September 30, 2012 | Graham

The Left does outrage so well

I’m wondering if Bob Carr intends to follow Alan Jones in apologising to Julia Gillard for capitalising for political purposes on her loss of her father, because you’d have to put him and Alan Jones in a similar boat.

Certainly the last person who ought to be apologising for anything is Tony Abbott.

A week ago Jones let off steam in a speech to a student club function which he thought was off the record. He claimed that Julia Gillard’s father had “died of shame”.

This is pretty poor form, but surely a problem for Jones and maybe the organisers of the function, but no-one else.

Jones speech only became public yesterday, but today Bob Carr tried to hook Tony Abbott into it.

“Tony Abbott ought to do the decent thing and say today loud and clear that he apologises to Julia Gillard for unacceptable remarks, made at a Liberal party gathering attended by frontbench liberals.

“Tony Abbott ought to send a message that the extremists at that gathering who cheered and applauded and laughed at that appalling utterance, Tony Abbott ought to make it clear that those people are denounced by him as well.”

Just like Jones, Carr is trying to trade off the prime minister’s loss. Unlike Jones, he casts himself as her defender, but that’s where the difference ends because they both use the death of her father for political purposes.

Further, while Jones’ comments were off the cuff and as the transcript shows, a little jumbled, and designed to be broadcast to around 100; Carr’s are premeditated and designed to be broadcast to the nation.

There is no reason for Abbott to apologise. What’s more, if he does apologise for one utterance of Alan Jones, then every other utterance of Jones becomes his problem for ever.

Abbott didn’t put Jones up to this, and despite Carr’s claims, this didn’t even occur at a Liberal Party function (Student Clubs are not part of any political party), so the Liberal party in general has no connection to it at all. The comments also appear to have gone down poorly at the function, a repudiation in themselves.

What we are seeing from Carr is a demonstration of one of the ways Labor has failed around Australia, including in New South Wales under his leadership. Bullying, politicking and harassment are practised to the exclusion of good government. He’s in New York at the moment, supposedly looking after the national interest. It’s not his job to moonlight as a Labor hatchetman at the same time he’s supposed to be being a statesman.

Carr knows Abbott doesn’t share any blame in this, but he can’t resist the temptation to try to implicate him because it suits the script that the ALP has been writing: that you can’t vote for Tony Abbott because he is a misogynistic, homophobic, extremist religious fundamentalist who is a physically intimidating, socially unacceptable caveman.

When you’ve got a government running that sort of abuse as its main re-election strategy it’s no wonder that verbal violence is breaking out all over the place.

Time to take all the trolls out of politics.


Posted by Graham at 3:12 pm | Comments (42) |
Filed under: Uncategorized


  1. Well done Graham. You nailed it.
    Bigpond/Sky News are having a field day pretending to be outraged by his very silly comments. The Sunday Mail could not give any prominence to a decent Riverfire photo because of front page outrage with a “guns in schools” beatup and gloating about their ‘gotcha’ with Alan Jones.

    Comment by Phil Young — September 30, 2012 @ 5:44 pm

  2. Agreed.If Labor continue to try amd implicate Tony Abbott as endorsing Jones’ remarks,then they are using Julie Gillard’s dead father as a political tool and are guilty of the same offence.

    We only have to look at the delight in the Labor camp at the stupid remarks by Jones to realise how desperate they.As Graham Richardson said a long time
    ago ,”Whatever it takes.”

    Comment by Ross — October 1, 2012 @ 6:14 am

  3. Rubbish. This one is fair and square in the Libs lap. They have quietly embraced Jones because he attacks Gillard with a venom they would like to but can’t. The old buffoon predictably crosses the line and they (and their apologists in here) run for cover and pathetically try to turn in 180. Jones is a dinosaur and it seems the Lib Machine through its Young Lib Academy is Jurassic Park

    Comment by Macpie — October 1, 2012 @ 8:54 am

  4. Oh yes, Graham? I feel quite sure that if the position was reversed and it was a Liberal stalwart that made such disparaging and ignorant remarks – you would be on of the first to be crying foul and expecting the Labor Leader to condemn them in the strongest terms, as well as calling for the perpetrator’s scalp.

