By golly, it takes hard work to discover prattling Polonius early in the digital dawn on a Saturday these days, as he gaily prattles away ...
The reptiles keep burying the poor old thing, perhaps in the belief that he's ossified, a fossilised, rigid, stagnant, obdurate, unyielding, hardened relic from another age ... but dammit, he's still alive and full of blazing indignation ...
Indeed, such is the perfidy of the ABC that The Drum had on a Christian chappie last night - as anyone can see here - who could see nothing wrong with spreading pamphlets stoking fear, hysteria and misinformation.
Of course all this arose from a story that spread far and wide in the Fairfaxians ... without the benefit of a single sous or cent from government funding... good on you Central Westerners ...
Now metropolitan readers could get the same story here, with its weird tale of Opus Dei fanatics living in the arcadia of Sydney's Hills shire and the way the Arcadian Monastery happened to involve Liberal party members ... off the charts, one person is quoted as saying, but all the pond reliably knows is that there be dragons out that way ... mythical beasts with a taste for inner west 'leets ...
Of course the pamphlets just looked like your average front page Oz news story demonising Safe Schools yet again ... but the brave reptiles forgot all this and sent off one of their finest to cover the Fairfax story ...
The brave lad - steadfastly ignoring the steady stream of 'safe school' horror stories that saturate the lizard Oz - filed a report on the matter ...
Naturally the brave lad began with a ritual washing of the hands and a disclaimer, "nothing to do with us" ...
And so on ...
It must hurt, seeing how the Oz is home to reporting that daily pleases the average Hills shire bigot of the Opus Dei kind ...
Rebecca Urban in particular is the resident reporter responsible for drumming up fear and loathing ...
And so on. The pond would run out of space before it ran out of examples of Oz hysteria ...
It produced a hollow Sierra Madre style laugh in the pond when Crowe turned from reporting to commenting - as the reptiles so often do these days - and concluded with a mealy mouthed bit of hand wringing ...
Yes, freedom of speech, freedom of hate pamphlets, freedom of Oz hate stories ... it's all pretty much part of the stew, and there's a reluctance to call it out, just to have lots of handwringing and then a concluding piety about conservatives supporting SSM ...
But in all the uproar and the ruckus - brought free to the world with nary a sous or a cent of government funding involved - the pond almost clean forgot about prattling Polonius, still nagging away at the need for government money to really get the shit stir going good ...
Sometimes Polonius is wondrous in the direness and stupidity of his pedantry, and really that line about not being able to afford to alienate the likes of George Christensen - because he's Nat rather than Lib - is surely designed to produce howls of delirious, delighted laughter ...
As for the notion that the debate has been going on for years, and will go on for many more years, what's that got to do with the notion that the plebiscite debate is already out of hand - before the plebiscite details have even been tabled - and that the alphabet soup is routinely ridiculed, not least in the pages of the lizard Oz ...
Bomb threats, pamphlets, abuse, hate, fear and loathing ...
To which Polonius, tucked safely away behind the arras, seems entirely oblivious, so he can produce that wondrously innocent last line ... without public funding, the no case may be shouted down ...
Because ... well, because bigotry and homophobia should have a place in every Australian home ...
Don't worry Polonius, there's already enough private money floating about for sly, smearing pamphlets and the odd telephone call carrying a bomb threat ...
Trust Opus Dei? Sure can ...
Meanwhile, as the cash is ready to be splashed on a public debate designed to go feral, the federal government pleads dire and abject poverty on matters educational ...
The only good result? A couple of cartoons from Pope and Rowe, with more Pope here, and more Rowe here ...
Hi Dorothy,
ReplyDeleteHenderson's pedantry has now descended to the level that he is resorting to word count for the Q and A participants.
Could such a humourless pedagogue be expected to tell if laughter was feigned or otherwise. I doubt he's barely smiled in the last 50 years.
DW
But, butt DW - and not dismissing Anony's excellent point below about the primitive incompleteness of word counts - we all know that one word from an inspired Rightist like Fiona Nash is worth at least five dull, plebeian words from those benighted 'radical leftists'.
DeleteSo, if we take the word count: Magda = 172 + 123 = 295
Fiona = 62 * 5 = 310 !
Fiona wins ! As we always knew she would.
Sorry, Hendo, not good enough. Comparative word counts only tell part of the story. We need breakdowns into the respective numbers of syllables, letters and vowels and consonants in order to get a full picture of the dreadful ABC bias in favour of the evil Left.
ReplyDeleteAlso what's with Mr Pedant's comment on public funding that "for an election, this is not a lot of money"? No, it wouldn't be - if the issue under debate was an election, rather than a plebiscite. No doubt Polonius will issue a stern correction to himself in due course.
Yes, he counts words. I met my tax agent at 1152 and forty seconds, the appointment was made by me by telephone for 1145 precisely. Fifty six words were used to make the appointment, thirty eight by myself (not counting the sixteen words I spoke to the receptionist - who answered with a perfunctory four -"putting you through now"...
DeleteBut mock laughter? I haven't watched the episode, I hate Q&A - but please, let the mock laughter be the maniacal evil deranged guy with bomb laughter, or a deep Dracular-esqe laugh, or Mutley's laugh - or indeed that nervous faux laugh that Abbott used when he believed something might have been humerous, but didn't have the necessary schooling in how actual people behaved to be 100% sure.
I read on another independent site the comment that those who uphold the "traditional" definition of marriage are adamant about the "between a man and a woman" bit, but not so vocal about the "for life" part, given the large number of divorces we see these days.
ReplyDeleteWell reading the Melbourne Hairoiled Scum over coffee (and pear crumble pizzetta with double ice cream), and one of the benighted readers was so radical as to suggest that if it's all about "a man and a woman with the intent of children" then it's about procreation, not marriage. Sheesh, the kind of people they'll allow to comment on Right Wingnut rave sheets these days.
DeleteThat person had an interesting definition of marriage. Among the many whose marriages it would render invalid is that of the Not Very Reverend Fred Nile. Following the death of his first wife he remarried a few years ago; Fred was in his late 70s, while Mrs Nile 2 was around 50. So not much chance of children there... though I suppose Fred might be counting on an Old Testament-style miracle, along the lines of Abraham and Sarah having Isaac when they were 100 and 90 respectively. Hey, it's in the Bible, so it must be true!
DeleteAwoke this morn to the loon Baldy and self-described moderate Leftist (would you believe?) that loon Doogue on their Radio National going over old Baldy's recent cloud shaking manifesto
ReplyDeleteword for doofus word,
point by drongo point,
his life's momentous work,
as reptile published recently,
and shredded here by the Pond,
Arrrrgh!!!