Away with the piggies ...

Now it's true that the pond has a warped, weird sense of humour and almost anything can set it off, but surely even the most surly and grumpy soul can have a laugh at the cheerful pig currently greeting punters being asked to register at news + (or if you will news √≠∅∑∏±).

The supplier of ham and bacon isn't even an anthropomorphic piggie in the style of Babe but a salivating, grasping type, as if designed to illustrate the grasping piggie nature of Murdoch la la land.

Now the pond got tangled with the piggie for a noble purpose - Ray Hadley had penned a piece, Extremists must never reach here, which of course would have allowed a joke about Hadley somehow having reached here, and extremism along with him. Boom tish, or tish boom, if you will.

Was it only a few days ago that Mike Carlton was calling Hadley's program a temple of hatred?

And berating the ABC's Australian Story for selective editing of his remarks about Hadley, and his behaviour in the workplace and towards his colleagues? And the show defending itself by proposing that it had shown just what a mean bastard Hadley really was, with deep-seated issues about anger?


"Ray Hadley's anger issues were the prism through which the program was tackled and indeed were mentioned multiple times from the introduction onwards .... We included more than one example of actual audio tape of Ray Hadley losing his temper. We included acknowledgements from Ray Hadley himself and his employers and his family regarding his 'scary' disposition and intolerant nature. His wife also spoke candidly about Ray Hadley losing his temper at home and the personal consequences for their relationship," she said.  (Mike Carlton lashes Australian Story for 'selective edits')

Naturally Hadley - apparently known for his 'scary disposition and intolerant nature' lashed back, describing Carlton as the most hateful and vengeful broadcaster I've ever encountered. (Mike Carlton lashes out against Australian Story on Twitter).

Sort of a hater hates the hate headline ...

Ah well that was all long ago, days and days, which count for an eternity in shock jock hate, fear and loathing land, and sadly the greedy piggie has stood in the way of learning about Ray Hadley's latest list of things to fear and loathe and hate.

Which is, when you think about it, probably a good thing. Thanks Spider pig, is there nothing you can't do?

What's that you say? Give News Ltd an email address? Is there some root canal dental surgery available instead?

Moving right along, and shuffling over to The Drum, the pond was intrigued to see that the joint boasts the usual infestation of private school supporters and IPA Bergians and gay marriage haters.

Kevin Donnelly set the tone by asking this question at the head of the page:

Naturally the pond read through All students are equal, why fund them differently?, expecting, hoping against hope itself, to find a vigorous denunciation of current funding philosophies which see lavish amounts of taxpayer money handed over to schools dedicated to fundamentalist Christianity, fundamentalist Islam, fundamentalist Scientology, fundamentalist young earth creationism, fundamentalist abuse of gays and women, and a half dozen other fundamentalisms which propose that all students aren't equal, and that instead some are the captives of raving ratbags, including cults associated with the likes of Hillsong, the ACL, Catch the Fire ministries, and the Exclusive Brethren (ah the good old days of John Howard and the fundies, recorded in Believers a world apart).

Sadly and of course - you knew it already, didn't you - there's not a word from Mr Donnelly about such pettifogging issues, because he's as usual defending faith-based education, and quoting UNESCO and leaving out all the tricky bits while leaving in the bit about the right of minorities to be as fundamentalist as they like ...

As usual, the piece ends with blather about the need to introduce vouchers and offer choice to parents - that great American bit of crap rhetoric which proposes education is rather like having a greater range of doughnuts - and not a mention of the way government funding currently supports religious ratbaggery on the taxpayers' dime. Well here's a choice. Go do it on your own dime ...

Okay, what, who, else have we got pounding away at The Drum? Supposedly part of "their ABC" which is allegedly an arid desert for conservatives?

Well there's Chris Berg, blathering away yet again about censorship, but it isn't really about censorship, it's about the evils of bureaucracy and government, and so entirely suits the IPA line (When does mission creep become censorship?) Yes, government is evil, evil, evil, it denies us choice, and chocolate doughnuts up against plain ones with too much cinnamon ...

Then there's Peter Reith, who now infests the joint like a swarm of Sydney cockroaches (lordy, do they swarm), getting agitated about the referendum, wherein the mighty Reith - let loose the hounds Smithers - thinks John Howard's treatment of the referendum regarding the republic provided a model worth repeating (Referendum deserves more than silence).

Let's tiptoe past in silence, but if we do likely as not we might stumble on Michael Cook having a go at former chairman Rudd in Ditch the switch: why Rudd is wrong on gay marriage.

Eek, it's more gay marriage bashing at "their ABC", but really does Cook know how to shoot himself in the foot or what?

Christians oppose redefining marriage because it is an important social justice issue, but so do atheists. To take one example, Brendan O'Neill, the atheist libertarian Marxist editor of Spiked, a quirky and influential UK on-line magazine, recently spoke at (at, not in) the House of Lords against same-sex marriage.

Bugger the pond dead, as we used to say in Tamworth, though perhaps the phrase should be thought of as evoking an ecstatic rather than a six foot under state, Brendan O'Neill trotted out as an example of atheist libertarian Marxism (and never mind the delusion that Marxism and libertarian can fit together in the one sentence).

Now many others have marvelled at the way O'Neill has spent many hours and words defending the Catholic church out of sheer innate and thoroughly predictable perversity (check out the links in What not to say - The anti-anti-Pope campaign of Brendan O'Neill).

Indeed the pond has got a few bucks riding on the notion that O'Neill on his deathbed will do an Oscar Wilde.

Never mind, it's a measure of Cook's naivety and innocence that he would lead with O'Neill as some kind of trump card, when all it did was provoke the obvious response that O'Neill was a narcissist who would argue and take any kind of perverse position provided it raised his profile and provoked consternation and disagreement. That's what always happens when you have a sheep in wolf's clothing ...

Anyhow, Cook produces howler after delightful howler:

Christians may find solace and motivation in their Scriptures, just as secularists do by reading Darwin or Dawkins.

Find solace in reading Darwin? Well you might hope to find a little science, but solace? As for reading Dawkins for solace, or even motivation, what planet does Cook live on? Perhaps on a planet where people wear cilices for solace ...

Then comes this:

... the only valid arguments in the public square on same-sex marriage or any other issue are those which are based squarely upon reason

Which doesn't seem to explain how Cook himself could deliver up this astonishing bit of fear-mongering as a reasonable, rational argument:

One of Mr Rudd's finest moments as PM was his apology to indigenous Australian for the stolen generations. The result of same-sex marriage will be the creation of generations of genetic orphans. Does he really want this?

Generations of genetic orphans?! Roll that one around on your tongue and sample the weirdly paranoid irrational flavour ...

Redefining marriage should be opposed because it does a colossal injustice to vulnerable children. It makes it legal to deprive kids of the right to know their natural mother and father and to be raised by them.

Yep, irrational hysteria dressed up as reason, and now the pond awaits an explanation from Cook why his interventionist god does such a colossal injustice to some vulnerable children by making them orphans ...

Never mind, we get an idea of Cook's age and mindset by his closing reference to Bolt's play A Man for All Seasons, and the heroic Thomas More standing up against Henry VIII scoring a divorce ...

Thomas More lost his friends (and his head) but he kept intact his reputation as a Christian thinker.

Um, so the argument is all about (secular) reason, and yet we end with More keeping his reputation intact as a Christian thinker?

Never mind, these days Xians love to get divorced, just like Henry VIII ... and to hell with whatever justice that delivers to vulnerable children ...

The pond blames it all on Kevin Donnelly. All that fundamentalist clouded religious thinking, funded by the taxpayer and yet purporting to be the voice of reason ...

All the same, this little excursion provides an exemplary warning to that little piggie at News Ltd.

You see, after all your relentless complaining about bias at the ABC, sites like The Drum are now full of conservatives whining and moaning about one thing or another ... so there's no need to give the greedy little piggie an email address, and sign up for a dose of "teh hatez", no need at all ...