Andrew Bolt: more than just the village idiot

Andrew Bolt

I’ve never seen Andrew Bolt as anything but a village idiot. The label, first applied by Mike Carlton a couple of years ago has stuck with me. It fits Bolt, just nicely.

I wonder at times if Bolt really takes himself seriously. If he does, then what parallel universe does he dwell in?

I’m yet to meet a person who likes him, let alone harbour an ounce of respect. Indeed, he has a history of inciting hate, much of which comes back at him. But as his employer keeps reminding us, Bolt is one of the country’s most influential media identities. It bothers me though, that they keep this idiot on the loose.

The man is also a hypocrite, engaging in the same behaviors he condemns others for. His idiocy must prevent him from recognising his own hypocrisy, and unfortunately in remains unchecked. Both his idiocy and hypocrisy have reached ‘red alert’.

Yesterday Andrew wrote a few nice words about Denise Allen. From what I know of Denise she’s a likeable person who plays with a straight bat, and for once found myself nodding in agreement with Andrew’s poison pen. However, the niceties were dispensed with and his usual bile took over and it became evident that he was actually hanging Denise out to dry. This is from his article:

Here are some recent thoughts of Nice Denise, the social justice campaigner.

On Margie Abbott, wife of the Opposition Leader:

Your husband, along with his bunch of feral shadow ministers and many on his backbench, have turned the political discourse in this country into the obnoxious, wretched, ugliness it is today.

Are you proud of him? I’m sure you are. You must be, because you have now come out and said what a wonderful, loving, decent man he is! To say that — you must agree with everything he says and does! Otherwise you would have the courage to say there are some things you don’t agree with him on….

Quite frankly, it disgusts me..

He may love you and the girls and his mother – and Peta Credlin – but that’s where his affinity with women ends.

So get over yourself, Margie Abbott.

Your husband is one of the most vicious Opposition leaders in this country’s history — and as he would say: “It’s just politics!”

It’s about time the decent women and men of this nation fought back against your husband’s ugly persona.

So … if you can’t take the heat, get out of the kitchen!

If your husband will let you, that is.

On Peta Credlin, Abbott’s chief of staff:

But when you roll out such personal information – information usually kept private between a woman and her partner, and perhaps few sympathetic confidantes – you, Ms Credlin, should be rightly condemned for using your IVF procedures as a blatant political tool. For using this emotive issue to sway the public into sympathetically thinking your boss doesn’t “have a problem with women”…

Which makes you a pretty unpleasant person in yourself. You will go to any length and stoop down into the lowest gutter to get your rotten boss over the line at the next election….

Even using your own personal tragedy as a lever for sympathy. What a disgraceful woman you are.

On political journalists:

Like jackals baying for blood, these neo-hacks ram their personal opinions down the throats of either the unsuspecting (often so aghast they are shell-shocked), or of the insatiable – the scandal hungry – devouring biased information as if it was their last meal…

I cannot remember a time when the mainstream media have been more in the gutter and more hateful than it is now — and they have the hide to disparage politicians for not being ‘honourable”.

Once I thought someone spiteful, personally abusive and shrill had no future in politics. But today I suspect Nice Denise will fit right in with Gillard Labor.

Oh, and if you are surprised a professional conscience could be so nasty, I must remind you again of the words of Bertrand Russell:

Much that passes as idealism is disguised hatred or disguised love of power.

Not a warranted attack on Denise, one could argue, given that it comes from the self elected champion of free speech. That was an epic hypocrisy moment: inviting condemnation of Denise for exercising her right to free speech. Obviously Bolt doesn’t encourage it for those who dwell beyond the political divide.

Hypocrisy moment number two is monumental. Denise was attacked for speaking her mind, yet the comments he passed for publication are freely allowed to be savage against Denise. Here are some examples:

What a nasty piece of work Denise Allen is. Labor Party dopes like her are full of rage because nobody listens to them any more. It never crosses their tiny minds that they are simply hopeless and are seen as such.

amf
Tue 26 Feb 13 (02:26pm)

Another unemployable desperate to get her snout back in the public trough.

Sirocco of Canberra
Tue 26 Feb 13 (02:30pm)

Thank you Andrew, for the warning. Nice Denise appears to be just another Chronic Malcontent, for which the Left is justly infamous.

Sunray of nswcentral coast
Tue 26 Feb 13 (02:30pm)

Unhinged…

Kick (Reply)
Tue 26 Feb 13 (02:31pm)

What a nasty, vicious ill informed low life she sounds like. Head up her derriere when not looking in the mirror praising herself for own self importance. Future labor PM in the making??

Bazza of Berwick
Tue 26 Feb 13 (02:34pm)

Typical leftist – a seething cauldron of lava like vomit full of hate and envy and loathing; full of self assuredness that their feelings are completely justified – if only they could work out why they feel that way. How horrible it must be to be born with a lifelong supply of crazy pills!

Baron of Brunswick
Tue 26 Feb 13 (02:35pm)

What a wonderful lady she isn’t. I can’t wait for a change in government and with that hopefully a broom is swept through many of the Left’s thinktanks (ie all funding cut) so that her and her ilk can go crawl back down the sh..holes from where they came

Sammy of Adelaide
Tue 26 Feb 13 (02:40pm)

The lady seems very disturbed and is showing the true nature or her bilious personality. It is very unappealing and should cause her shame.

KenL
Tue 26 Feb 13 (02:42pm)

What a nasty piece of work is MS. Allen,I don’t know this female but after reading her BS I feel I could slap her across the chops.

Lyn the Lib of Gold Coast
Tue 26 Feb 13 (02:46pm)

I can’t see the problem. Labor has always attracted the mentally unstable.Thanks to the computor age this is now being exposed.Poor darlings are so mentally unstable they actually thought that the social media would work to their benefit, instead it is exposing them for what they really are. A bunch of sociopatic misfits all out to destroy what they consider the enemy.

holty of sth pacific
Tue 26 Feb 13 (02:51pm)

Just another one wanting to suckle at the public teat. How can the papers allow such vitriol without being challenged

mark of melb
Tue 26 Feb 13 (02:51pm)

What a potty mouthed individual. She will fit in well in “New Labor”. Disgusting language such as I have just read from this woman (certainly not a LADY) makes it clear what she thinks of the world and its inhabitants.

