Mark Simkin: Get this smug fool off our ABC

Sure it isn't SimPkin?

I'm getting really sick of getting my political news filtered through this smug idiot.

Firstly you can be sure his whole spot will be a laboured build up to a lame punchline.

For a "reporter" he uses a lot of coloured language to either bias or trivialise the information

Two cases in point:
1.  Julia Gillard addresses the G20 with some thoughts about our local economic success - Sim[p]kin immediately calls it "lecturing"

2.  New information about the Slipper case, implicating journalists and LNP figures in a nasty smear campaign - Sim[p]kin jokes that according to Slipper's defence team, all sorts of people are involved (nudge nudge). If he was a real journalist, it would be he who was breaking this news, instead of mocking it.

Give me strength

Asked and Answered

... well, answered then asked, actually.

Saturday's Good weekend (16/6/12) cover poses the following question:

"He has the ear of the Pope and Tony Abbot, so why does George Pell generate such fear and loathing?"


Read that again, Jane Cadzow, and I think you'll find find a couple of clues.

Although, if you wrote that, maybe clues aren't your long suit.

OK so it's probably a sub-editor's fault but such a stupid question seems to me to imply a particular slant to the article (i.e. fear and loathing being contrasted with having influence with those two) makes me disinclined to read the article at all...

... unless to get my angry up for another post

Join the dots

How was The Age's Tony Wright able to write Wednesday's article about Craig Thomson's nemesis, Kathy Jackson, without noting the implications?

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Oh come on!

Jackson, secretary of the HSU, spoke to the right wing, union smashing H.R. Nicholls Society ... no raised eyebrows, Tony?

HR Nicholls is dedicated to a non union free market approach and I believe that some of its members were key architects of Workchoices, and here is Thomson's key accuser (not to menion HSU rival) appearing there as a guest speaker.

Did I mention that Jackson's partner is an Abbot appointed VP of Fair Work Autralia, the investigator of Craig Thomson ... Not ringing a bell, Tony?

You don't see that there may be a bit more to this?  No?  Hmmm

Check this out if you're wondering

Tony, or Katherine Murphy or any other entripid journos should be smelling a huge story but it seems that they don't write anything unless someone writes it for them and gives it to them as a press release.

Labby and Stav: Why?

What's the deal with Labby and Stav on TV?

Who are they and why do they think that dressing up in women's clothing is hilarious anywhere outside of  a local footy presentation night?

Could it be an effort to make Neighbours seem like quality writing?

What mysterious market forces keep them on the air?

Is there conceivably any demographic they would appeal to?

Maybe it's a cunning plan to get us to appreciate ad breaks - when we consider that this is the alternative

Can't tell the difference? Really?

Swimmers with guns V shooters wearing bathers.

So: There's no difference between a violent man, with a track record, posing with weapons and a group of people firing guns in a controlled environment as part of a team-building exercise?

Really?

The slap with a wet lettuce sanction has taught these jerks nothing.

Their attitude smacks of kids who have never been made to accept consequences in their lives.

I hope no one expresses surprise when these guys commit their next misdemeanour.

Come on, ABC

Hey Mr. ABC: You don't need to run promos interrupting the game every five minutes or, even worse, during the cricket - interrupting to tell us what the score is and what station we are listening to - instead of letting us listen to the play.

The reason I'm listening to sport on ABC in the first place is because there are no advertisements so I already know who you are.

And what's the story with replays on radio? Utterly pointless at best; and usually confusing.

sheesh

Private schools: how to have your cake, eat it and still ask for more

The demise of Mowbray has raised an interesting angle on the Private v State school debate.

My view is: If parents want their children to be schooled in a particular way, well, good luck to them - I just don't see why tax dollars should go toward it while there are perfectly good State schools available.

The counter argument is that funding private schools with public money offsets the total cost of public education funding so we all win.

Suggestions that private schools must be accountable if they take public money was howled down by the private school lobby

Which brings me to Mowbray:  An independent school, getting government funds, despite its "independence", goes broke and what happens?

Out comes the claw for more public dough without any sense of irony.  Talk about yer entitlement! Maybe Joe Hockey is right

And to top it off they have the cheek to wave "shame Julia, shame" placards

Let's just hope they don't teach accounting in VCE

Turns out they won't be able to pay their creditors and are owed fees

Don't pay your debts? So much for much vaunted private school "values".

Oh come on, you have to be kidding

I think my son is sick of me ranting because he told me: "you should start your own Blog".

Like everyone else in the blogosphere, I reckon I can see something that everyone else is missing; in the news, in sport, in TV shows, in general.

Who knows what will make me mad next?