    Macpie has it right – your argument is complete rubbish – an entire misrepresentation of the facts. These remarks were made at a Liberal *political* function attended by Liberal Shadow Ministers and senior Liberal supporters. It was personal abuse made to encourage the sort of negative slanging which appears to be the only ‘contribution’ that Tony Abbott is capable of making to the political debate.

    Oh, I’m sure that you’ll convince some people, just as the megalomaniac Campbell Newman managed to do to achieve election of himself and dismissal of the best premier in Australia at the time and the only one to have made a competent job of dealing with natural disaster on a massive scale and with genuine respect and compassion for its victims.

    That Alan Jones has an Order of Australia is just another example of how appallingly distorted is the general understanding of what constitutes worth in our society.

    Tony Abbott is moronic in his continual negativity and misplaced arrogance. Should he ever become Prime Minister of this country it will be an appallingly sad day for all Australians except the exceedingly rich and well heeled, the bigots, and the unfeeling, uncaring and discriminatory kind that were epitomised by John Howard’s parsimonious arrogance unequalled since Menzies and Petersen.

    Bob Carr’s comments are not political point scoring – Alan Jones hasn’t even apologised – his supposed back-down was a complete sham – just as couldn’t John Howard, neither could he bring himself to say ‘sorry’. Why? Because he isn’t. The sooner this country is rid of right wing, self-serving, intellectually deficient morons, the sooner we’ll have a place which values equity, equality, fairness and consideration for all. The sooner this country will be able to achieve the greatness it deserves and could enjoy.

    Comment by Roger Hawcroft — October 1, 2012 @ 12:02 pm

  5. Roger, you do even-handed and even-tempered so beautifully. I guess you need binary vision to spot hypocrisy, particularly when it’s one’s own?

    Comment by Graham — October 1, 2012 @ 12:24 pm

  6. The saddest part of the whole of this is that we are busy saying to the Muslim world “Free speech means everything to us. It is much more important than religions” Now it appears we cannot take silly inapropriate remarks from a highly prejudiced old man and ignore them as they should have been. If the Labour party had not jumped with glee at the opportunity to score nothing more would have been heard at all.

    Comment by Dickybird — October 1, 2012 @ 1:27 pm

  7. Graham (@5). Time to give up. Stop digging. You tried to defent the indefensible, which was Jones’s repeated appallingly bad manners and social ineptitude, followed by his highly conditional offer of a non-apology.

    The simple story here is that AJ has lost his marbles and deserves to be disciplined. His offense is of the worst conceivable kind, short of actual physical violence, which he both advocates and condones. It was premeditated, vitriolic, repeated and is escalating in its severity.

    Bob Carr was guilty of none of these faults. To pretend that there is some sort of equivalence in the behaviour of Carr and Jones is just a hollow ploy, a sham and an attempted fraud.

    Stop wasting your time and that of your readers.

    Comment by JohnB — October 1, 2012 @ 2:03 pm

  8. Graham, I can see your point, however only agree up to a point. And I find it hard to disagree with Macpie. If the shoe was on the other foot, Abbott et al would be milking the politcal point scoring opportunity for all it’s worth – it’s what they do for goodness sake. In the interests of good taste and human decency, anyone who gives the likes of Jones the time of day and associates with him, is making their own statement about their own judgement and boundaries (or lack thereof). And in spite of all of this, there’s still no denying one can’t vote for Tony Abbott because he really is a misogynistic, homophobic, extremist religious fundamentalist.