David S of Up-North
Tue 26 Feb 13 (02:57pm)

I hope she reads this and sees herself as we see her.

I feel sorry for her children, that this is the legacy she will leave her descendants when they discover her on WHO DO YOU THINK YOU ARE.

If you are what you eat, then I’d very much suggest you swap diets.

pennyoz
Tue 26 Feb 13 (03:03pm)

What a vile excuse for a human being. She is obviously a prime Labor candidate. Anyone with such hatred of men; such hatred of families and such hatred of all things non-Labor will no doubt aspire to be the next (far distant) female Labor leader.

She will no doubt be welcomed with open arms by all her Labor peers.

Dee
Tue 26 Feb 13 (03:03pm)

Wow! What a piece of work…..
Beggars belief that this person thinks she has anything at all to contribute to the debate. She is overflowing with bile and resentment, and in typical labor fashion can only retaliate with attack and misinformation.

Grounded in Reality of Qld
Tue 26 Feb 13 (03:07pm)

Does anybody else see the hypocrisy there?

Among other things, Bolt was smarting that Denise had dared to ridicule Margie Abbott, wife of the Canberra clown who masquerades as Leader of the Opposition. This leads us to hypocrisy moment number three: Bolt’s own attacks on Julia Gillard’s partner, Tim Mathieson, to which Denise’s ridicule of Madam Abbott pale limply in comparison. Denise wrote one article on Margie Abbott. Bolt, on the other hand, has been prolific in his ridicule and condemnation of Mr Mathieson. Here are the links to some of his articles:

If Margie Abbott were as idle as Tim Mathieson, how the Left would jeer

First bloke’s work dilemma

Column – Tim trapped on the sofa by sexism at the Lodge

Mathieson must pay for Gillard’s extremism

Minding Tim as he minds Julia

Meet the First Bloke

Do Gillard’s speech laws ban Mathieson’s Asian joke?

Couch potato

If I were to include in this post every denigrating comment that Bolt has made about Mr Mathieson (in the above articles) I’d be guilty of keeping you up all night, either from reading too much or suffering horrific night-terrors. Visit the links to his vile pages if you wish and see for yourself this consummate hypocrite at work. See too, how his denigration inspires his fan base of Neanderthals to feed on the carcass of his unfortunate victim.

Hypocrisy moment number four. This one too is monumental. Show me a site where Bolt has attacked anybody who has written anything the least bit abusive against a left-wing politician or their partner. Has he jumped heroically to slap down his constipated colleague and viral Gillard basher, Piers Ackerman, or that toxic bubble-headed buffoon Alan Jones, for example? Of course he hasn’t. He’s too much of a hypocrite. And too much of an idiot to see it anyway.

If he’s prepared to publicly humiliate Denise Allen over her writings – on her own blog to her own readers – what must he think about these disgusting tirades that have gained national prominence:

Andrew Bolt – village idiot, village hypocrite – would make a perfect case study for anybody wanting to examine the reasoning behind the pathetic levels the mainstream media has slumped to in this country.

The man is pathetic. Sadly, he gets away with it.

Bolt 2

About these ads


Categories: Media

Tags: , , , ,

88 replies

  1. These cookie cutter Liberal shills in the media imagine they’re helping their “cause”. They obviously know the Liberals are a basket case, needing all the “help” they can get. Mostly they preach to the converted; morons who line up every day to have their brainwashing reinforced and conservative prejudices exploited.

    Meanwhile their bias is helping to send the Old Media into decline. Anyone repelled by the right-wing monopolisation of the “mainstream” media in Oz can now access a world of competing viewpoints with the click of a mouse or swipe of an iPad. The ground has shifted under the feet of the yokel partisan shills. They’re no longer the only side of politics with a voice. They’re being marginalised, and they’re panicking.

    In their desperation to avoid obscurity they’re ratcheting up the rhetoric. But this only drives the sane and moderate audience away faster. So they’re caught in a vicious tailspin, where the more threatened they become, the uglier the rhetoric, and the more they become sidelined.

    Very soon (if they’re not already there) they’re also going to run into the pitfalls of market saturation. With News Limited, Their ABC, talkback radio and increasingly the Fairfax publications all now competing for essentially the same ugly right-wing demographic, they are going to find there are enough audience to ‘go round’. I can see media outlets going under because they’ve “overgrazed the field”. Of course they’ll try to compensate by being even shriller, which will only hasten the decline of their Old Media. And so the vicious cycle will continue.

  2. This Bolt idiot has shown just how one-eyed he is. Some other idiot left a comment that Margaret Abbott should sue Denise Allen, over, of all things, the comment, “He (Abbott) may love you… and Peta Credlin…” I explained that it would be laughed out of any courtroom in Australia, and attacked Bolt for the right-wing extremist fruitloop he is, but would they publish that? Hell no!! I will never forgive Bolt for the flippantly cruel remarks he made about Paul Hester after his tragic suicide ten years ago, or the lies he told about Ruth Cracknell after she died. Mike Carlton has immortalised himself for correctly labelling Bolt the village idiot.

  3. Michael
    I think that you miss the point of his criticism of Denise Allen, its an attempt to hold her to account for the things that she has said or published, good bad or indifferent if Denise Allen says something about politics then its entirely legitimate to critique what has been said and there is in fact no suggestion in the Bolt piece that she be prevented from saying anything she pleases, only that when she talks hate that she should be called on in.

    As for you not knowing anyone who likes Bolt , well that suggest to me that you need to widen the circle of people that you talk to about politics because he and his views are more liked and appreciated than you think.

  4. My comment has disappeared

  5. This would appear to be Andrew Bolt’s standard method, run articles denigrating others (from a safe distance) and for no other reason than his own notoriety. His article of course reeks with sarcasm about Denise being a “professional conscience” for people with disabilities.

