Sunday, February 26, 2017

In which the fat owl of the remove shows terrible twos how to bung on a do about the ABC ...


That Terror splash comes across a bit garbled, but that's the way it appears in the pond's browser and in a way it's fine as a metaphor for the arble garble that the fat owl of the remove (and the Terror) routinely produces ...

It seems that Akker Dakker had a rough time on Q and A last Monday, and though it took a while for the simmering stew of pique to come to the boil, eventually it did, and so the lid blew off the kettle this Sunday ...

Akker Dakker is a proud figure ... a squire of tree-killers ...


Sure the pond mixes its metaphors, but when the pond is confronted by a cut snake, it's best to reach for the stick, the cliché ... or the Akker Dakker column ...


Now the pond never ever watches Q and A - it's their ABC, not the pond's, something the pond realised when the impossibly named Daisy Cousens turned up recently on The Drum. The pond immediately swore off the program and since has lived happily in its ignorance ...

Besides, the pond has no interest in programs designed to generate more heat than light, in the manner of the lightweight Drum, and the equally insubstantial but interminable fluffery of Q and A, and more specifically, in a program that imagines that the likes of Akker Dakker could offer light or insights or useful opinions, as opposed to the parade of bigotry, ignorance, fear-mongering and pandering he's shown for decades clutched like an asp to the bosom of News Corp ...

But the pond is always delighted when Akker DAkker is piqued, and turns his personal pique, Donald style, into a general attack on an entire organisation. That's the sort of bold as brass effrontery, much bigger than Myers when it was really Myers, that might be expected of the fat owl of the remove ...

The pond headed off to Q and A here to see why Akker Dakker might have been so traumatised, and not having seen the show, to mark the results of a transcript search in yellow ...

The first clue as to the source of Akker Dakker's pique and rage came right at the top of the piece ...


Nobody paid attention to the fat owl! He didn't get to dominate, why he barely beat that wet liberal Julian with a damp lettuce leaf to avoid relegation ... (don't they sack coaches in the UK for that sort of performance?)

The old fusty fuddy duddy was clearly just an appendage, an afterthought. No attention was paid, the fat owl was no longer in his glory days ...


This helps explain Akker Dakker's state of agitation ...


Akker Dakker is of course in the grip of "what I should have said" and "if only I'd told that useless git off in a right proper way" ...

Instead of coming across as a right proper useless git himself ...


But um, billy goat, but, but, um ...


Oh that must hurt, the jeering and the applause and the fat owl having to boast that he pays a lot of tax, for scribbling a few useless columns a week to pad out the Terror ...

No wonder that the fat owl was in a high state of dudgeon and fierce, intense indignation ...

Coulda shoulda woulda ... verbally smoted them mightily, if only I could have the time over again, and a bit more time, and not be cut off by that damned socialist Tony ... who always let Clive rabbit on for hours ...


Clearly the fat owl has never actually had to try to contact Centrelink, but even more clearly, it's the pique ... the hurt pride ... the sense of having been rolled and mocked and spurned that's got the sweet lad agitated, as if he'd been caught raiding the tuck shop ...


Oh the indignity of it all. A groaning audience and that terrible woman clucking in his ear. The inhuman torment of it all ... so it's back to the coulda, shoulda, woulda and all that was never said on the day to subdue the groaning audience, and reduce their surly insolence to tears and regrets ...


Indeed, but at the time, when it came to the crunch, and the warrior needed to rise to the hour and perform valiant verbal deeds? What happened then?

Did Akker Dakker make incisive points, hold paper up to camera, prove decisively that Akker Dakker was right?


Oh dear, those days of glory had gone ...


A jibber and a jabber and Bunter left yarooping and garoahing, and oh the shame, the infamy, the perfidy of the dreadful ABC ...

And Akker Dakker's response? Sack the ABC board, it's all their fault ...

Why the average terrible two couldn't put on a better foot-stamping display of petulance and childish anger, and the question must now be asked - is the fat owl of the remove already in his dotage?

Should he ever again appear on an ABC program? More to the point, should the ABC ever invite him?

Clearly he's much better typing up what he coulda, woulda, shoulda said, than actually managing to say it ...

Never mind, was it only yesterday that the pond ran this Pope cartoon?


The pond apologises. This oldie but goodie would have been just as much to the point ...




1 comment:

  1. Yes, the ABC Board and management certainly should be sacked - for giving yet another platform to such a tedious, flatulent old fool.

    Sad to say, though, Pies seems to have lost much of his old venom, if these transcripts are anything to go by. Once he would have simply talked over any opposing views, spewing bile and full of confidence in his own fruity pomposity. Now he seems reduced to feebly bleating for a fair go - HAH!

    Could it be that the dream is over, and Pies has lost his mojo? Is he destined to share a ward in the Old Blatherers' Rest Home with Ned, taking turns to empty each others' colostomy bags and recycle the contents as emergency filler columns for News? Oh, say it ain't so!

    ReplyDelete

Comments older than two days are moderated and there will be a delay in publishing them.