    Comment by Roxanne — October 1, 2012 @ 2:38 pm

  9. […] Young of the Online Opinion blog ‘Ambit Gambit’ contributed this post yesterday to argue that Tony Abbott should not have to apologise for Jones’s remarks because: […]

    Pingback by Alan and his mate Tony « Victoria Rollison — October 1, 2012 @ 3:47 pm

  10. To summarise: former Liberal Party campaign manager tries vainly to defend the utterly indefensible, disgracefully insensitive, bigoted and shocking remarks about the Australian prime minister from a major Liberal Party cheerleader speaking at a Liberal function attended by Liberal Party MPs — by attacking “the left”.

    Or, to summarise even more succintly: spurious and pathetic.

    Comment by David Donovan — October 1, 2012 @ 4:51 pm

  11. David, given you posted this crap on your blog this morning I don’t think you’re in a position to comment on what is “indefensible, disgracefully insensitive, bigoted and shocking”

    Those are concepts you have a demonstrated inability to understand.

    Comment by Graham — October 1, 2012 @ 5:44 pm

  12. Jones was speaking to a small audience, and fell into the trap of believing humour was permissible.

    Understandable, because he is of an age which enables him to remember humour, before it was destroyed by the scourge of political correctness.

    We all know that the PM’s father was a lefty trade unionist, and proud of his psychotic, power crazed liar of a daughter, so Jones’ ironic remark was good for a laugh.

    His troubles arose when the humourless left accessed his talk.

    Comment by Leo Lane — October 1, 2012 @ 5:53 pm

  13. I think Julia Gillard has more to answer for than Allan Jones.

    When Julia Gillard was working for Slater and Gordon some 17 yrs ago she set up an Incorporated Assocoiation with her then boy friend Bruce Wilson.

    [Paragraphs deleted for defamation.]
    Michael Smith for his investigation into this affair was sacked from 2UE and Glen Milne was also silenced when he asked the really hard questions.

    Do you really think we have freedom of the press or thought when such a scenario is revealled?

    Comment by Ross — October 1, 2012 @ 7:14 pm

  14. Graham, By all means stick to your myopic and undiscerning biases. There is no excuse for that arrogance and obscenity that typifies Alan Jones. That he has a much greater opportunity than most to influence others because of his inordinate access to the media, accentuates beyond the pale his misuse of his position.

    There is nothing hypocritical about my standpoint. I am very much opposed to censorship and accept that public figures have to accept that they will be subject to attack and criticism. However, there is great difference between genuine political difference and under-hand, mean spirited invective such as Alan Jones spouts repeatedly.

    Freedom cannot exist without responsibility – the greater the freedom the greater the responsibility. Alan Jones and those of his ilk need censuring for they exercise no responsibility.

    We need the exercise of intellect if we are to improve society – Alan Jones and his liberal sycophants exhibit none.

    Comment by Roger Hawcroft — October 1, 2012 @ 7:18 pm

  15. Oh Leo & Ross, how your ignorance and prejudice shines. Humour! Don’t make me laugh. Humour doesn’t excuse prejudice and abuse and it is particularly low to demean someone who can no longer speak back – John Gillard. You should be ashamed of yourself.

    As for the innuendo ridden and unsubstantiated allegations about Julia Gillard which were examined and discredited nearly two decades ago – a somewhat disingenuous attack, I think.

    The pair of you should engage your brains and develop some intellect before you speak out, else you continue to look as foolish in public as does Alan Jones appear despicable.

    Comment by Roger Hawcroft — October 1, 2012 @ 8:33 pm

  16. Roger Hawcroft you fail to deiscern between ignorance and good journalism.Julia Gillard has not addressed any of the realities that connect her will the theft of monies from the AWU.She and the Labor Party have used their media regulations to silence the truth.

    This is more concerning than the lie,”There will be no carbon tax under the Govt I lead.”

    Comment by Ross — October 1, 2012 @ 9:00 pm

  17. Ross, your account of Gillard’s involvement in Wilson’s criminality is factually incorrect and defamatory. I’ve deleted it. I’ve warned you before for this sort of posting.

    Roger, the allegations against Gillard have never been examined and discredited, and from what I’ve seen of the facts I believe that she was involved in criminality. The facts ought to be examined properly either in court or via a Royal Commission.