    This article reminded me a lot of Bolt’s attacks on Aboriginal people, that they gained professionally by “pretending” to be black It seems that Bolt is inferring that Denise is likewise “pretending” to care about people with disabilities..look at how nasty she is, says Andrew Bolt.

  6. Iain, your comment didn’t disappear, it wasn’t there in the first place..now it is.

  7. Iain, as can be evidenced via the comments which Bolt chose to publish, it was an incitement to denigrate.

  8. Min
    What is the bet that this post serves as an incitement to denigrate Bolt in the comments?

  9. Oh and Its well known that Bolt himself does not moderate the comments at his blog , that is done by someone specifically employed for the job by the News Ltd so its unfair to blame him for the choice of comments that are published.

  10. Bolt is not an idiot and that’s what makes him so dangerous.
    He distorts facts and deliberately and vigorously peddles misinformation in order to promote his and his benefactors’ vested interests. His hateful opinions and prejudices are clear to any person who is capable of independent thought.
    He appeals to the willingly ignorant and the blissfully ill-informed. He is a shock-jock in print. He is used (and well rewarded) by others too gutless or too sneaky to voice their own disgusting views.
    He epitomises the cancerous decline in journalistic standards to which we are currently being subjected.
    He is an utter disgrace in every way and anyone who takes him seriously is similarly discredited.

  11. Iain, could you please point out exactly where in her piece Denise Allen “talks hate”? I really want to know which parts you are considering to be hate speech.

  12. Iain, absolute rubbish. As a blogmaster yourself you know that it is you who is ultimately responsible for comments which appear on your blog.

  13. Oh, what a surprise, Factless Troll rushes to the rescue of his beloved Bolt. I can only assume that its because both Ian & Andrew suffer from the same combination of a dangerously low IQ, & a grossly inflated sense of their own importance.

  14. rosellajam, I AGREE!

    Even highlighting the most extreme parts of those stories on IA they don’t come close to some of the vitriol bolt and his ilk have directed at the PM and the Labor party as a whole.

    I do prefer our politicians to maintain a level of debate, but really, what Denise has written is barely scratching the surface of what has been peddled by the libs and their media since the Unhinging began. And we will see a lot more, and from bolt himself.

  15. Bolt makes truth of Denise’s statement that..

    I cannot remember a time when the mainstream media have been more in the gutter and more hateful than it is now.

  16. Min
    I don’t agree because in many ways Bolt’s blog is not the same as one that You androve comemnts I might run, he may have the reach that we can only dream of but he does not have the ultimate control over what is published in the comments as his many weekend posts bemoaning the lack of moderators for the comments threads testify like this one where he makes it clear that he can’t approve comments:

    Pass on news tips here. No moderators, though, mean no comments can be posted, although I can read them.

    He may be the blogger but blogmaster? I think not.

  17. corrected comment:

    Min
    I don’t agree because in many ways Bolt’s blog is not the same as one that You and I might run, he may have the reach that we can only dream of but he does not have the ultimate control over what is published in the comments as his many weekend posts bemoaning the lack of moderators for the comments threads testify like this one where he makes it clear that he can’t approve comments:

    Pass on news tips here. No moderators, though, mean no comments can be posted, although I can read them.

    He may be the blogger but blogmaster? I think not.

  18. Andrew Bolt needs to learn what IRONY is….

  19. I have always had complete disdain for Bolt.I find it incredible that not only does he still have column but now also a TV spot to showcase his vitriol.I’m also not convinced that there are that many idiot sycophants that reply to his articles.I’m sure he sits in front of a mirror and writes them himself.Your article was so spot on.Congratulations.

  20. Alison
    I am well aware of what irony is, in fact I find that its incredibly Ironic that Bolt is constantly compared to “shock jocks” when his on air demeanour and the tone of his writing is the antithesis of that stereotype.

  21. his on air demeanour and the tone of his writing is the antithesis of that stereotype.

    But his message is the same. liberal good, Labor BAAAD

    And his self awareness at his own hypocrisy is at the same level as those abusive shock jocks.

  22. Bolt’s a performance artist. He’s like Cirque de Soleil without balloons and acrobatics, doing shows every day about everything under the sun to an undiscerning audience of siege-mentality halfwits who spend their whole lives embracing vast leftist conspiracy theories, spitting out their own bile and bullshit hither and thither, while recoiling in shock and horror at anyone who criticises their lame, limp and unsubtantiated opinions about everything from climate change to the “slippery slope” arguments on gay marriage and on and on and on and on.

    He can dish it out, but turns to water when it’s dished back, running around in circles squealing about how he’s being victimised and oppressed, and denied his right to free speech.

    It’s very funny when you really think about it. Here’s a guy who’s little more than a hired hack and lackey for Murdoch, who types and types and types about anything that crosses his mind, and suddenly, people begin thinking he’s an authority on it all.

    A narcissistic, self-absorbed whoring little populist twat.

  23. Bolt is a born dolt. Alan Jones is a bag of piss and wind. Paul Mitford, Sydney.

  24. Tom R

    But his message is the same. liberal good, Labor BAAAD

    He is often critical of the coalition although in the last few years he has had less cause to do so than he has had to criticise Labor.

  25. he has had less cause to do so

    Oh, so he is happy with an opposition that changes it position on everything depending on who they talk to
    happy with an opposition that trash talks the economy
    happy with an opposition that cannot even add up correctly, and then lies about it
    happy with an opposition that uses foul language and denigrates a PM’s father just after his death
    happy with an opposition that accuses the PM of criminal conduct, without a shred of evidence
    happy with an opposition that consorts with grubs such as ashby, gretch and blewitt.

    yea, right ian ;)

  26. Tom R

    You need to try to understand that other people do not see the world in the way that you do. Your last comment really demonstrates the narrow black and white way that you see the world
    Try to “walk in the shoes” of those you criticise and your credibility may improve a great deal.

  27. Try to “walk in the shoes” of those you criticise and your credibility may improve a great deal.

    I note that you do not address the points (or, as in bolts case, the lack of points) raised above

    If you want to ‘walk in the shoes’ of a party that has exhibits all of the above behavior and more, feel free to. Personally, I’ll just avoid getting the mud on mine in the first place.

