The Australian and by golly you can see the great wall of China and the hubris and the venting spleen from the moon ...

(Above: fortunately it's the pond's belief there's no point living in the real world, not when you can live in Murdoch la la land).

Not being able to muster the strength and the courage to watch Q&A, and wondering whether Caroline Overington managed to make a goose of herself, as a reader predicted, we sat down to skim through the transcript, only to discover novelist Richard Flanagan came away with the line of the week, perhaps the month:

RICHARD FLANAGAN: Well, I think if you stood on the moon, two things would be visible, the Great Wall of China and the self pity of Andrew Bolt.

It seems an appropriate way to introduce the maudlin self-pity on view regarding the Bolt matter in Paul Kelly's contribution to maintaining the rage, Tony Abbott should seize free speech as election issue.

Yes, that's just what Tony Abbott should do, identify himself with the lunar extremes of News Ltd, nee Corp, especially Andrew Bolt.

There's nothing new in Kelly's piece, just more blather about political correctness and the legal-human rights culture of legislation and so on and so forth, including the preposterous notion that Labor will suffer electoral damage over the Bolt matter, as if most in the electorate give two figs for Bolt's twaddle or predicament, as opposed to all the other issues doing the rounds.

We look forward to a piece from Kelly explaining how Labor will suffer electoral damage, and free speech will be rooned in the antipodes if the institutional campaign to remove Rupert Murdoch and his minions from News Corp keeps gathering pace, as noted in Campaign grows to oust Murdoch.

Of course if it's all so problematic, News Ltd has the right to appeal, and so save the nation and free speech and in the process make an ongoing set of political points while maintaining the rage.

Hang the expense - it's only money after all - hang the possibility of losing - the gatling might be jammed and the square full of blood, but play up and play the game - because you see, it's the principle of the thing.

Oops, getting too excited, must have been an overdose of tofu.

Meanwhile the deluded Kelly, who likes to imagine himself as the paragon of balance and virtue, to the point of being tepid and dull and banal, shows he's drunk the kool aid and whips himself up into a fine lather about Labor:

Meanwhile many of its cultural backers are irrational about Abbott and fan hostility to shock jocks, the so-called Murdoch media, while betraying their resentment of an Australian public that still backs Abbott.

It would be a disaster for Labor to become party to the new political correctness. Doesn't Labor see this is not about Bolt? Doesn't Labor grasp that this issue plays directly into Abbott's entire political narrative? Doesn't Labor grasp that stifling debate is a sure loser with the voters?

It's not about Bolt, but somehow it's about Bolt?

To mangle Flanagain, I think if you stood on the moon, four things would be visible, the Great Wall of China, the self pity of Andrew Bolt, the delusions of grandeur of Paul Kelly and the megalomania of News Ltd.

The point is, in terms of the Bolt matter, it's not for Labor to do anything. It's up to News Ltd to lodge an appeal, and get down and dirty ...

Let's see how they go, whether they can person up to the task ...

Meanwhile, in keeping with Louis XIV, perhaps the new company motto should be L'État, c'est moi, or perhaps L'État, le Bolt, et le News Corp, c'est moi, though in the matter of Murdoch's ongoing presence in the company, perhaps they should prefer the more accurate Louis XIV quote: "Je m'en vais, mais l'État demeurera toujours." ("I depart, but the State shall always remain"). (Louis XIV of France).

How long will The Australian maintain the rage? How long is a befuddled piece of string? Roll on the appeal, or better still the paywall, which we understand has been delayed a few more months ...

Will the suffering of humanity never end?

Meanwhile, Janet Albrechtsen is doing her best to maintain the high standards of Gordon "greed is good" Gekko in Let champagne socialists pay more tax voluntarily.

She's shocked, outraged and appalled that a few rich people have abandoned the barricades and joined Warren Buffett in suggesting that the mega rich should pay more tax - though why she should pick out venture capitalist Mark Carnegie for particular scorn is a mystery, as the News Corp galley managed to assemble ten class traitors prepared to say yes, the rich should pay more tax.

Frankly this kind of treachery is enough to make anyone swoon, except Dame Slap, who is determined her outrage will be seen from the moon, along with Andrew Bolt's self-pity.

Not once does Albrechtsen mention her major concern - that the family of redback spiders lodged in her purse might suffer emotional stress if disturbed - but she has endless reams of other rhetoric to explain why the filthy rich should remain filthy rich, and not give a toss about anyone else, because everyone aspires to be filthy rich, and part of the joy of being filthy rich is the right not to give a toss about anyone else at all ...

Wealth inequality in the United States, where the top 10% possess 80% of all financial assets?

Why it's as it should be, and with a bit of luck, a little work will trickle down to the swine savouring the swill, who might pick up work as gardeners or maids, and what's wrong with a little bit of economic slavery? Whatever you do, don't trouble yourself about 15 Mind-Blowing Facts About Wealth and Inequality In America, now as good as it's been since the roaring twenties ...

Somehow, Albrechtsen manages to conflate people earning 90k in Australia with people earning US$380,000 in the United States, or those earning US$490k in California, never mind that the current point of discussion about Obama's tax proposals revolves around the US$250k mark. Somehow Albrechtsen imagines people earning 90k are up there past the 250k mark. So much for dollar parity, but the pond says bring it on ... we always fancied living on a quarter mill ...

Never mind. The point is taxing the rich will lead to ruin, perhaps even an economic Armageddon. It was taxing the rich that's done down the United States and California, and no doubt Mississippi and Alabama as well ...

There's the usual blather about the Reagan years and economic theory, but you won't find any mention in Albrechtsen's piece that Even Reagan Raised Taxes:

Everyone remembers Reagan's 1981 tax cuts. His admirers are less likely to tout the tax hikes he accepted as the 1981 recession and his own tax cuts began to unravel his long-term fiscal picture--a large tax increase on business in 1982, higher payroll taxes enacted in 1983 and higher energy taxes in 1984. A decade later, when a serious recession and higher spending began to upend the fiscal outlook again, the first President Bush similarly raised taxes on higher-income people in 1991; Bill Clinton doubled down and raised them again in 1993.

Enough of that nonsense, because Dame Slap is determined, by hook or by crook, that the rich be given a "get out of jail and taxes" card by hook or by crook, using whatever methods it takes.

(The get out of taxes, or "keep them to a dollar Kerry Packer style" offer is on the other side of the card, but this side comes in handy when the ATO takes a view).

So if Kerry Packer can keep his tax to a minimum by using tax avoidance schemes, yet still score a taxpayer-funded state memorial service, well good on him for gaming the system and scoring a win even when he's carked it ...

Most people, no doubt, will remember with a nodding smile what Kerry Packer told a Senate Committee in Canberra in 1991:

"I pay what I'm required to pay, not a penny more, not a penny less. I can tell you, you're not spending it that well that we should be donating extra."

Yes, no doubt most people off in Murdoch la la land will recall with a nodding smile Packer's love of bullying and screwing people, and if that involved ripping off the poor so much the better.

Why you can almost picture kindly Uncle Rupert's eyes moistening, a discreet tear coursing down a cheek, as people throughout the land celebrate tax minimisation and Swiss bank accounts and the heroic work of the noble tax accountants they have in their employ ... along with the maids and the gardeners and the lickspittle journalists...

And best of all, that sweet little redback spider family lodged in the purse can sleep on, safe and sound and undisturbed ...

Meanwhile, in pigs might fly news it turns out that The Australian now supports an NBN.

Fast, efficient broadband is essential for Australia's economic future. The Australian supports an NBN but not the government's business model...

The anonymous editorialist, without a shred or trace of irony, titles his piece Time to warble a different tune ...

Un huh. Talk about warbling a different tune, as off key and appalling as Stephen Conroy warbling the Collingwood song to his eternal humiliation and damnation in Chaser skits.

And there the pond was thinking that the minions of Murdochs' relentless ongoing, ceaseless never-ending war on the NBN was because they opposed the NBN, holus bolus, lock stock and barrel.

It seems that the good news is that Nationals have realised the NBN has something to offer the bush, and it might live on in any new regime, albeit in modified form. Now if they can only run that fibre outside our certified black spot for ADSL home before the bush gets to socialise its infrastructure and pocket its profits in best Toorak style ...

But, but, but you ask, what about all that talk of wireless and the uselessness of fibre to the home and so on and on, an endless war that raged on the way the Bolt war rages now? Well silly, you mis-read the fine print.

Whatever, don't fret. The Australian doesn't think its readers are cretins, it's just that the readership is expected to suffer from short and long term memory loss. And after reading The Australianfor a little while, what with all the endless corrections and amendments to the party line, who's not inclined to get a little glazed in the eye and Orwellian and 1984 and Ministry of Truth?

They were never opposed to the NBN, it was only the business model, not the actual NBN itself ... in much the same way you'll recall, that Oceania was never at war with Eurasia ...

I wonder if they can see Janet Albrechtsen's greed from the moon, and even the giant, flashy, bold as brass monkey balls of the anonymous editorialist?

(Below: found here).