    Comment by Graham — October 1, 2012 @ 9:02 pm

  18. Graham, you calling the writing of Australian journalistic royalty, Tess Lawrence – whom you’ve published yourself – crap, shows how lacking your judgement is in this matter. When you are in a hole, you should stop digging. Frankly, you are embarrassing yourself.

    Comment by David Donovan — October 1, 2012 @ 9:04 pm

  19. I’d encourage everyone to go and read it to see what sort of rubbish you publish. Tess offered that to me this morning for republication and I turned it down. Yes, occasionally she gets it right, and when she does I’m open to her work, but I exercise considered discretion as a publisher and most of it doesn’t get through.

    Comment by Graham — October 1, 2012 @ 9:21 pm

  20. Lots of people are reading the “rubbish we publish” Graham – more and more all the time.

    Comment by David Donovan — October 1, 2012 @ 9:30 pm

  21. […] of the Liberal Party, Graham Young, on the Online Opinion blog ‘Ambit Gambit’, contributed a post on Saturday to argue that Tony Abbott should not have to apologise for Jones’s remarks because: […]

    Pingback by Alan Jones and his mate Tony | Independent Australia — October 2, 2012 @ 12:01 am

  22. […] of the Liberal Party, Graham Young, on the Online Opinion blog ‘Ambit Gambit’, contributed a post on Saturday to argue that Tony Abbott should not have to apologise for Jones’s remarks because: […]

    Pingback by Alan Jones and his mate Tony | OccuWorld — October 2, 2012 @ 1:43 am

  23. “He claimed that Julia Gillard’s father had ‘died of shame’. This is pretty poor form, but surely a problem for Jones and maybe the organisers of the function, but no-one else.”

    Tony Abbott’s close friend and supporter Alan Jones offers yet another in a long line of scurrilous remarks about Julia Gillard’s truthfulness completely in line with many, many previous statements made by Abbott himself. Abbott offers a belated, half-haerted, mealy mouthed condemnation of Jones’ comments but has nothing to apologize for personally. Really?

    “Abbott didn’t put Jones up to this, and … the Liberal party in general has no connection to it at all.”

    Oh really? Abbbott Pyne Bishop etc, forgetting Liberal difficulties with core and non core promises and distinctions between what is written down and what is merely said, have been screaming that Gillard is a liar for many months.

    A clutch of Liberal backbenchers present at this inglorious event either supported Jones’ comments or didn’t have the courage to register their disapproval on the occasion. Following their leader, they have belatedly issued their own mealy mouthed, half hearted rejections of Jones’ comments.

    A former staffer for Brendan Nelson who is himself a failed Liberal candidate supplied the chaff bag that was auctioned. But the Liberal Party has nothing to do with Jones’ comments? Don’t be ridiculous.

    Comment by Doug Evans — October 2, 2012 @ 12:12 pm

  24. Pretty long bow Doug.

    So Abbott is personally responsible for every utterance by every person who likes him, or has had any connection at all with the Liberal Party?

    I’m actually waiting to hear Julia Gillard apologise herself for calling Abbott “Jack the Ripper”, that meets the old-fashioned test for personal responsibility.

    But on your new revised test where it is now apparently the party leader’s responsibility for everything everyone else, no matter how tenuously connected with his or her party says, she will also no doubt apologise for Mark Dreyfus comparing Abbott to a Nazi war criminal, and for Bob Carr and Nicola Roxon for intimidation of a witness and claimant in the Slipper sexual harassment case, and Bob Ellis for his insults about her coming home from Russia early for her father’s funeral, and Mungo MacCallum for calling Howard unflushable “shit”, and Wayne Swan for insulting just about everyone, and Chris Bowen because his wife does tweets suggesting Jones should die.

    And the list goes on.

    When all of this happens I’ll take you seriously Doug.

    Comment by Graham — October 2, 2012 @ 12:33 pm

  25. I pretty much disagree with everything you say here Graham! But will defend to the death your right to say it.
    Very rarely do I think Guys like Alan Jones, add anything of real value to the political debate.
    However, he has a right to defend an entirely indefendable, extraordinarily hostile and thoroughly indefensible comment, which simply follows an endlessly episodic, unwarranted, highly implausible public ranting, and patently partisan promulgation of puerile pernicious opinion pieces, merely masquerading as public interest subject matter.
    So, she changed her mind to suit unexpected circumstance created, I believe, by self serving traitors in her own party?
    So what?
    It certainly does not now or ever, give Jones the right to publicly label her a liar? Or its very juvenile equivalent, Ju’liar.
    Yes other public figure have clearly crossed a line, that should prevent most of the so-called educated from crossing it, and should all be called to account for clearly offensive indefensible abuse.
    We have long had the most un-redeeming language of the gutter, and people whose average IQ’s not much higher than ambient temperature, inclined to its use, given they knew/know no better.
    It is time all this sand pit bully boy behaviour was buried where it belongs, in the pages of history.
    Public figures can and do say what they like; it’s after all, a democracy!
    But, a public meeting is hardly a place to air one most private inner hostilities.
    Sure its fine to have a political opinion or position. But, do we have to take this second rate theatre quite so seriously or personally.
    After all one can insult a person with perfectly polite language and even turn them into an abject object of derogatory humour.
    One remembers Prime Minister Menzies, who was often able to reduce an opponent to a quivering mass of speechless flapping mouth fury, just with the power of his oratory and decidedly quick wit.
    One can always tell a Victorian, but one can’t tell them very much.
    One thinks of Alan Jones these days as seemingly demented clown, who now regularly opens his mouth, just to change socks, rather than the more moderate language, of seasoned veteran he previously presented?
    I believe everyone needs to lift their game on both sides of the so-called political divide, and their often overdone abuse!
    Alan Jones may now say he feels like a perfect fool after this episode? But hey, nobody’s perfect!
    Alan B, Goulding.

    Comment by Alan B. Goulding — October 2, 2012 @ 1:51 pm

  26. Let’s face it – and I admit I’m as guilty as the rest of you for engaging with it – this story isn’t worth this much effort.

    Graham, you either know that your piece is specious hyperbole or you need a great deal of education.

    Alan Jones and his ilk are not called ‘shock jocks’ for nothing. They play to that proportion of the public who are predominantly the uneducated, ignorant or prejudiced.

    Tony Abbott has done nothing positive since taking over the Liberal Party leadership. All of which he seems capable is to throw rocks and complain and like most of the rest of his party seems incapable of considering the welfare of people, the environment or the future. If the Liberal Party wants to stand for anything worthwhile then Malcolm Turnbull is it’s only hope.

    A lie is a conscious tactic aimed at misdirection, it is not, as you say – a change of mind for good reason. Both major parties have indulged in both sorts of tactics. We would never, ever, have a GST under John Howard, for instance.

    The insipid and weak excuses made by apologists for Alan Jones are worthless. No decent person would conduct nor endorse such a scurrilous attack and denigration of a dead father who can’t answer back and of a grieving daughter within a couple of weeks of her father’s death. Apart from having absolutely no evidence that John did die of ‘shame’ – to use such an attack for political points scoring is scraping the bottom of the waste cart.

    None of you apologists for Alan Jones have a credible and rational base to support your relatively moronic defence of he indefensible.

    Let’s just put this to bed and accept that prejudiced and irrational bigots will be prejudiced and irrational bigots. That hyperbole exists precisely because most of those with the biggest mouths have the smallest brains.

    It’s plain and simple, Graham – you and your supporters, Alan Jones and his, and Tony Abbott and his are guilty of the worst sort of hypocrisy and an exhibition of deficient intellect – or at least, irrational use of it, such as I’ve rarely witnessed.

    I hope you can live with yourselves but I doubt that any of you can sleep straight in bed at night – unless you are as completely deluded as was John Howard and as is Campbell Newman.

    Comment by Roger Hawcroft — October 2, 2012 @ 5:55 pm

  27. Thank God Alan Jones was not a Muslim or a Lebanese. Imagine the national outcry, protest marches and violence on the streets of our country. Bob Carr is trying to milk it for all its worth; sick!. Abbott is fearful of muttering anything that may offend Jones. Gillard is not my preferred choice of PM, either. But what Jones said at a public function is utterly indefensible. The only decent politician is M Turnbull.

    Free speech is not there to offend and defame others. There is such a thing as decency and proper public debate. We are fast becoming a nation of bigots and extremists of all sorts. Who cares about the fact that crime and violence are on the rise; vandalism and wilful destruction of both private and public property have increased; unemployment & cost of living are on the rise. We are not safe to walk down our streets; parks and nature strips every where are spewed with dog pooh.
    The decline in safety, decency and proper, responsible behaviour are not for lack of rules and regulations. What is sadly absent in this land is enforcement. And Graham is defending the indefensible. Shame on you, man!!

    Comment by Jolly — October 2, 2012 @ 6:36 pm

  28. Well Roger, Alan and Jolly a couple of things you seem not to have noticed, whilst describing others as “moronic”, “bigotted” etc. One is that I wasn’t defending Jones. Two is that as you don’t appear interested in distancing yourselves from the abusive comments made by members and supporters of the government, then on your own logic you must be presumed to support them!

    Comment by Graham — October 2, 2012 @ 6:47 pm

  29. Graham – it’s sad but you still don’t get it, do you?

    As for you not defending Jones – you could have fooled me – if you didn’t intend your piece as a defence then you really have problems with language, mate. As for ‘abusive comments made by members and supporters of the government’ – that’s one of the most disingenuous red-herrings I’ve ever come across.

    Come on, mate – if you’re going to publish this sort of thing, at least be honest enough to admit when you’ve got it wrong or made a mistake, or can you not do so because you actually set out to write a biased piece of misleading propaganda?

    Comment by Roger Hawcroft — October 2, 2012 @ 7:19 pm

  30. So tell me about Roger Hawcroft. What drives him to go around the Internet misrepresenting what other people have written? I’m assuming that you did read the piece? Yours is exactly the sort of behaviour I’m putting my finger on. It makes the Internet a very uncivil place.

    Comment by Graham — October 2, 2012 @ 9:26 pm

  31. I understood this board to be about ‘Opinions on politics and social policy from across the board’. Is commenting on your posting then: ‘(going) around the Internet misrepresenting what other people have written?’

    First of all: I haven’t misrepresented anything that anyone has written. In the case of the article on which I’ve been commenting – your very title gives the game away ‘The Left does outrage so well’, and as subtly as you may think you have done it, the content supports the bias implied by the title. ‘As for, ‘I’m assuming that you did read the piece?’ – do we really have to descend into personal abuse? I’ve actually found the open-ness of this discussion refreshing – in spite of disagreeing with much of what initiated it and many of the comments made.

    Ending a sentence with a preposition is, despite the opinion of Winston Churchill and some modern academics, a misuse of our language and sloppy at best, however I am interested to know why you choose to attack my expressing my particular views on this topic as the sort of behaviour on which you are placing your finger. I suspect it is because I won’t be bullied into silence.

    I don’t make the Internet an uncivil place, Graham, nor do I make the World so. It is interesting that you end you last post there, however, for it seems to me that ‘civility’ is very much at the heart of what prompted this topic and the lack of it very much that which I have argued against.

    Comment by Roger Hawcroft — October 3, 2012 @ 6:07 am

  32. If you were genuine and civil Roger you would accept that I don’t believe Jones’ behaviour is acceptable, as I have quite plainly written. You would also accept that I don’t believe that Carr’s is acceptable either, nor that of the others that I cite.

    You impute bad faith to me when there is evidence of none.

    I am a life long observer of politics whose honesty is so unquestioned that I was expelled from the Liberal Party because my analysis in The Australian, The Courier Mail, the ABC and On Line Opinion was just too uncompromising.

    I’ve also dedicated a fair slab of my life to publishing On Line Opinion which publishes a wide range of opinions and tries to foster a civil debate.

    Over the last ten or so years I have watched the ALP developing an abusive style of politics where personal insult and innuendo and confected outrage overwhelms any genuine political discussion. Some on the other side of politics have responded in kind.

    Jones deserves a fair bit of what he is getting, but Abbott deserves none of it. Bob Carr is one of the architects of this style of politics. If you want the Internet to be a civil place, then behave civilly.

    Comment by Graham — October 3, 2012 @ 6:38 am

  33. This would be a more accurate summary of the situation, vis-a-vis your last two paragraphs:

    “Over the last ten or so years I have watched the development of an abusive style of politics where personal insult and innuendo and confected outrage overwhelms any genuine political discussion. This style is epitomised in the negative rantings of the Leader of the Opposition, Tony Abbott.

    Jones deserves most of what he is getting, though those that sink to his level in response to his attack on Julia Gillard defeat their own argument. Abbott has shown a failing of leadership in not speaking strongly against Jones’s remarks and the support of such a bigot by members of his own front bench who were even present at the event and engaged with it.”

    I notice that, as do others who have no real evidence or credence, you ignore the refutation I have made to your criticisms of me and my opinion. Evidently, for others to express opinion, regardless of the truth or evidence for it, is only alright when it supports your own.

    I am not uncivil to anyone, Graham – on the contrary I try to inject objectivity and fact into any discussion into which I enter. In contrast to Alan Jones and John Howard, nor am I afraid to say: “sorry.”

    So, in as much as you feel I may have offended you or denigrated you then you have my unreserved apology – I am sorry.

    However, I don’t believe that I warrant the attacks you have made on me nor that I have attacked you in a personal way – simply that I have argued against your view, which I believe to be flawed.

    So, I will bow it and let you have the last word. You win, I will go quietly now. Thank you, at any rate, for not being so unsettled by contrary opinion as to censor it, in the way that so many others would do.

    The floor is yours – abuse away – have your last word – I hope it makes you feel good.

    Comment by Roger Hawcroft — October 3, 2012 @ 7:36 am

  34. The abuse is yours entirely Roger. You misrepresent what I say, and as you are a librarian I assume you can read accurately, then claim to be on the side of the angels.

    I suspect, reading what you have written, that the only problem with what I have written from your point of view is that it does not accord with your personal bias.

    Comment by Graham — October 3, 2012 @ 8:08 am

  35. Graham, I have sat outside this discussion thread for the past day or two and have observed you making an utter fool of yourself.

    My advice to you is to follow the age old advice about a cup of tea, a Bex and a good lie down.

    When your blood pressure returns to normal, you may be able to read anew the contributions which others have submiotted with good grace and objectivity, only to be slagged by your own return comments, which are degenerating progressively.

    One thing worth remembering is that, in order to persuade, one first needs an audience.

    You have lost yours.

    Comment by JohnB — October 3, 2012 @ 10:10 am

  36. Roger & Graham stop this silly school yard bickering. Come on boys behave yourselves failing which Saturday detention is the only solution.

    Jones is a red-neck, period. His lack of judgement or grace is glaringly obvious. He is genuinely filled with rage and anger, poor chap. I feel sorry for him and his own internal turmoil that is often manifested in his hatred of fellow humans.

    Comment by Jolly — October 3, 2012 @ 11:38 am

  37. Can’t say I support the govt per se. But as a fair minded man I’m prepared to give credit where it is due, and thank the govt, serendipity and current policies for the present state of our economy. Albeit, it could be a lot better!
    I rarely if ever agree, with the so-called reforms of either party.
    I still hate Howard’s GST, really revenue surety, merely masquerading as genuine reform?
    As a former business man, who long since learned to think outside the box, I see a better more pragmatic way FORWARD, with ACTION! [And pardon the all too obvious pun?]
    However, as a small L liberal, standing in the moderate middle, I find that both of the major parties now stand to my right, with so called liberals far too far to the right. Is there anybody out there?
    Menzies would surely turn in his grave?
    Alan Jones has, I believe, quite a history of overstatement, intemperate improper inflammatory language, and was recently called to account, before a tribunal for quite blatant Islamiphobia.
    Even so, I respect his right to form and express an opinion. He can and has been quite a convincing and passionate public speaker, especially when campaigning for a common cause, with his own time?
    That said, I share Malcolm’s Turnbull’s more temperate evocation, that Alan was out of order?
    But, having said my piece, see no reason to join the shouting match or the rat bag brigade. It’s done and dusted.
    One of my favourite radio jocks, was a long deceased Melbourne Breakfast Announcer.
    I like many others, who grew up in very poor circumstances, and had walked that mile in others’ shoes, regularly rang to voice a dissenting opinion.
    To which my friend invariably replied, we can always agree to disagree agreeably.
    A true gentleman of the airways and one Alan Jones would do well to emulate, instead of resorting to the rabble rousing, one expects from the other side, or the gutter.
    We who live in life boat Australia, come from all walks and nations, and do need to learn to row together.
    Our future, peace and prosperity demands and depends on it!
    Really do appreciate the opportunity to voice an opinion Graham! Just because I do and can disagree on occasions, doesn’t also mean I dislike.
    I am and remain an ardent admirer of all things OLO.
    Cheers mate, Alan B. Goulding.

    Comment by Alan B. Goulding — October 3, 2012 @ 12:46 pm

  38. Jolly, I’m not bickering with anyone. Graham’s argument is specious and has no validity. All he has done is degenerate into personal abuse of me. Having checked out much more of his offerings I now realise that I made a mistake in thinking that this was a forum for exchange of rational and open opinion and robust discussion. It’s actually just a sop to Graham’s immense ego and self-righteous personal adoration and a place for him to publish outrageous, usually false, and always prejudiced right wing assessments of various issues.

    How anyone can admire all things OLO as does AB, is beyond me given the rabid attacks on me by Graham and the appallingly low intellectual content of the site. I’m sure that you’ll be happy to know it won’t be seeing me again – enjoy your predudice, Graham – but know that against any rational and rigorous criteria it is nothing more than drivel.

    Comment by Roger Hawcroft — October 5, 2012 @ 10:55 pm

  39. It is inconceivable to Roger that his outlook is other than from the centre, which make his contributions counterproductive.

    On the positive side, he has given us a great example of the left doing baseless outrage so well

    Jones failed to use a form of abuse approved by the left. He could have called her an “unflushable turd”.

    None of Roger’s side objected when this term was applied to good PM, so it would be inconsistent to object to its application to the current incumbent.

    Roger agrees that humour is dead, but Alan stirs our nostalgia for the days when it was alive and well, before the scourge of political correctness.

    Comment by Leo Lane — October 6, 2012 @ 9:24 am

  40. I wouldn’t worry about Roger Leo. His last post is surely an avant garde absurdist piece in the genre of Dame Edna or Les Patterson: not meant to be taken seriously, and to be gently ironic and mocking of the person into whose mouth the words are put.

    Comment by Graham — October 6, 2012 @ 11:28 am

  41. just a sort omment, no raving, sorry.
    Now that Williamson has been charged (HSU) when will we see Craig Thomson charged also, given that the police already have the goods on him as well.
    If he is not we will all know that this government is perverting the role of justice.

    Comment by pipi16beau — October 8, 2012 @ 11:17 pm

  42. Graham, do you know that you are a supercilious and arrogant commentator? You are so far up your own anus you wouldn’t know truth if it bit you on the head.

    Comment by Roger Hawcroft — October 11, 2012 @ 10:29 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.