  28. Thinking person’s lament:

    The paucity of policy protected by the polls
    Journalists as judges in their self-appointed roles
    Mining magnates, Murdoch, Media…synonyms
    If you ask me what I think, they’re all a bunch of crims

    How dare you tell me lies and feed me rhetoric
    The bullshit that you spin is making me feel sick
    Let’s talk about some facts here instead of Kevin Rudd
    The “news” you print is inane fluff best described as crud

    To thinking people everywhere I urge you to rebel
    Take up the fight and let them know that we are MAD AS HELL
    It’s time that we got vocal and took action to revolt
    Piss off Jones and Hadley and take that cretin Bolt!

  29. Tom R

    Well may you criticise those involved in the examples that you cite above but what you are trying to do is claim that those who don’t see those matters the same way as you are in one way or another “evil” and because Bolt does not do as you wish about those matters that he must be condoning them. Is that a fair summation of your logic?
    It falls down though because there is a great deal more moral ambiguity about those issues than your thinking can conceive of
    Your points refuted:

    Oh, so he is happy with an opposition that changes it position on everything depending on who they talk to

    that is too vague to respond to

    happy with an opposition that trash talks the economy

    He is less happy with a government that has been trashing the actual economy

    happy with an opposition that cannot even add up correctly, and then lies about it

    Debatable at best, especially when discussing something as uncertain as economic predictions.

    happy with an opposition that uses foul language and denigrates a PM’s father just after his death

    What foul language? and what denigration

    happy with an opposition that accuses the PM of criminal conduct, without a shred of evidence

    Less happy that Gillard had a dodgy past

    happy with an opposition that consorts with grubs such as ashby, gretch and blewittt.

    Hmm being a “grub” seems awfully dependant on party affiliation to you, what about the “gruba” in the NSW right of the ALP who are keeping Gillard in the lodge? They make Ashby Gretch and maybe even Blewitt look like small beer.

  30. Iain, you say try to “walk in the shoes” of those you criticise! Gladly! I would love to stroll down the streets of their elite suburbs, a pair of Gucci loafers protecting my soles (though not my soul) from the blood and broken bones over which I would be walking. I’d love to fill my Manolo Blaniks with their ill-gotten wealth.
    Are you seriously trying to justify Bolt’s, Jones’, Abbott’s, Reinhardt’s, Murdoch’s corruption and manipulation and greed?
    Riddle me this: if we were to “walk in their shoes” what blistering truths would be revealed that would change what you refer to as “narrow” world view?
    Please do enlighten us all. We wait with breath that is bated.

  31. that is too vague to respond to

    I think the ‘vagueness’ lies elsewhere ;)

    He is less happy with a government that has been trashing the actual economy

    Worlds Greatet Treasurer, Worlds leading Economy.

    Penny Wong

    I will make another couple of points about spending and about the budget. Of the 12 coalition budgets that were handed down, nine of them showed higher spending as a percentage of GDP—nine out of 12—so higher spending as a proportion of GDP than now. I would also make this point: when you look at our last five budgets plus the last mid-year review, we have delivered $154 billion worth of saves. That is eight times the number of savings delivered by the Liberals in their last five budgets when, of course, we remember that there was revenue coming in hand over fist to government that they frittered away and failed to invest in skills or in infrastructure or in anything of long-term benefit to the nation.

    Senate Hansard.

    You read the news too much ian, and don’t get the facts.

    Debatable at best, especially when discussing something as uncertain as economic predictions.

    Nothing ‘debatable’ there

    http://www.petermartin.com.au/2011/12/lib-costings-debacle-auditors-fined.html

    What foul language? and what denigration

    That’s Bullshit! Shit Happpens! Die of Shame!

    Less happy that Gillard had a dodgy past

    So, you make the same mistake s the libs, seem only right./

    Hmm being a “grub” seems awfully dependant on party affiliation

    blewitt was a union guy genius, and Labor are not associating themselves with those you mention now. The libs actually went out of their way to talk with blewitt and push his smear.

  32. Iain if you don’t think the Opposition changes their position depending who they talk to could I remind you of Tony Windsor’s speech in Parliament where he reminded Mr Abbott that he had said he “would do anything to get the PM job, except sell his ass”, and the various interviews from 2009 where Mr Abbott said he felt a carbon tax would be a simpler solution. Do you TRULY believe he will dump the carbon pricing scheme? I think not.

    And as for the economy, what planet are you living on? Our economy is one of the best in the world. We have AAA credit rating, low unemployment, low inflation, continued growth in spite of the GFC.

    Yes economic predictions are uncertain which is why it was wise for the Govt to give up the idea of trying to achieve a surplus. It’s called reacting appropriately to current economic issues.

    Alan Jones comment about Ms Gillard’s father dying of shame was unforgivable.

    Mr Abbott set up a trust aka slush fund that raised $100,000 to use against Pauline Hanson’s party because it was dividing the conservative vote. He also wrote a character reference for a pedophile.

    And what do you make of Judge Rares findings that Mal Brough was complicit in a conspiracy to bring down an elected government?

  33. Tom R

    Worlds Greatet Treasurer, Worlds leading Economy.

    :lol:

    only on planet Tom R would such a claim be made have you forgotten the amazing Labor Surplus promise? or the Swan designed MRRT?

    Mate you are pissing into the wind and that makes you …!

  34. Iain I suggest you do some research outside of what Andrew Bolt and Piers Ackerman say. Every credible economist said the Government was right not to pursue a surplus considering the global economic situation. The MRRT is a profits based tax which in 6 months raised 126 million, the second instalment being much larger than the first. There are various reasons why it failed to make as much as anticipated. One large contributing factor was that mining companies went into investment phase so were able to claim deductions for capital expenditure and depreciation. Commodity prices have risen and as profit increases so will revenue.

