The Dog's Tits
Sasha Castel

Tim Blair
Damian Penny
Gareth Parker
James Randi
Eject Eject Eject!!!
Bizzare Science

Premium core
The Last Decent Frog
Little Tiny Wit
Ranting Aaron
Silent Running
Catallaxy Files
Little Green Footballs
Daniel Pipes
Scott of The Eye
Sage Advice
White Rose

Girls, Girlz, Grrrlz
Hawk Girl
Jane Galt
Kathy Kinsley
Rachel Lucas
A Small Victory
Angie Schultz
Virginia Postrel

Beautifully Wicked
Bitchin' Monaro Guide
Drivel Warehouse
Little Tiny Lies
port Israel
Capitalist Chicks
Evil Godless Swine
Professor Bunyip
The Rottweiler
Right Wing News
Frozen Montreal
Mean Mr. Mustard

Le Québécois Libre
Hot Buttered Death
Vigilant TV
Juan Gato

Bleedin' Brain
Kim Du Toit

Aussies Up Your Arse
Angry Anderson
After Grog Blog
Ken Parish
Amax Weblog
John Quiggin

Dickheads Galore

Victor Zammit
Dick Neville
The Daily Saddam
George Monbiot
Jew Killers United
I Love Osama
The Guardian
Screeching Dweebs
Noam Chomsky
John Gotti Fanzine
Green Left Weekly
The Independent


Live Whacking Permalink Archive
click "Live Whacking" button for the latest entries

8 August 2003

One bullet for this scumbag

Joh Bjelke-Petersen - who presided over the most corrupt government in Australia's history - is suing the Queensland government for $300 million for 'pain and suffering' caused as a result of the crimes of his gangsters being brought to the public's attention. A great editorial in the Oz sums it up beautifully:

Perhaps Sir Joh was not a crook, but he was a friend of criminals – four of his ministers as well as his hand-picked police commissioner went to prison. Demanding payment now shows his hide is as thick as when he started. In 1959 he sold an oil search licence purchased for a nominal sum and made a huge profit after just five weeks. Two decades later he was accepting money – in brown paper bags – and a jury in a libel trial found he accepted bribes. And the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal ruled that businessman Alan Bond believed the then premier had subjected him to commercial blackmail. He barely escaped conviction for perjury when a jury, which had one of his political supporters as foreman, split on his guilt.

I just hope the current Queensland government can think of a creative way to send Sir Joh into financial ruin and misery. Him and his cunt wife.

Amrozi pleads for mercy

Well, well, well. It seems our brave little Asshole-For-Allah isn't as keen on martyrdom as he made out:

Convicted Bali bomber Amrozi bin Nurhasyim today instructed his lawyers to appeal against his death sentence.

Despite giving the Denpasar District Court the thumbs up when he was found guilty yesterday and sentenced to death for his part in the Bali blasts that killed 202 people, lawyer Wirawan Adnan said today Amrozi wanted to appeal.

Adnan said the defence team had visited Amrozi in jail today and he signed a document authorising them to appeal the conviction and sentence.

"He has signed and asked us to go ahead with the appeal," he said.

"I don't think any normal person would want to die."

I'm sure there's lots of readers at The Age willing to provide character references.

Life sucked in the good old days

Wind Rider asks an important question.

Reality distortion field

Niall is getting even more confused in his responses defending the ABC. He offers this howler:

If it's popular, it survives. If not, it dies. The exact same concept applies across the board, commercially or publicly funded, it makes no difference.


Niall then supports his argument by offering a link which shows SBS had a whopping 5.5% audience share. How impressive. That's means only 94.5% of the audience who are paying for SBS are not watching it. If 5.5% doesn't rate as "not popular", then Niall uses a different system of maths from the rest of us.

Here we have an entire network which is very unpopular, yet it has not died as Niall has promised. It has received taxpayer dollars despite these terrible ratings for over two decades. It is immune to the forces of the market. It doesn't have to perform or satisfy.

And the ABC plunged to a 16% share in 2001. They survived too.

I managed to find at first shot was a hell of a lot more conclusive than what Tex provided.....or didn't.

Yep, you showed links proving my point - almost noone watches it, yet it continues to get money. Guess you should have got your argument straight first eh?

Oh, by the way Tex, SBS is commercially as well as publicly funded. If you paid a little more attention to fact rather than grandstanding, you'd know these things.

Well, I'd figured that part out thanks to, you know, all those commercials it shows. And that still makes no difference: they are still using my money to broadcast a product I don't want.

Why do you think ratings are so important, Tex?

So commercial stations can attract advertising revenue through popular programs.

He agrees, then in the same breath, denies people who don't like the crap that he likes any kind of public broadcast information or entertainment.

No stupid, I said I don't want the government using my money to fund the network. If other people want to subscribe to it, good luck to them.

Because Tex dislikes having to pay for the public broadcaster through taxation, just like everyone else, he denies everyone their inalienable right to benefit for their taxation through this medium. Now that's egalitarian of you, Tex.

Their "inalienable right" to use my money for a service they want? These are the sort of "rights" that are popular in North Korea. The only "inalienable right" of the ABC viewer is to use their money to pay for it if they want.

Oh, yes.....another strawman here too. I didn't say murpack et al were brainless......I said they were aimed at the brainless.

Duh. That's what I getting at you klutz. The leftie elitist attitude that popular shows are there to amuse the stupid masses. Because when it comes down to it, lefties don't like popular opinion. The Great Unwashed tend to vote for the wrong politicians, watch the wrong TV shows, go to the wrong movies and basically don't know what's good for them. Rather than respecting people's choices and rights to choose, Niall - the big baby - calls them all "brainless".

- Again, just so long as your kind didn't continue with the bleating because you didn't have access to something the rest of us did. Likelihood? Absotively, posilutely, completely fucking zero.

Except you're wrong already. I don't have access to quite a few of Foxtel's channels. Go find me a place where I complained about that.

(...sound of crickets....)

It's because I couldn't care less that I don't have access to them, because I have chosen not to pay for them thanks to my total lack of interest in them. If I wanted them, I wouldn't complain that I didn't have it, or start whining about my ""inalienable right" to have other people buy a subscription for me. I'd just go ahead, find the money and subscribe to it.

Simple, no?

I can't stand blue heelers, or Neighbours, but I don't complain much about these, because noone is forcing me to pay for it.

This is, after all, my point that Niall has completely failed to address: that there is no justification for anyone to use my money to fund the ABC.

Freedom of choice, the will of the market, paying your way. Such simple concepts, yet they so confuse and frighten the ideologically righteous ones.


MC News
AMA Superbikes
Motorcycle News
Perth Bikes
Oz Trikes
World Superbikes

Holly Valance
Eliza Dushku
Katherine Heigl
Michelle Williams
Kate Winslet
Kristin Kreuk

Dark Horizons
Roger Ebert

FrontPage Mag
The Smoking Gun
Straight Dope
Against Nature
Australian Skeptics
Shooters Party
Currency Converter

Assorted Gubshite
Draggin Jeans
Really Cute Chess Geek
Pure rancour
Brunching Shuttlecocks
The Onion
Omega Chess

Coopers Ale

Hahn Ice
Crown Lager
Carlton Draught
Tooheys New
James Squire

Barrett Rifles
Smith & Wesson
Ruger Firearms

Support Brave Multinationals!!!