Saturday, October 01, 2022

In which the pond lines up the bromancer, the dog botherer, and our Gracie serving up a Nigel making plans...

 


The pond was astonished and relieved to discover it was not alone with it came to feeling grundled ...







Even the Weekly Beast decided to get into the act, with a snippet that ran ...

News Corp can’t seem to decide whether the new Italian prime minister Giorgia Meloni is fascist or not.
After several pieces which argued the Brothers of Italy candidate was not a fascist, including one from Daily Telegraph political editor James Morrow, came one from news.com.au which listed all the reasons she is a fascist.
The website, which, it has to be said, often breaks the mould, listed her remarks about immigration, race and gender which have made people worried. “There’s a reason one woman is being described as ‘a danger to Europe’,” Rohan Smith wrote. “Her fascist roots and radical far-right beliefs have many worried.”
It’s a far cry from the Australian’s foreign editor, Greg Sheridan, who wrote a piece with the blunt headline: Relax, Giorgia Meloni’s Brothers of Italy aren’t fascist.

There was a link to the Smith piece, and the pond had already covered the bromancer (and why link to a paywall?), but it was as good a cue as the bromancer to be top dog this day ... 

Relax, if you want to share intelligence, Giorgia Meloni's Brothers of Italy must be a really good place to start ...







Full disclosure. This is a long rant by the bromancer - it seems in the absence of nattering "Ned" he's the reptile that's been assigned to filling up the digital void - and it's only a chance for him to revive his favourite hits and hatreds, but the pond can't simply avoid the bromancer because he wants to wander down memory lane, and perhaps revive memories of the Cambridge Five, a splendid example of British intelligence at its finest, with Donald Maclean, Guy Burgess, Harold "Kim" Philby, Anthony Blunt and John Cairncross sterling examples of how it should be done ...

What's that you say? Odds are, if you bet a delusion, imperialistic fascist Vlad the impaler against a plummeting Pommie pound, they're not going to get a mention?

Never mind, you've always got Smiley for that ...








Ah yes, the mango Mussolini, the orange Jesus ... why would anyone have a complicated relationship with such a deep thinker? 










No, the pond isn't going to do a cartoon-led distraction, but why not one for the fun of mind power? 







Did someone mention a data breach?










Not to worry, here's the greatest hits and memories moment ...










Yep, not a hint of a mention of the likes of the Cambridge Five, but that's how it goes when you only have one eye with which to observe and tell a story ...







Oh indeed, indeed, righteous restoration of the Ming the merciless legacy, and surely Ming absolutely did not weaponise the Petrov affair, and Meloni isn't a fascist. 

Trust the bromancer? Sure can ...

As for that reference to Madame Hoover, the pond has no idea if he was a cross-dresser, nothing wrong with cross-dressing any way, and as for being gay, who can say?

Hoover and Tolson worked together more than 40 years. They traveled on vacation and official business, rode to work together, shared lunch nearly every day at Washington’s Mayflower hotel and sometimes even wore matching suits. Hoover, at his death, left Tolson most of his estate. Their relationship, by all appearances, was stable, discreet and long-lasting. But what they did physically behind closed doors, if anything, they kept between them. (WaPo)

Yes, just two good old bachelor buddies sharing quiet moments together ...








...Friends and political associates knew to treat them as a bona fide couple. In the 1930s, for instance, Hoover and Tolson hit the town with Broadway star Ethel Merman and Stork Club owner Sherman Billingsley, busy conducting their own illicit affair. By the 1950s, the two men were double-dating with Dick and Pat Nixon, whom Hoover had met while pursuing the case against Alger Hiss. “I did want to drop you this personal note to let you know how sorry Clyde and I are that we were unable to join Pat and you for lunch today,” Hoover wrote to Vice President Nixon after one failed invitation in 1958. On another occasion, Nixon suggested that Clyde—“our favorite bartender”—ought to learn to make the mean if unspecified pink cocktail that they all had often enjoyed together.
Such exchanges evoke nothing so much as the formal world of 1950s married life, one set of spouses trading entertaining tips and social niceties with the other. But did these friends actually view Hoover and Tolson as a romantic and sexual couple? In recent decades, many acquaintances—including Ethel Merman—have claimed that they “knew” about Hoover and Tolson. But it’s hard to say if this is posthumous speculation or accurate insider knowledge. Nixon famously referred to Hoover as a “cocksucker”—a suggestive word, but one that may or may not be referring to Hoover’s sex life. In the press, Hoover and Tolson were most often described as “bachelors,” a term that served simultaneously as a euphemism and as a straightforward description of an unmarried heterosexual man. At the FBI, acquaintances consistently denied anything other than a close friendship.
It is easy to write off the more open aspects of Hoover and Tolson’s relationship as proof of old-fashioned naiveté—to assume that folks in the 1950s were unaware. But this gives the people of the past far too little credit and flattens out an intriguing social history. If Hoover’s story tells us anything, it’s that today’s binaries—gay vs. straight, closeted vs. out—map uneasily onto the sexual past. Hoover and Tolson were many things at once: professional associates, golf buddies, Masonic brothers, and possibly lovers as well. (Slate)

Indeed, indeed "cocksucker" is a suggestive word, but the pond has strayed far into Deadwood territory and must return to the bromancer ...







Ah, J. Edgar Hover again, but the pond will settle for a final gobbet and a celebration of all that's good in democracy, including cross-dressing and Cambridge life ...






Strange that all those other human relationships didn't get a mention, but any reader who made a bet now scores a plummeting Pommie pound, and so on to the next weekend reptile, and how could the pond forsake the dog botherer ...








A valiant defence of our Glad, and in the pond's defence, look at the alternative reptile offering on the same theme ...










The pond is so over its visits to planet Janet above the faraway tree. Once she gets on to a theme these days, she can harp about it for weeks and weeks.

Right now all we get is attacks on the voice, and valiant support of the right of the politically corrupt to run wild and free ...

Why turn to Dame Slap for that when a serve of dog bothering is more than enough?









The pond thought that the heart of the case was whether Glad should have given the grifter his grift, but never mind, the dog botherer is here to explain that there's nothing wrong with a little shady grift ...









Look at the upside. The dog botherer has had to do such an elaborate and weird set of contortions that the usual mention of climate science, and a snide aside celebrating climate science denialism, have had to be put on hold ...








Oh indeed, indeed ... who can forget the very model of a modern persecution?

Julia Gillard has said “decency” should require coalition members who falsely accused her to apologise after the royal commission into trade union corruption found no evidence she had engaged in serious wrongdoing or criminality.
The royal commission recommended criminal charges be considered against scores of officials from three unions but found the former prime minister committed no crime and was unaware of any crimes committed by others.
“Australians may well ask themselves whether the millions of dollars the Abbott Government has spent on a twenty-year-old matter that was already in the hands of the police would have been better allocated to health, education or law enforcement,” Gillard said in a statement after the royal commission released its interim report. (Graudian)

As for the rest? Only one conviction resulted from the process, while five other union officials either had their charges dropped or had been found not guilty.

And as for the righteous commissioner himself?

In June 2020, an investigation on behalf of the High Court found that Heydon had sexually harassed six female associates while he was a member of the Court. The Chief Justice of Australia, Susan Kiefel apologised to the women on behalf of the Court, and announced new measures to protect judges' personal staff, and to improve the handling of complaints. The same month, the Sydney Morning Herald published the results of its own investigation in which several women alleged that they had been sexually harassed by Heydon. The newspaper also said that "Mr Heydon’s predatory behaviour was an 'open secret' in legal and judicial circles."
Heydon denied the claims and apologised for any "inadvertent and unintended" offence. He did not apply to renew his practising certificate with the New South Wales Bar Association upon its expiry on 30 June 2020.
Three of the associates sought compensation from the Commonwealth and Heydon. In February 2022 the Commonwealth Attorney-General[52] and the associates' lawyers announced that the three had settled with the Commonwealth, with terms not to be disclosed (although some reports refer to a "six figure" amount). Neither announcement said whether the settlement dealt with the trio's claims against Heydon personally. (wiki for the footnotes)

A classic triumph in the onion muncher manner, and a splendid example of how to deal with integrity in politics, and so to a final gobbet ...






Luckily there's an infallible Pope to hand celebrating the deeds emanating from cockroach land ...









And so to wrap up proceedings with a light hearted serve from our Gracie ...








Now the pond had other choices ... there was Brendan yelling freedumb for womyn in a way only Brendan can do ...








Yes, the patented Brendan freedumb to control your body and have an abortion if you choose ... but who knew that Brendan would indulge in a wild-eyed attack on the GOP, the Donald, religious fundamentalists of the Southern Baptist kind, and the Taliban running things in the USA ...

We keed, we keed, but the pond has been very unfair to our Gracie of late, and thought she deserved her time in the pond sun, especially as she's handing out advice to elderly gents... and she invokes a man having a wild-eyed farage ...










Some reality should be brought to the conversation?

The pond would rather bring a cartoon ...











Now there's some prime dating material ... and yes, the pond caught Bodies Bodies Bodies last night and survived the experience ... how ancient and long ago the Scream franchise seems, but as our Gracie tells us to look to popular culture, the pond just wanted to reassure everyone that The Old Dark House still has a role to play ...







Infotainment on the fringes? How about comprehensively fucking a country? And with that thought, the pond must end proceedings with yet another cartoon ...









14 comments:

  1. Well, this is truly tragic news; the Institute of Public Affairs has lost nearly all its substantial sources of funding - https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2022/10/01/exclusive-ipa-has-lost-all-funding-asx-100

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous - I guess the minions will have to scrape by on the fat fees they (no doubt) receive for their appearances on Sky News.

      Delete
    2. That's not how you spell 'moron' Chad.

      Talking of neoliberal ideology, a new term has been added to the lexicon - moron risk premium.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjTOMqQFCEw

      Delete
    3. Befuddled - damned spellchecker; has probably been infiltrated from the dark side ;-)

      Delete
    4. Well that's elective democracy for you, Bef: the longer it goes on, the more the massed morons get to elect more of their own kind. So, the USA elected Trump and the Pomegranates elected Johnson, and then the party members elected Truss. Fewer and fewer actively voting constituents exercising their personal choices.

      Now what aspect of democracy do the USA and the UK have in common ? First-past-the-post voluntary voting. They'd have been way better off with sortition. Or compulsory preferential voting, maybe ? Now who has that, I wonder - maybe somewhere where a doodlehead like The Bromancer can declare Whitlam as the worst "by far" PM we've ever had.

      If you look at Federal elections, the number of seats won on preferences has climbed from 6 in 1951 to 68 in 2019:
      https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp2122/Quick_Guides/PreferencesAustralianFederalElection
      (couldn't find the number for 2022).

      Delete
    5. Most excellent news and most excellent link ...

      There was a time, not so long ago, when corporate Australia lined up to throw money at the nation’s oldest think tank, the Institute of Public Affairs. That time is past.

      “Twenty or 30 years ago,” says John Roskam, whose 17-year tenure as executive director ended a couple of months ago, “we had dozens of ASX 100 companies supporting the IPA. Now, there’s not one.

      “Not one,” he repeats, for emphasis. “Not one of the ASX 100 companies supports the IPA.”

      No wonder Roskam sounds dispirited. Big business created the IPA. It was set up in 1943 following the collapse of Australia’s major conservative political party, the United Australia Party, in opposition to the perceived “socialism” of the Curtin Labor government.

      Its founders included the chairmen of BHP and Coles, as well as the head of the Herald and Weekly Times newspaper group, Keith Murdoch, father of Rupert, among many other business leaders.

      The fact that corporate Australia now has largely abandoned the IPA – although the Murdochs, whose business is listed offshore, are still supporters, as is mining magnate Gina Rinehart, whose interests are held privately – may be the clearest indication of the declining influence of not just the IPA but right-wing think tanks in general.

      Now more than ever it's the Institute of Gina and Rupert ... but still there is one out there to carry on the tradition ... whatever the slurs they might sling at the Caterist and Compass Polling ...

      There are essentially two major right-wing think tanks left, the IPA and the Centre for Independent Studies. There are three if you count the Menzies Research Centre, whose executive director since 2014 is Nick Cater, a former senior journalist and editor with the Murdoch media.

      Of these three, the CIS is generally seen as having the strongest claim to being a vehicle for independent research – which, after all, is the prime purpose of a think tank. Menzies is essentially an arm of the Liberal Party, so not truly independent. And the IPA, says Quiggin, “now seems to be to a significant extent a career path for right-wing young men. A lot of Liberal MPs have gone through the IPA”.

      Delete
    6. Dorothy, you refer to the Cater and his relationship with Compass polling. A reminder, if I may, that the IPA continues to use - nay, promote, Dynata - whose website invites us to ‘Ask your questions to the right audience’.

      Dynata fancies itself as just a tad superior to firms like Compass. It claims that you individually just cannot apply to its subsidiaries to be included in its database of persons willing and able to give assessments of consumer products. Oh dear no, nothing so common. No - you have to be nominated by companies who have commissioned work with some part of the greater Dynata.

      How might those companies know you exist? How about those tiresome e-mails you get from almost every tiny purchase of goods or services these days, that arrive in your ‘in’ box 2-3 days after the transaction, asking you to ‘share’ your experience with the supplier. Those e-mails can serve several functions - they might instil a feeling in you that the supplier actually gives a toss about you, they might be part of data collection for indices used in cranking-up the bonus for the CEO - to show what a caring/sharing/committed person he or she is - and it is highly likely they are traded around.

      Well, the favourable ones would be traded around, including for nominations to part of Dynata, to claim that it can draw on the opinions of millions of sentient beings, for the benefit of your business.

      Delete
  2. By contrast with the Bromancer’s ‘suggestion’ of Whtilam as the worst prime minister in Australian history, by a long distance. (Yep, in the Bro’s mind, that counts as a ‘suggestion’) we have all the evidence of the trusted, cosy, relationship between William McMahon and the Nixon administration when Whitlam travelled to China in 1971.

    What a great act McMahon mustered to speak, with such bluster, of Zhou Enlai playing Whitlam ‘like a trout’, just a few days before the US administration announced that Kissinger had also been in China, setting up a similar visit for Nixon for 1972.

    It was a consummate performance from McMahon, who, by the Bro’s assessment, must have been privy to all that was going-on in the Nixon administration, but convincingly pretended that he knew nothing of the imminent Kissinger-Nixon initiative - even to adding petulant comments immediately after the Kissinger announcement.

    This international security thing is so tricky - it is given to just a few superior intellects (who also happen to have the right ‘mates’ for the good information) to understand, and guide us peasants.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Our Gracie makes judgements on mainstream Australia based on the content of commercial TV and radio?

    What specific content? “Home and Away”? “The Farmer Wants a Wife”? Sky News? 2GB- style shoutback radio?

    Perhaps Gracie should go back to those old suburban newspapers for her research, assuming she can track down any back issues.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Reading the Bromancer and the Boverer today was illuminating. It showed me just how many of the reptiles practice the same profession as Winston Smith. Using rumours, fantasies, exaggerations and lies to construct a world that never was and never will be, but which can be radically changed just by them condemning anything they've previously written to the "memory hole" and producing a whole new exposition. And what was the main aspect of Smith's works: he never had to support any of them with actual evidence because he was never going to be questioned.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Our Gracie: "If we look to popular culture, evidenced by content on commercial television and radio, it is clear that mainstream Australia is economically conservative but socially progressive." Actually, no: Australians in general are simply pig-ignorant about economics and still think that money is 'real'; for instance, the number who still claim, after 50 years of contrary evidence, that the Libs are best at running the economy.

    And even in the UK where it should be bleedin' bloody obvious that the Conservatives are hopeless at managing the national economy, apparently most people still think they're the best.

    So here's the riddle of the week: how long Truss and Kwarteng ? And will Boris return ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. NPW - neat, plausible, and wrong. Always amusing at family gatherings to role out MMT - I don't really understand it that well but it tends to cause some degree of alarm amongst those who believe they understand something but have never bothered to question the orthodoxy.

      Delete
    2. MMT is anathema to those who, deep in their subconscious, believe that you still do have to have enough gold and silver in the vault to back up your paper currency.

      For anybody who doesn't quite understand MMT, think about this: every year the Australian population increases significantly (well, it will again now, post Covid). So, every year somewhere between 300,000 and 400,000 people are added to the Australian population. So, $billions more $AUD are required every year to pay them, to build houses, schools, hospitals and roads and provide services for them. So where exactly does all this money come from since very few of them can actually bring a lot with them ? And in any case, newborn babies generally don't have a bank account or a credit card. Have $squillions just been lying around in the banks waiting to be spent ? Or does the RBA just 'print money' to keep Australia solvent ?

      And is it that annual extra money that keeps inflation going ? If not, what exactly is it that the RBA thinks will ensure an at least 2 - 3 percent inflation rate going forever. And given that at 2.5% inflation, prices double every 28 years, how long will it be before the average annual wage/salary is at least $1Mn and a house costs around $15-$20Mn ?

      If there's still a human habitable world left in which to build houses, of course.

      Delete

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