    Your posts are very short on facts

  35. Jennifer Fallon

    Iain if you don’t think the Opposition changes their position depending who they talk to could I remind you of Tony Windsor’s speech in Parliament where he reminded Mr Abbott that he had said he “would do anything to get the PM job, except sell his ass”, and the various interviews from 2009 where Mr Abbott said he felt a carbon tax would be a simpler solution. Do you TRULY believe he will dump the carbon pricing scheme? I think not.

    You can bet your house on the Carbon tax being dumped as a first order priority because Abbott is smart enough to know taht failing to do so would tar him with the same brush as the one that has so blackened Gillard.

    And as for the economy, what planet are you living on? Our economy is one of the best in the world. We have AAA credit rating, low unemployment, low inflation, continued growth in spite of the GFC.

    Sure but that is despite the steward of Swan and Gillard not because of it

    Yes economic predictions are uncertain which is why it was wise for the Govt to give up the idea of trying to achieve a surplus. It’s called reacting appropriately to current economic issues.

    The problem was not admitting the obvious but that it took Labor far to long to give up the pretension that they would achieve that economic result.

    Alan Jones comment about Ms Gillard’s father dying of shame was unforgivable.

    It was gross and insensitive and hurtful for sure and I do not endorse what he said, nor I might add did Andrew Bolt, the reaction from so many lefties was way out of proportion to the offence though. That said I detest Jones probably as much as you do.

    Mr Abbott set up a trust aka slush fund that raised $100,000 to use against Pauline Hanson’s party because it was dividing the conservative vote. He also wrote a character reference for a pedophile.

    The former was not illegal or to hide stolen money like the fund set up by Gillard as for the second thing I don’t know what you are referring to but I very much doubt that Abbott would have knowingly written a reference for a Paedophile.

    And what do you make of Judge Rares findings that Mal Brough was complicit in a conspiracy to bring down an elected government?

    I wonder just what Rares’ political leanings are to be honest, because he is just one man and not above having a partisan view on such things .

  36. only on planet Tom R would such a claim be made

    I’m not making the claim genius, the leading European banking and finance magazine Euromoney is.

  37. Ian
    “You need to try to understand that other people do not see the world in the way that you do. Your last comment really demonstrates the narrow black and white way that you see the world
    Try to “walk in the shoes” of those you criticise and your credibility may improve a great deal.”

    Right back at you mate! ;)

  38. Here you go Hall,

    Tony Abbott linked to Catholic priest dumped after child abuse case

    by: Paul Osborne
    From: AAP
    February 08, 2013 12:24PM

    Don’t know how you could if missed that,

    The former was not illegal or to hide stolen money like the fund set up by Gillard as for the second thing I don’t know what you are referring to but I very much doubt that Abbott would have knowingly written a reference for a Paedophile.

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/tony-abbott-linked-to-priest-in-web-of-intrigue/story-e6frg6n6-1226573435456

  39. To get back to the purpose of this thread, the truth is out there and it sure as hell ain’t coming from people like Andrew Bolt, Piers Ackerman, Alan Jones (I lol at his climate change denial perseverance) and Ray Hadley our resident bully boy

  40. This is what you can get when you have a journalists interested in getting answers rather than Gotcha’s. An informative interview.

    http://blogs.abc.net.au/queensland/2013/02/prime-minister-julia-gillard-talks-to-steve-austin.html?site=brisbane&program=612_morning

  41. Bolt is nothing more than a low run journalist who sold his soul at the crossroads for populous fame. He is obsessed with becoming a “rockstar” reporter. Bolt approached Fox to become the next Bill ORiley and models himself as a poor man’s version thereof; you know the inferior knock off Iphoney version.

    Bolt is building his “brand bolt” on the proven Fox formula of character assassination, lies and synthetic polemic button pushing. Faux doubt, faux threat, faux fact and engineered fear. These are the ingredients developed by his Yoda, Murdoch as a formula for successful proliferation of tabloid opinion.

    To anyone that employs critical thinking it’s all so predictable. Branding 101 manufactured outrage, rouse the gullible to support the brand to elevate his cult.

    Anyone who dares to disagree is a “lefty”, the root of all things evil and the source of every problem in Australia. Bolt reinforces the term “lefty” to insult, hammering the term like a nail in the coffin of all things decent. It’s the bolt version of “Red” or “socialist” designed to attach cause to dumbed down issues for people too lazy to think for themselves. This is brand bolts prime target, the lazy, the gullible and the intellectually inferior. Bolt selectively attaches himself as a champion of controversial issues that promote his brand. Climate, political correctness, gender, race, religion the environment wherever there is controversy you will find bolt the attention succubus pushing his brand to fuel his ego. Bolt is a nationally syndicated across print, television and the net with a army of lawyers yet uses free speech like a privilege of his brand when he is convicted of breaking the law.

    Bolt is nothing more than a paid propaganda cog for the Neocon overlord puppeteers machine behind him. Bored with life as a vanilla newspaper journalist, desperate for celebrity; bolt has taken to the stage reborn as the dancing marionette of Rupert and Gina Reinhardt.

    Bolt is not a journalist, he a salesman for a company line nothing more than an apologist for the billionaires who finance his foray into the cult of populism. He is a big piece in a larger agenda puzzle. Rupert is the devil at the crossroads. Tony Abbott has sold his soul for his fame agreeing to change the law to allow Bolt free reign to push Rupert’s agenda outside the bounds of democratic decency, free from costly litigation.

  42. This is how abbott handles them

    photo/1

  43. And if you don’t think the Opposition has a planned startegy to hide behind smear campaigns, polls and leadership speculation have a look at this from Andrew Laming MP

    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151195723037507&set=a.421096667506.192118.730307506&type=1&relevant_count=1

  44. Screaming for “Freedom of Speech” seems to be a common thread for these morons.

    Senator Cory Bernardi is the same, his facebook page has a rant demanding the right of free speech for everyone but if you question the senator or dare post a negative comment you are immediately blocked censored and banned lest his supporters hear a different opinion.

    you can be blocked censored and banned for asking why people are being blocked censored and banned. Vile hate filled comments are welcome but there is absolutely tolerance for questions or a different opinion.

    https://www.facebook.com/PeopleWhomCoryBernardisPageHasBlocked?fref=ts

  45. Listen to ‘rosellajam’ a wise person indeed.
    Andrew Bolt’s main use is to sift out the people who you just met. At my wife’s work function, just recently, the subject of Andrew Bolt came up and from the responses I was able to work out who was worth talking to. I’m getting on in years and I cannot afford to waste my time on people who cannot be bothered to think.
    Bolt is a genuinely dangerous person because he can make garbage sound like gold. If he was just an idiot we would not need to fear him. Without him we would not realise how far we have yet to go.

  46. ain Hall
    February 28, 2013
    Tom R
    Worlds Greatest Treasurer, Worlds leading Economy. :lol:
    only on planet Tom R would such a claim be made have you forgotten the amazing Labor Surplus promise? or the Swan designed MRRT?

    You have dared to insult bolts biggest fan boy, the source of the pittance of faux fact he cares to post…..I think this guy has forgotton the Liberal surplus was due to 72 billion dollars worth of public assets and not economic prudency. Or Tax evasion.:roll:

    araneus1
    February 28, 2013

    Listen to ‘rosellajam’ a wise person indeed.
    Andrew Bolt’s main use is to sift out the people who you just met. At my wife’s work function, just recently, the subject of Andrew Bolt came up and from the responses I was able to work out who was worth talking to. I’m getting on in years and I cannot afford to waste my time on people who cannot be bothered to think.

    That is priceless, thanks for the chuckle :-) you’re a gem. Its like one of my friends who gauges people on whether they “get” Seinfeld or not.

  47. Mate, you’re really shooting fish in a barrel here. “Does anybody else see the hypocrisy there?” Yes, everyone but Blind Freddy does. Why do you think he’s one of the “one of the country’s most influential media identities?” Because smart people like you won’t ignore him, and even link to his tripe; don’t feed the trolls. The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about, eh? Whenever someone mentions him I say, ‘oh yeah, he’s one of my favourite comedians.’

  48. Ah, factless troll claims that the Coalition doesn’t change its message based on who they’re talking to. What, like the time he told an audience in WA that farmers should be allowed to keep miners off their land, yet told an East Coast audience that farmers *shouldn’t* have that Right. Or when he told a WA audience that the GST formula should be recalculated, but told a Tasmanian audience that he had no intention of recalculating the GST formula. Or then you have Hockey lamenting the culture of “welfare dependence” to an audience in London, but then bemoaning the means testing of the PHI rebate (a form of welfare). Then you have Abbott pledging a surplus, & Hockey saying he can’t guarantee a surplus. Hardly “on message”. Seems like Factless Troll is making statements not backed up by the facts!

  49. Give that man a cigar. Craig, you are a gentleman. I used to get all exercised about Bolt too, but ignoring him (as the ABC finally saw fit to do after indulging him for far too long) is far more effective than arguing with him. It brings to mind the old adage about arguing with idiots: they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. And Iain Hall is very experienced.

  50. Craig, I like shooting fish. In this case I’m shooting gummy sharks. ;-)

    BTW folks, many comments are getting caught up in our spam folder. I’m clearing them as quickly as I can.

  51. Mr Bolt thinks irony is what his wife does! It is disturbing the amount of followers he has. I can’t believe so many people have the same opinions as him. He incites hatred and loathing rather than trying to create a better and harmonious place. What in his past has shaped him to become so hateful and vengeful. I think he is truly suffering. When you point one finger out, you point three back at yourself. Not a well man Mr Bolt, not well at all.

  52. Bolt can`t be trusted to moderate the comments. The `rda` court determined Bolt can`t be trusted to write fairly about `white` aboriginals. Folks of average intelligence or above know Bolt is just an over-paid teabag shill spreading `heat` into public topics to make benefit for monster corporates.

  53. Back from errands
    Paul

    I read the linkage to the reference story and the most significant line is this one:

    “In 1997, Mr Abbott provided a reference for Mr Nestor in an open court. He was subsequently acquitted by a District Court Judge,” a spokesperson for Mr Abbott said.

    Acquitted means innocent doesn’t it?
    :roll:

  54. Yes Hall, then there is this

    However, the suspended Nestor was never allowed back into church ministry.

    He was referred to the church’s NSW Professional Standards Resource Group, which kicked off a lengthy saga ending in him finally being struck off as a priest by the Vatican about five years ago.

    If he was acquitted, why was he defrocked by the church.

  55. BadAbit
    February 28, 2013
    Mr Bolt thinks irony is what his wife does!

    Mate I’m not traveling too well and this tread has me pissing myself today… :-)

    It is disturbing the amount of followers he has. I can’t believe so many people have the same opinions as him. He incites hatred and loathing rather than trying to create a better and harmonious place.

    Yes mater for a cleaver country, there sure are a lot of stupid people out there, just the way the libs and Murdoch’s marionette likes it. This guy hate academic’s because it reminds him how lazy he was not to finish being completely average @ Uni

    What in his past has shaped him to become so hateful and vengeful. I think he is truly suffering.

    Money and fame, he wanted to be a rockstar but ended up playing in a dance band in CWA halls and deserted RLS’s serenading tables and chairs. He had no problem reinventing himself as an asshole, he was already well qualified.

    Miglo
    February 28, 2013
    Craig, I like shooting fish. In this case I’m shooting gummy sharks.
    BTW folks, many comments are getting caught up in our spam folder. I’m clearing them as quickly as I can.

    No Bait needed, Just more Tar for Abbott

    You gotta pay Willie when you make a deal with Lou Cypher

  56. Bolt can’t earn an honest living doing something useful for the world, so he recklessly poisons it in exchange for corporate coin.

  57. Ah yes Hall, but surely the point is that Abbott provided the reference before he was acquitted. I don’t know about you Iain, but if a person is under charges for child sexual abuse, then I would be a little reluctant to provide these. At best it indicate poor judgement and a lack of caring about the issue of child abuse from Tony Abbott.

  58. Min, not only that. That was one of the real bad cases Those boys at that orphanage had already suffered much before going there.

  59. Min

    Ah yes Hall, but surely the point is that Abbott provided the reference before he was acquitted. I don’t know about you Iain, but if a person is under charges for child sexual abuse, then I would be a little reluctant to provide these. At best it indicate poor judgement and a lack of caring about the issue of child abuse from Tony Abbott.

    In Law the man was proven to be innocent of the allegations, and Abbott can only have said in his personal reference what he actually knew of the man, so I have to ask you how well do you know the people that you might be asked to vouch for? Do you know every tiny detail of their lives? Is it at all possible that there might be things that they have done in their lives that you know NOTHING about? Now its all well and good to be so judgemental of Tony Abbott on this occasion but unless he actually had prior knowledge that the allegations were true and he still offered the reference then there is nothing to admonish him about now.

    FU

    Min, not only that. That was one of the real bad cases Those boys at that orphanage had already suffered much before going there.

    Because Kiddie fiddling is such a vile crime its perpetrators are very skilled at deception, trickery and intimidation to hide their crimes. in fact you will find none as harsh in judgement of such crimes as I am . Even so we have a legal process and a court system to judge the veracity of such allegations and we have to have faith in the process and accept its outcomes or we will have no justice at all.

    paul

    So Hall, you are saying that it is OK for a priest to sleep with children, then get a reference from Tony Abbott saying he a good priest.

    You have marbles in your head mate.

    Its leaps of illogical thought like that that show what an idiot you are.
    You owe me the most sincere apology for making such a foul accusation :mad:

  60. “Acquitted means innocent doesn’t it?”…does it? Is an aquittal as black and white as you would like it to be in this case. No, an aquittal does not automatically mean innocent.

  61. Iain, you are on a loser if you believe you can tell me anything about child abuse, or sexual abuse of children

    I just wish you would cease being so patronizing with assessment you make. Sadly you get it wrong most of the time.

    There was two things that took me to Uni at forty. I needed answers. One was sexual abuse of children the other domestic violence.

    I am afraid, I am not much the wiser, but one thing I can guarantee I have forgotten more than you have ever learnt.

    I would stick to giving advice on subjects you may know something about.

  62. Acquitted means not proven. Sometimes, only not proven beyond reasonable doubt.

  63. SEXUAL ABUSE OF A CHILD IS ONE OF THE HARDEST CASES TO GET A CONVICTION IN COURT, ESPECIALLY IN THE PAST.

  64. Iain, I am not sure, it is not you that owes people apologies.

  65. FU

    Surely one thing that your experience will have taught you is that those who abuse children are precisely as I suggested: Because Kiddie fiddling is such a vile crime its perpetrators are very skilled at deception, trickery and intimidation to hide their crimes. I am more than willing to listen to any part of your experience that shows me to be wrong to believe this. Just appealing to your own authority does not do it.

  66. Bullshit. It is too important to use tricky words, to make yourself sound good.

    Iain. i believe you are going one step too far with the games you are playing.

  67. No, Iain, we do not use the words you do.

    It is an insult to the victims.

  68. Hall, this is what was said in the paper,

    Tony Abbott met John Nestor while training for priesthood
    John Nestor received Tony Abbott’s support during abuse case

    And this about the Priest,

    The priest admitted in court that he had slept, wearing boxer shorts and a singlet, on mattresses on a floor in his presbytery with the boy and his younger brother some time between June and September 1991.

    So the Priest admitted sleeping with the boys.

    So, Abbott would have know what the case was about, gave him an endorsing reference about his character, that says more about Abbott than anything else.

    And no you will not get an apology from me.

    To me this was a vile act from a priest, someone who should of known better, someone the boys trusted, but yet he slept with the boys.

  69. Iain, visit this site, you may learn something.

    http://brokenrites.alphalink.com.au/

    There is one there that was my son’s mate was abused by.

    My son slept in the next bed.

    That boy was in Boggo jail by twenty, after committing two murders.

    No,it was not Westmead.

    The priest was well known for his work with troubled boys. Yes, if was troubled boys be abused in at least two states.

    I was reluctant to believe the boy when he first told me, thinking that there was some mistake.

    No, sadly he was a offender over many years.

    Yes, the church covered up.

    I believe because of my son’s background. Coming from an abusive situation, this priest knew he was too dangerous to touch.

    A marvelous talent for working with these boys, then he abused them.

  70. Hall, this is what you said about the Royal commission setup By the Government on Child sexual abuse.

    We are mostly talking about events that happened more than thirty years ago and we have had three Popes since then, likewise the leadership of the Australian branch of the church has been as far as I know entirely changed in that time as well with the men who were in power then all either long dead or retired, so just who are you going to hold responsible?

    And this as well

    Hmm pardon may cynicism but I can’t help but think that this is just another attempt by Gillard to distract media attention from the poor performance of her government, after all what could be more fine and noble that to chase after kiddie fiddlers?

    And this

    This exercise will be expensive, but I have my doubts about its efficacy and as I said in my previous post it will be a great boon for the legal profession and the victims of abuse are less than likely to end up feeling that much better about their exploitation and subsequent angst.

    Its a circus and it will cost an awful lot of bread, but bread and circuses have a long and less than honorable history at entertaining the masses.

  71. Acquitted, Mr Hall, does NOT mean “innocent”, beyond someone facing a trial is innocent until proven guilty. Someone is aquitted when there is insufficient evidence to prove them guilty. It is NOT “proof” of innocence. BTW, ‘dependant’ is a noun, you meant ‘dependent’. Hopefully, you are always appreciative of having such errors pointed out to you. :)

  72. This part here in the post, actually reminds me of someone who comments here.

    I’m yet to meet a person who likes him, let alone harbour an ounce of respect. Indeed, he has a history of inciting hate, much of which comes back at him.

    Now I wonder who that is?????

  73. Paul
    your vile comment has been deleted and your refusal to apologise well noted by me.

    Further if you are going to quote me please have the good manners to cite where you are quoting from so that other readers can see the context: http://iainhall.wordpress.com/2012/11/13/bread-and-circuses-have-a-long-and-less-than-honorable-history-at-entertaining-the-masses/#comments

    FU

    I am using plain language and simple concepts so please don’t accuse me of being “tricky” when you can’t refute my argument

  74. Iain, the likes of you do not tell me wahy I can say or do.
    Every word I said stand. You konw nothing about this subject at all.

  75. “what”

  76. Amazing that Hall calls for apologies, however never apologises to anyone he insults with his vile, divisive, factless attention seeking views… “KAMA” I guess.

  77. Hall, I have read that article, You have stated that the royal commission was setup just to distract the voters because of the PM’s poor performance, If you believe it was just set up for that and that only, which you have stated several times in the article, then you are not seeing the bigger picture.

    We are mostly talking about events that happened more than thirty years ago and we have had three Popes since then, likewise the leadership of the Australian branch of the church has been as far as I know entirely changed in that time as well with the men who were in power then all either long dead or retired, so just who are you going to hold responsible?

    The institutions, that is who Hall, like the Catholic Church, and it does not matter when the offenses occurred, they all have to be looked into.

    This exercise will be expensive, but I have my doubts about its efficacy and as I said in my previous post it will be a great boon for the legal profession and the victims of abuse are less than likely to end up feeling that much better about their exploitation and subsequent angst

    Hall, if have you doubts of its efficacy, why then was it started, if not to get results.

    I beg to differ, just starting the Royal commission has bought about things being done.

    As for the victims, some may actually get closure from the Royal commission to see that the perpetrators who inflicted these atrocities on children be accounted for and sent to jail.


  78. FU

    Iain, the likes of you do not tell me what I can say or do.
    Every word I said stand. You know nothing about this subject at all.

    Asserting something does not make it so, frankly you may have a degree in the subject but that has made you any more cognisant of the nature of the abusers that you claim to know so much about.

    Ricky (Tory Torcher)

    Amazing that Hall calls for apologies, however never apologises to anyone he insults with his vile, divisive, factless attention seeking views… “KAMA” I guess.

    Get over yourself.

    paul

    Hall, I have read that article, You have stated that the royal commission was setup just to distract the voters because of the PM’s poor performance, If you believe it was just set up for that and that only, which you have stated several times in the article, then you are not seeing the bigger picture.

    Yes I certainly see the Royal commission as being motivated by the desire to see less space devoted to the ALP woes in the Media but I have never said that it was the ONLY reason for its creation.

    We are mostly talking about events that happened more than thirty years ago and we have had three Popes since then, likewise the leadership of the Australian branch of the church has been as far as I know entirely changed in that time as well with the men who were in power then all either long dead or retired, so just who are you going to hold responsible?

    The institutions, that is who Hall, like the Catholic Church, and it does not matter when the offences occurred, they all have to be looked into.

    How wonderfully Joe McCarthy of you that claim is!

    This exercise will be expensive, but I have my doubts about its efficacy and as I said in my previous post it will be a great boon for the legal profession and the victims of abuse are less than likely to end up feeling that much better about their exploitation and subsequent angst

    Hall, if have you doubts of its efficacy, why then was it started, if not to get results.

    You don’t understand the meaning of “efficacy” do you Paul?

    I beg to differ, just starting the Royal commission has bought about things being done.

    Like what?

    As for the victims, some may actually get closure from the Royal commission to see that the perpetrators who inflicted these atrocities on children be accounted for and sent to jail.

    “closure” is a myth perpetuated by American popular culture and I am willing to bet that the number of Perps who are prosecuted as a result of the Royal commission will be a very low number indeed.

  79. So Hall, basically, what you are saying is that the Royal commission should not have been started, because it will not get the desired results, very few perps well be found and very few victims will get closure.

    And Hall, why should the commission not look at these atrocities of child abuse from 30 or 40 years ago, they are just as relevant then as the atrocities of child abuse of today.

    Again I say, you are not looking at the bigger picture.

  80. Hall, this is your article,

    Hmm pardon may cynicism but I can’t help but think that this is just another attempt by Gillard to distract media attention from the poor performance of her government, after all what could be more fine and noble that to chase after kiddie fiddlers? Strangely enough though there is no mention of the rampant sexual abuse that has been revealed in far to many remote indigenous communities or the way that our friends from the left want to look the other way on that…
    I seem to recall someone of significance opining that no politician should have an royal commission unless they know precisely where it will go to and what it will achieve. Gillard may well have climbed onto the tiger here in an effort to distract attention from her own dodgy past at Slater and Gordon but who is surprised that she makes this desperate move?
    This exercise will be expensive, but I have my doubts about its efficacy and as I said in my previous post it will be a great boon for the legal profession and the victims of abuse are less than likely to end up feeling that much better about their exploitation and subsequent angst.

    Its a circus and it will cost an awful lot of bread, but bread and circuses have a long and less than honorable history at entertaining the masses.

    Not once in there do I see another explanation from you as to why the Royal commission was set up, except for this remark

    ” after all what could be more fine and noble that to chase after kiddie fiddlers? “

    To me that sounds like sarcasm from one Mr HALL

  81. Not only a degree. A lifetime of personal experience and working in the field.

    All you have are your unthoughtout personal prejudices.

    Listen to the news. Listen to what they are saying about the topic. . Listen to what is happening in the USA. A cardinal that is not being allowed to vote. Suspect Pell is not far behind him.

    IT IS NOT ABOUT POLITICS. IT IS ABOUT MANY GENERATIONS OF ABUSE BY THOSE IN POWER, WHETHER CHURCH OR OTHER GROUPS.

    What you and your ilk have to say, only adds further insult to the victims,

    I have no idea what the topic is doing in this thread.

    .

  82. The truth is, it took guts for the PM to bring on these queries.

    This will become apparent when they begin.

    We already have such from the very narrow inquiry that O’Farrell was force to set up. One he hoped to trap the whistle blower policwman with..

    At the very beginning, is the exposure, that NSW police was provided an officer to work with the body Pell set up to protect their clergy. ,.

  83. Peter Harvey has died. I wonder how he would have develop if he began into todays media climate,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,087 other followers

%d bloggers like this: