working as one throughout the election campaign.)


80 Comments

  1. deffdredd says:

    The PP crew are on the wrong track for criticising Bolt, IMO. If he’s guilty of anything, it’s lazy journalism rather than ‘intellectual dishonesty’ (whatever that is).

    The problem for them is they’re not going to convince anyone of their view anyway. Political types like ourselves who visit blogs have already made up our minds about Bolt, whether we think he’s an idiot or a genius or anything in between.

  2. SockPuppet says:

    I reckon its about showcasing their pseudo intellectualism. If they ever had a point it was lost long ago.

  3. SockPuppet says:

    Thats why I put in the tag ‘wankers’.

  4. Iain Hall says:

    I like to go there to play with the rabid lefties, some of whom are so close to the most outrageous far left stereotypes that they are a hoot as you have already noticed the only threads that get any substantial traffic are the ones where I stir them up. They have this lovely habit of attacking en mass anyone putting a contrary opinion. and the way that they moderate the forum is often far from conducive to spirited debate either.

  5. Ray Dixon says:

    You mean they don’t exactly abide by their own comments policy, Iain?:

    The Pure Poison team would also like to set one simple guideline for all of us to follow at this site: Play the ball and not the person; low-level snark is fine but derogatory statements about a person’s character are not.

    I’ve noticed that.

  6. Iain Hall says:

    It was even worse when Scot Bridges was writing for them he had this lovely habit of editing out my emoticons and putting derisory editorial asides into just my comments.
    This thread is interesting for the way that it has been moderated and the way that Jezza looks foolish

  7. PKD says:

    Five posts for a total of 150 mainly sycophantic comments.

    150 comments for 5 posts is pretty decent – I actually have no idea what your point is apart from that you can count past 20 once you’ve run out of fingers and toes.

    I assume the buffoon clown is back after your 1 serious post on the Israelis dancing at Auchwitz .

    And if sycophantic comments is something to criticise them over well, at least no one can accuse this comment of that! 🙂

  8. Iain Hall says:

    Well PKD at least here we welcome a contrary view point and the argy bargy of debate 🙂

  9. SockPuppet says:

    PK Gum an average of 30 comments per post would be good for a Joe Bloggs blog* but for a mainstream commercial website like Crikey it is peanuts. That is my point.

    Well and that they have a very narrow focus that they have done to death and is boring as all shit.

    And this is also a serious post. No buffing going on here. I am dealing with facts.

    (* That is a good name for a blog BTW)

  10. SockPuppet says:

    Iain can we reserve that name (Joe Bloggs blog) somehow please? Can you TM it for me?

  11. PKD says:

    Well PKD at least here we welcome a contrary view point and the argy bargy of debate 🙂

    Yeah, I’ll give you that!

    Well and that they have a very narrow focus that they have done to death and is boring as all shit.

    And I reckon theres a distinct possibility that you are doing to PP what you reckoned PP are doing to Bolt in your last post…

  12. SockPuppet says:

    “theres a distinct possibility that you are doing to PP what you reckoned PP are doing to Bolt in your last post”

    When I have written post after post after post after post for 18 months on the same topic PK Gum then I think you can say I am doing that.

    I dont know why you seem to think the Pure Pwned (TM) boys should be immunised from criticism.

  13. PKD says:

    PK Gum an average of 30 comments per post would be good for a Joe Bloggs blog* but for a mainstream commercial website like Crikey it is peanuts. That is my point.

    Having just looked at the the home page for Crikey’s blogs (blogs.crikey.com.au) that lists the 6 most recent topics of each blog, PP appears to have the most comments apart from the poll bludger. Thats 2nd out of 21 blogs. Your point, such as it is, is well short of the mark.

    So obviously the only one finding reading critiques of Bolt boring is you. May I suggest that if you don’t like it them just don’t read it? I do the same nowadays with Bolt’s tripe and its a much healthier approach to life I can assure you…

  14. PKD says:

    I dont know why you seem to think the Pure Pwned (TM) boys should be immunised from criticism.

    Never said that but your ‘criticism’ of their comment is whats at fault here. And even if there comment count really was low then its about the most pointless petty thing to whinge about I can think of given its their subject matter that apparently bores you so…I mean, is moaning inaccurately and irrelevantly about the number of comments the best you can do?

  15. SockPuppet says:

    PK Gum, I can only repeat to you that the comments at Pure Pwned are very low by anyones measure. I have no idea about the other Crikey blogs but if you want to see what I am talking about in terms of real numbers look at ABCs The Drum and at other more mainstream websites.

    PPs participation is lower than Iains I reckon and Iains just doing this as a hobby.

    Sheez if you think its a good blog well … each to their own. Sorry if my opinion and my fair review and criticism offends you mate.

    Tell me (your turn to answer) why do you think its good? Do you comment there? I havent seen you. You comment here though.

  16. PKD says:

    are very low by anyones measure.

    No by your measure. And like I said even if the figures are low its utterly irrelevant as far as I am concerned if the articles are usually accurate. Which they usually are. Boring? Well possibly for you, but usually accurate.

    The only reason I haven’t posted there is just as I explained to Iain a couple of months back – a combination of time (and probably laziness) and of needing to have yet another bloody login and password to remember. Oh one day I will probably get to it though…when I can be motivated enough!

  17. SockPuppet says:

    Hurry up, they need you.

  18. PKD says:

    Oh, I’ll definitely do it once I get worried that their comment count is getting too low and risks being beaten by a redneck Queenslander and his talking Sock! 🙂

    (I like the new 1234 Ad BTW if you and the Sock on the telly are one and the same).

  19. SockPuppet says:

    Wow we have got more comments than Daves last two posts.

  20. gigdiary says:

    Wow, PKD’s on the rampage tonight… ‘a redneck and his talking sock’, I must say that I don’t agree with you PKD, apart from the Red Octopus, but it makes for very entertaining reading….

  21. SockPuppet says:

    Yeah Gig Guy, PK Gum must have missed my first post on Pure Pwned where I said that their subject matter was piss poor (another PP acronymn) and that I would “do them slowly”:

    https://iainhall.wordpress.com/2010/07/16/bolts-boring-fan-club-just-keep-boosting-his-popularity/

    This post is about the comments count or lack of. I could (and will) mention:

    Tubbys mindblowing graphs – wow!

    Daves nitpicking no consequence posts – wow!

    Jeremys typical whining unrealistic expectations – wow!

    More to come.

  22. gigdiary says:

    Looking forward to these upcoming episodes, Socky.

    Esp. the Jezza one with the ‘whining’….

    I could be accused of being Puppet Sycophant, but funny stuff, old son, keep drinking those Bundies and posting your stories…

  23. SockPuppet says:

    I think Ive had two too many toonight gigguy.

  24. SockPuppet says:

    I blame Laura.

  25. PKD says:

    I must say that I don’t agree with you PKD,

    I suspect thats because you don’t agree with anyone doesn’t agree with criticising PP.
    Sure its sycophantic (and perhaps so am I!) but thats ok, I understand! 🙂

  26. PKD says:

    Tubbys mindblowing graphs – wow!

    Daves nitpicking no consequence posts – wow!

    Jeremys typical whining unrealistic expectations – wow!

    BTW I do partly agree with you on that last one, so you’re not all wrong!

  27. Craigy says:

    Andrew Bolt is Australia’s greatest living journalist.

    His reach is growing each week, and we now enjoy his opinions and well researched articles not just on Wednesdays and Fridays in the countries biggest selling and most fair and balanced paper the Melbourne Herald-Sun, but now on any day of the week, in his new role as their most informed and balanced columnist reporting on the Election.

    This is on top of his wonderful spots on his fabulously successful (well they will be soon) Melbourne Talk Radio (MTR). His ability to un-mask the real villain in Australian life, the ALP and the Greens, is second to none. Australians are lucky to have such and insightful person, who is gaining more and more air time and column inches, expanding his great work in informing us of the real issues facing us all.

    I mean without Andrew, we wouldn’t know that our whole future as a proud Western Democracy was being put at risk by the ‘open door ‘ policies of the ALP and Greens. I had no idea, until I read Andrew Bolt, that we were at such risk from these toxic cultures that want to infect us with their cruel religious laws.

    I also thank Andrew for all his quality information on the ‘Climate Change’ scam. Who would of thought, without the great graphics and scientific facts that Andrew has published, that our whole international science community was corrupt and just wanting fame and fortune like the fat ex-vice president Al Gore.

    I was one of those ignorant and stupid people who thought that the environmental campaigners actually wanted to protect the planet from our over indulgence, in order to preserve some of it for future generations. But thanks to Andrew, I now know they are ALL just leftist elites’ who want us to live in caves, while they create a hellish nightmare socialist future for us all.

    I also thank Andrew for his many great insights into the Aboriginal industry and the lie that is the ‘Stolen Generation’.

    I was living in an illusion, created again by leftist elites’, that Australia was a racist country for many years. I believed the shameful stories those lying Abos’ told of being taken from their parents and told lies about them as they were locked away in abusive homes.

    I never understood, until I started reading Andrew, that the early Australian settlers were in fact quality Gentlemen, who had nothing but the best interest of the first Australians at heart. They removed them from their families because their culture was again ‘toxic’, and their parents were too primitive to actually love them or look after them. They may not appreciate it now, but I, like Andrew, hope that one day these primitive Blacks may embrace our superior culture and gain all the benefits we enjoy from our hard won wealth.

    And finally I would like to thank Andrew for pointing out that the fires that burnt down my home last year and killed my friends, was in fact my fault, as I have been a supporter of the Green Wedge policies of the socialist Greens and the ALP for some years.

    As I now write this, I get tears in my eyes knowing that if I had only started reading Andrew earlier, I could have saved this state from the horrors, by voting for the Liberal Party and supporting the removal of the stupid National Parks and all the fuel that hasn’t been cleaned up because of those ignorant tree huggers.

    I don’t see any reason for a site like ‘Pure Poison’, It deserves the ridicule you pile on it for attacking someone as important to Australia’s future as Andrew Bolt.

    Thank you Socky…

    And thanks Andrew …..You’re the Best.

  28. Husky Jim says:

    I like David Marr better.

    AND HE’S GAY AS WELL.

  29. Iain Hall says:

    Craigy
    the Irony is that Socky is no fan of Andrew Bolt either 😉

    I have edited your use of the word “allusion” which I am sure you meant to be “illusion” 😉

  30. Craigy says:

    My point being that there is ample reason to have a go at Andrew.

    Can you change the where to were…? In the sentence…’where in fact quality Gentlemen’

    Thanks Iain, bloody spell checker…

    Less mistakes than a Bolt column though!

  31. Husky Jim says:

    You mean “fewer” mistakes Craigy.

  32. SockPuppet says:

    I don’t see any reason for a site like ‘Pure Poison’, It deserves the ridicule you pile on it for attacking someone as important to Australia’s future as Andrew Bolt.

    Craygee,
    I will reinterpret your statement (if you do not mind) from its deliberate irony into what you are really saying. This is what you mean I think. Below (in quotation marks but not in sloping italics):

    “Pure Pwned is a great website and it should not be ridiculed because they are doing a great and important job attacking an irrelevant, shit journalist over & over & over & over again.”

    That is about right isnt it? You see I think you have just explained why Pure Pwned serves no purpose. If you think Mr Bolt is such a dick (and I have said in my first post if you care to read it – scroll down the page, use the arrows – that I am no fan of his) then why is it such a good idea to pay him so much attention like PP does over & over & over & over again?

    Arent they just raising his status? I think they are. I will await your reply.

  33. Iain Hall says:

    Craigy
    Fixed your mistake, as you suggest spell checkers are not perfect and I should know 😉
    I have no problem with anyone deciding to critique Andrew’s arguments but as Socky suggests the way that they do it at PP is in fact rather less than perfect.

  34. SockPuppet says:

    Its too repetitive and almost hero worship on their part Iain that is my point. Who gives a shit if ‘Andrew Bolt is wrong’? I think he appeals to the people he appeals to and the ones he does not appeal to do not need a dedicated blog to work that out.

  35. Iain Hall says:

    I think that rather like the fact that Anti-porn campaigners actually love that which they so virulently denounce I think that most of the writers and all of the commentators pay far more attention to Andrew than I, as someone who often agrees with his positions , does. As I said several times when I was critiquing Jeremy’s original Boltwatch the methodology of the criticism was often very poor and it has not changed since then.

  36. Husky Jim says:

    The PP motto states that they will “………..expose the intellectual dishonesty, the flimsy arguments and the distorted data wherever they appear in the mainstream media”, but the “wherever they appear” line is more about wherever they appear on the right.
    When was the last time that Marr, Adams or Singer was critiqued at PP. Surely Germain Greer has occasionally demonstrated intellectual dishonesty?

  37. SockPuppet says:

    I would go deeper into that Iain but not too deep and not too often otherwise I would be guilty of doing exactly to them what they are doing to Bolt – paying homage.

    Craygee has written 12 paragraphs of irony to explain why he does not think much of Bolt but that is okay because I like parady too (In fact I am a parady expert as opposed to some people who are Internet experts and write posts at The Drum that get shut down for legal reasons) and because he got it all out in one go and did not write it every day for 2 years on a dedicated blog over & over & over & over & over and …. like forever.

  38. SockPuppet says:

    Husky Dog
    They did attack Christine Deveny once or twice but then they came out in support of her when she got the flick from The Age for tweeting stuff about Bindi getting laid & Rove’s dead wife. They defended her right to do it I think.

    Apart from that I cannot think of any journalists on ‘the left’ they have had a go at.

    Maybe they should have a go at some of the tripe written at The Drum? Thats where all there readers and commenters have gone. And there boss. And a social media expert who wrote one post at PP but gave it up as a bad experience.

  39. Craigy says:

    But I wasn’t being Ironic Socky, I love Andrew, he is the best. I read him every day like so many ‘thinking’ Aussies.

    Even though he has managed to get such wide coverage, and has managed to get past the elites on the left who try and stop him from commenting and so gets heard Australia wide in the biggest selling newspapers and electronic media, as well as TV and radio every single day, I don’t see any justification for Pure Poison writing about his views. I mean, why try and counter his sensible, balanced and properly researched penmanship.

    I think Iain should bring back ‘Bolt Watch Watch’ as it is very important to continuously criticise one of the 20 odd blogs at crikey for having a go at an Australian Hero like Andrew.

    There is so little written critically about Andrew in the MSM and this is how it should be. All we need to do now is stop all the Blogs, with small readerships, from attacking Andrews’s scientific and social knowledge. Then we can spread the truth about AGW, Abos’, Bushfires, the ALP and Greens.

    And I agree socky, Pure Poison is so badly written, they get the facts wrong in every post and they have such big egos, I can’t read their dribble. It is much easier to read Iain and Andrew’s well informed and modern views on things like homosexual marriage and abortion.

    God, can you imagine if the PP crowd got their way, and we had THE SAME RIGHTS FOR ALL AUSTRALIANS? It would be a disaster, the end of our great Australian way of life!

    And as for writting over and over and over, well I guess they have to do this as Andrew writes on such a broad range of issues and never repeats himself that I can remember.

    Also, thanks HJ for the grammar lesson. I am glad this blog has one person who never makes a mistake (other than Socky). I wish I finished high school.

  40. SockPuppet says:

    You angling for a gig there Craygee?

    BTW it is Iain that is saying PP is badly written I have not gone into that. No need to.

    You are obviously a ‘thinking Australian’ Craygee and I understand what you are saying (in reverse) about Bolt getting so much mainstream exposure. But do you really think hes that important that he influences people on how to think or vote? I dont.

    Whether you are using irony or not you are putting him on a pedestal. Hes just a paid journalist and anyone who agrees with him would not be swayed by what PP writes. Setting up an attack blog like that is well its hypocritical to start with but it also works more in favour of the target I think.

  41. SockPuppet says:

    Anyway I do not think PP and you Craygee are seeing the bigger picture of what is really happening in Australia. You are talking about things we do not have (yet) but not looking at what we do have and how far we have come with issues like gays, climate change, asylum seekers and on & on. We are as Julia says “moving forward” and even under Liberal governments we actually move forward. All the time.

    I know you will disagree with that but the glass is 80% full Craygee it is not 20% empty.

    On the other hand Bolt is wanting to move backwards (sorry Iain but thats what I think) but he is clearly losing that battle and thats why he craps on so much. And no it is not PP that makes him lose the battle it is the average Australian whether YOU or PP think they are capable of intelligent thought or not.

    I think PP, Jeremy you and the Greens should stop whinging and get with the program whether you vote Liberal or Labor it does not matter a lot in the scheme of things because above all else we are a progressive society with good people doing good things.

  42. Craigy says:

    Boy Socky, that is all a bit serious for a Bogan like yourself, perhaps you need a sock over your sock so you can argue the serious points you make.

    I think you need to keep it comical when you post as sock. My post is in the spirit of trying to get a laugh, that’s what you, Socky, are about (I think).

    As for your point that Aussies are intelligent and can see through Andrew so we don’t need Pure Poison…….well…….

    What I will say, in the spirit of fun, is that I have a very smart retired friend, who is also a conservative and he started reading the great columns Andrew writes not so long ago.

    It was great to hear him repeat to me Andrew’s well informed views on AGW word for word, it made me proud to be Australian to hear him rip into those bloody Abos’ just like Andrew does.

    No we don’t need Pure Poison, what with so many smart people (Iain included) absorbing and repeating his quality opinions, why give these old conservatives any stress by supporting a small blog that counters his factual well researched articles.

    And the ‘good people doing good things’? Well clearly countering one of the widest read opinion writers in the largest circulation daily newspaper is not done by good people, all the writers at PP are clearly whinging losers.

    Cheers Socky.

  43. Husky Jim says:

    No worries Craigy.
    Bad grammar is something, up with which I don’t intend to put.

  44. Husky Jim says:

    That should read – Bad grammar is something, I don’t up with which, intend to put.

  45. SockPuppet says:

    Craygee
    I do not always write in comic or parady mode. Just like you do not always write in serious mode (as you admit above). Sorry to be ‘out of character’ but I will just point out somethings here:

    * If you think people are so unintelligent that they cant see through Bolt then how does PP help them do that? They would have to find it first and then work out what they are saying. Pretty hard gig for dumb shits isnt it? I think PP only appeals to people who already agree with them that Bolts a dick.

    * Your friend was a conservative anyway so you are just proving my point that Bolt only influences those who agree with him like your friend and like Iain.

    * I am not saying we do not need small blogs criticising Bolt. I am saying that when a blog does pretty much nothing other than that it is pretty bloody pointless and boring. But they are welcome to do it.

    * I dunno how “countering one of the widest read opinion writers in the largest circulation daily newspaper” the way they try to do it does anything for anyone. Look at the comments – most people are staying away. Its not like The Drum where you will find variation and real robust debate and stuff.

    But I have to go now and take a Nurofen because you are confusing me with your paradys Craygee. Cheers mate.

  46. Craigy says:

    [Funny mode off]

    I guess you are trying to make the point Socky, that those with welded on views are not going to change those views…..Ever.

    I don’t think this is the case, I am happy to admit that I have moderated my views on a number of issues by reading blogs like Iain’s and others.

    Also, what happens with those leftists who read PP is that they get information to support their views, so they can have informed debate outside of the blog world.

    People do still talk face to face you know, and not everyone can do the research necessary to make a convincing argument that Bolt is wrong on so many issues.

    I am not saying that a blog is the best place to do your research, but they can give you a better understanding of the arguments by reading the points in comments.

    I agree that the commenter’s at PP are a small number, and often the same people, but that could well be said about Iain Hall and Iain claims good readership figures.

    You do have a bee in your bonnet when it comes to that site. I wonder why you seem so obsessed? Same goes for Iain.

    [Funny mode restored]

  47. SockPuppet says:

    [Nurofen not yet kicked in]

    Craygee I have been on Iains executive salary here for about 9 months and only in the past couple of days have I written about Pure Pwned so that is hardly “obsessed”. I just find it funny thats all. I know I didnt write about it ‘dunny funny mode’ but thats because something that is so bloody obviously funny sends itself up.

    So its a training ground for leftists huh? Okay I must have not have seen its educational value. Is it Tubbys graphs?

    [Nurofen kicked in now]

  48. Husky Jim says:

    Craigy
    I don’t agree.
    I think there is a lot of difference between moderating a view and changing one.

    One moderates one’s view when one hits another on the head with a hammer, but uses his left hand in order to make it fairer.
    One changes one’s view when one decides that the hammer is best left for the striking of nails and the way to deal with others is not to hit them at all with hammers or other objects.

    I’d like to know, if you don’t mind too much, what subject you moderated your view on, and what the nature of the moderation was?
    I’m willing to bet that it wasn’t soley due to the wisdom of bloggers or the loss of an argument.

  49. SockPuppet says:

    Husky Dog if you are hit on the head with a hammer do what I did and take a Nurofen. Craygee was starting to get to me before it kicked in. Now I am back to normal. Wow!

  50. Husky Jim says:

    Have you niticed that Lefty, who’s previously decried preference deals as undemocratic, is now defending them?

    Worth a thread of its own Iain.

  51. Ray Dixon says:

    Bob Brown isn’t defending them. And he has lost a lot of credibility over his denial of being involved in the deal. He shows no leadership.

  52. Husky Jim says:

    Agreed. Maybe Jeremy might put up and throw his hat into the ring.

  53. Craigy says:

    HJ, sorry mate but your semantics I hold to can’t…… (And grammar)

    Anyway, I CHANGE my views and MODERATE my views just about every day.

    I am not one who claims to know it all, and consider anyone who thinks they have stopped learning, and so understands how the world or peoples personal politics works, is deluded.

    I have learned over time that there are good and bad people everywhere, yes I was a partisan when I was younger but I am much less so these days.

    One example is in the way I vote, these days it is for the best candidate in my area and while I will vote Green in the senate, I may vote Liberal this time in the lower house as I think the candidate better than the ALP one. Our retiring member is Liberal Fran Bailey who has been a very good member in McEwen. I have not voted for her in the past, I have changed my view.

    This change of attitude has a lot to do with the arguments I have read at Jeremy’s, Iain’s and others over the past years.

    Many of the arguments on these blogs don’t have a winner or a loser. I try not to argue about things I have little knowledge of, not in the way of a partisan anyway, but I will ask questions of people and often the response is not what I expect. On some topics that I have some understanding of, I do take a side and argue hard, I don’t get as much from these arguments except a better understanding of the person I am arguing with.

    I have watched Iain moderate his attitude over the last few years, he has obviously learnt something good from his time on the net as he started out looking like a complete arsehole and is these days much more polite.

    I think the longer you spend in the on-line world most people seem to moderate or change their approach and opinions eventually. One of the great things about communicating with people is it make you see we are all just people, good and bad, regardless of the strong views some may hold.

    I have even gained some respect for you HJ, so there you go…..

    Socky, you do get yourself a bit hyped up from time to time if someone is disagreeing with you, don’t take it so personally man…..

    Your attacks on PP are over the top, the site is not that bad. Did Jeremy do something to upset you like call you names or does his online personality give you the shits?

    Either way, his arguments that you claim go over and over the same ground (homosexual marriage and Andrew Bolt) are best had on-line, on blogs, which are designed for this purpose. Your whinge seems like arguing against having water in the pool…..

    …Now just relax a bit……have a can of JD and put the V8’s on the telly…. soothe your troubled mind my friend…..

  54. Ray Dixon says:

    I may vote Liberal this time in the lower house as I think the candidate better than the ALP one

    You’re in McEwen, aren’t you Craigy? I actually heard the Liberal candidate for McEwen interviewed on ABC Local Radio this morning. I kid you not, this bloke couldn’t string two sentences together and didn’t seem to understand the issues. He was a nong. Eg:

    Q: “Tony Abbott’s been having a lot of trouble convincing us about his workchoices pledge, why do you think people don’t seem to believe him?”

    A: “I don’t know. They should. ”

    (long pause while interviewer waits for some elaboration, which is not forthcoming)

    Q: “Well do you think it will be a problem for you in your campaign?”

    A: “Um, no. I don’t think it will”

    (interviewer gives up and asks a soft question instead)

    Q: ” So how about the debate going up against master chef, what do you think of that?”

    A: “People should watch. It’s important.” (um, watch what?)

    You get the picture?

  55. Craigy says:

    Yes Ray that does look bad.

    He is a Policeman from Kinglake, and a hero during the fires. I wouldn’t vote for him on that basis and he wouldn’t lose my vote because he struggles to answer for Tony Abbott.

    As I said, I would have voted for Fran had she been running again and we will see how he goes.

    I will be watching the candidates very carefully (I am not impressed by the ALP guy who has run before) and will vote for the one with the best attitude to our local area and the issues we are currently trying to work through.

    As I think you would understand, the issues around the bushfire reconstruction are huge in our area.

    I am, at this stage, what you would call a swinging voter due to circumstance.

    I am also of the opinion that voting locally against the party leader is not the way our system is supposed to run. I think Tony Abbott is unelectable, but that doesn’t make all the Libs so.

  56. SockPuppet says:

    Craygee
    You are all over the place today again matey and giving me another headache. How do you manage to complicate simplicity so much?

    Socky, you do get yourself a bit hyped up from time to time if someone is disagreeing with you, don’t take it so personally man…..

    I am about as hyped up as your leader Bob Brown. You know, almost comatose. (But I am not a poof like him). And I do not take nothing personally because I am not a person I am a sock. I learned this trick of protection from some other types but I do it without being a creepy shit like they do.

    Your attacks on PP are over the top, the site is not that bad. Did Jeremy do something to upset you like call you names or does his online personality give you the shits?

    What, you think it is okay for some people to be critical of some people but not for some other people to be critical of the same some people in the first place? Huh? Anyway he has not called me names but I think he gives everyone the shits.

    Either way, his arguments that you claim go over and over the same ground (homosexual marriage and Andrew Bolt) are best had on-line, on blogs, which are designed for this purpose. Your whinge seems like arguing against having water in the pool…..

    He just whinges about people having pools. They should be his not theirs. How very dare they. (PS: He wants to marry a gay?)

    …Now just relax a bit……have a can of JD and put the V8’s on the telly…. soothe your troubled mind my friend…..

    Can I just have what your having?

  57. Craigy says:

    It’s called the elixir of life socky….and you’re welcome to some of it!

    You may be a sock, but I reckon you still have feelings Mr. Puppet.

    It may be you’re made out of very thin material and may even have a hole or two. Still, you could get a poof to sew them up for you, might make you a better sock!

    Sorry to give you a headache……try a blow job, I hear it is a good cure for a sore head…

  58. SockPuppet says:

    Your offer of a blow job is rejected. Besides I have Laura.

  59. Ray Dixon says:

    “I am also of the opinion that voting locally against the party leader is not the way our system is supposed to run. I think Tony Abbott is unelectable, but that doesn’t make all the Libs so.”

    I tend to think the system is about voting for the party you want to see in power, or at least voting against the party you do not want to see in power. By and large I think local members once elected switch their allegiance to the party and just go through the motions of representing their electorate.

  60. Craigy says:

    “By and large I think local members once elected switch their allegiance to the party and just go through the motions of representing their electorate.”

    This is the case with Ministers but not the case with all of the others.

    Fran Bailey, for example, was our local member for 18 years, and while the electorate moved to the left, she was able to hold on because she was strong on supporting locals, often over and above her work in Canberra.

    One good example was her intervention when the Kennett Government was trying to hand over the old quarantine station at Point Nepean to the developers. It wasn’t even her electorate but she intervened to keep the land available for the public to enjoy.

    I recently had a holiday (provided by Mornington Shire to Bushfire affected people) down there and was very happy it is still a public space.

    I think if more people voted on local issues, we might see a very different attitude from the parties and their leaders. This is how the system is supposed to work, not this stupid presidential type of election but a vote for your best local candidate. The system as it is has been brought into play more and more by the MSM and the big parties have been happy to go with the flow. Education at a high school level, which would help our democracy function as it should, is not encouraged.

  61. Craigy says:

    Socky, she looks like a doll. Why don’t you ask her for BJ, might fix your headache…

  62. Husky Jim says:

    Graigy
    Is deciding that you should have voted for the member that’s retiring all along when you never did actually changing your mind?
    It looks as though you’re regretting your past actions, but determining to continue to act that way. I’m not too sure that’s an example of changing your mind.
    To change your mind might for example be to have accepted the orthodoxy on an issue (like AGW) and to have done some reading and research and realised the orthodoxy was a sham or based on a sham and then to reject it. Or to MODERATE it and say that the orthodoxy was only partly able to explain the issue.

    I’m not seeing any examples of where you had a concrete view and changed that view.
    I do think you seem a pretty balanced commenter and I like the way you’ll admit being wrong, but in some cases I think it’s being convinced that your weakly held conviction or suspicion needs more thought. I think you’re more the sort of bloke that never commits to a view. That’s not a criticism and please don’t take it as one. It’s probably a better way to be than the alternative, but it makes claims that you’re changing your mind a bit dodgy because you’re actually never making it up in the first place.

    Just a thought.

  63. Ray Dixon says:

    Did Fran defy the general voting trends of the nation and/or State, Craigy? Not to my knowledge. I guess we look at Federal elections differently; I have never seen it as what my local member can do for me personally or even for my local area. I see it as a big-picture vote for the general direction & management of the nation. Parochialism and/or self-interest has its place but not when it comes to the serious matter of governing for the greater good in my opinion. I don’t look at my local member* as a micro-manager of the Indi electorate – there are heaps of other authorities & government agencies through which the smaller stuff can be addressed.

    (*I prefer not look at her at all, quite frankly!)

  64. Husky Jim says:

    What’s wrong with her? Sophie’s an attractive woman.

  65. Iain Hall says:

    She looks like she came from the same family tree as your own good self Ray so maybe that is the reason that you loathe her so much 🙂

  66. Husky Jim says:

    It would appear he rose from his seat (at her right hand) to take the pic Iain.

    Me thinks he doth protesteth rather too much.

    🙂

  67. Ray Dixon says:

    Thanks Iain, but I am not Greek.

    HJ, not true. Observe this 2nd photo. Also observe the guy sitting at the front. His mood sums up the mood of the entire audience. No, Sophie’s not singing:

  68. Husky Jim says:

    I’d say that that bloke just looks like he’s in Bright.

  69. Iain Hall says:

    Some times think that hating a politician has a sort of rolling snow ball effect that means that the longer you make the claim the less likely that you can even see the reason that you originally disliked them because it is so encased by your repeated instance that they are bad.

  70. Ray Dixon says:

    Iain: Pot … kettle.

    HJ: _ _ _ _ _ _ _

  71. Craigy says:

    I don’t disagree with you Ray, it’s not self interest though as I see it, if the person you vote for is both a good advocate for your area and a good performer in the Government. The two things aren’t mutually exclusive.

    In our circumstances, the good local member is more important than which party is in Government. I admit our area is a special case. One other point that I will keep in mind this election is the small difference between the parties at this point in time. I don’t think it makes much difference who wins.

    We also have a good state ALP member Danielle Green.

    HJ, I did type a response but for some reason it got lost….I’ll get back to you.

  72. Iain Hall says:

    Craigy
    The war is not an issue here and I very much doubt that it will be a vote changer or part of anyone’s calculus for deciding how they compare the economic credentials of either side of politics.
    But there is just no getting away from the fact that in its three years at the helm the ALP have performed far worse in terms of delivering its schemes on time and on budget.
    A good example is the total failure of the ALP promise to increase and improve he housing of our first Australians they have spent many many millions of dollars and ended up building fewer houses than I have fingers. That is a total disgrace. Their “medical super clinics” are just as impressive in their non existence the promised hundreds of the things and have built what is it? two of them ? The failure to deliver all of those Lap tops to high-school kids is another one, that is before we even get to the BER program and the Insulation rorts , the deaths of installers, The stupidity of the ETS and Rudd’s lack of courage to put it to the people. Its hardly surprising that Gillard is trying so hard to “move forward” from all of that but I reckon the voters have not forgotten…

  73. lynot says:

    “The war is not an issue here and I very much doubt that it will be a vote changer or part of anyone’s calculus for deciding how they compare the economic credentials of either side of politics.”

    I agree with you there Iain.After all the war has been a total success.They are slowly getting their infra structure back, people can actually at long last take a shit sitting on a second hand tomato crate.The locals can have a nice bath in one of the passing sewer outfalls, and they are getting all the plasters they need from the new and improved health services.

    Not to mention the fact that they only lose about sixty people a week now due to suicide bombers, but as you know these are just terrorists who want their country back.Yep your spot on Iain this is no way a vote changer, although it bloody well should be.

    They will no doubt have the same success in Afghanistan.But a topic for another time mayhaps??

  74. Craigy says:

    “A good example is the total failure of the ALP promise to increase and improve he housing of our first Australians they have spent many many millions of dollars and ended up building fewer houses than I have fingers.”

    Yes they have only built some houses (should have done a lot more to help with ownership in these communities) and that is positive.

    But if you want to point to failures, Howard’s intervention? Boy has that made a difference. I hear that violence amongst disadvantaged Australians has completely disappeared due to this great and not at all racist policy.

  75. Craigy says:

    Here it is HJ.

    Your attempt to work me out missed the mark in some of your comments.

    I guess I have changed some of my views slowly over time. The events of Feb 2009 help speed that along a bit, and in the case of Fran, it was her response to our situation that allowed me to see another side of her, given that I did like her already from the work she did at Point Nepean. It is a shame she is leaving.

    I guess what has changed is the way I choose who I will vote for in the lower house. I still strongly support the Greens and will vote for them to have the balance of power in the Senate, but believe the house of representatives should live up to its name and represent the local communities.

    I do have some very strong views and many things, so you are wrong there.

    If we take AGW for example, I have done some reading on it and come to the conclusion that the conspiracy theories fostered for political reasons are bullshit and I see no reason to doubt the science.

    Having said that, I am not a scientist and don’t have endless time to read on this, so some faith is involved. I think having faith in what has been shown time and again to be good science is not a silly way to live. I would not have admitted this before at this site because Iain would have been banging on about me joining the Green religion, you know, that gem of an Andrew Bolt talking point that Iain love so much. But there you have it, I have faith in science.

  76. Iain Hall says:

    Well thanks for finally admitting that yours is a faith position of AGW Craigy 😉

  77. Craigy says:

    Thanks for being on message Iain, Andrew thanks you as well.

  78. Husky_Jim says:

    Ditto Iain on AGW.
    How many of your very strong views are changed views? Very strong views don’t typically change nor do views that change become very strong ones.

    And I still have an issue with your view on Fran. Ok so getting to know about her made you change your thinking, but to what end if she’s out and you didn’t ever get to vote for her. What you should, if you don’t mind me suggesting, be changing is the way you assess your local politician. I doubt that Fran changed because there was a fire. The point is that it appears to me you never took the time, despite believing house of representatives should live up to its name and represent the local communities, to find out about who you were voting to keep out (FRAN) and then after the election, who was in fact representing you (FRAN). Maybe that’s something you need to change.

    I still don’t see any examples of really changing your mind and then acting as if you have.
    That’s not a criticism though. I would happily admit to having the same failing (if it is indeed a failing), but at least people know what I believe in and where I stand on issues.
    Stick to your guns if you believe in something. Remember nobody ever changed their mind as a result of losing an argument.

    Cheers

  79. Craigy says:

    Cheers HJ.

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: