Australian Politics Forum - The Insiders sack Piers Akerman

Postmodern Trendoid III

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 10266
Gender: male

Re: The Insiders sack Piers Akerman - more ABC bias.
Reply #60 - Feb 11^th, 2014 at 1:33pm

aquascoot wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 12:42pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 12:09pm:

Lobo wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 11:33am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 9:26am:

Karnal wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 9:25am:

Thanks, Alevine. I'd like to put Longy in as executive producer.

What a great choice!

And can we hire Misty to clean the studios?

Perhaps the slop bins in the cafeteria???

Wink

No misty has a phd in mopping.

Anti intellectualism from the leftards. They be hating on smart people more than the redneck bogans. Quite obvious to any educated person that mistie has a good brain. yet to see much from many leftards in terms of logical reasoning.

D minus leftards, Cheesy

Not to worry. Every time they speak they only justify further why the academe and public service needs to be purified. I see their continual idiocy as helping this cause.

Back to top

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: The Insiders sack Piers Akerman - more ABC bias.
Reply #61 - Feb 11^th, 2014 at 1:50pm

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 1:31pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 1:01pm:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 12:50pm:

myself.

seriously, as an observer of the many fights between mistie and those of the left

pecker
karmy
yourself
george

he always posts quite logical things and the replies are usually that he is a janitor.

you do yourselves no favours with that sort of juvenille piffle.

i actually think the only people from the left who TRY to present an arguement and not emotive BS are greenswin and the wiseone. Now i'm not sure i'd want those 2 opening the batting for the leftard team

thoughts?? Wink

Thoughts?

Mist is an interesting supremist. That's about it. The moment he gets lost in his own crazy world, he refers back to anuses and feces. As he has nothing else going for him. And most probably because he sees so many feces in his job.

The last time we crossed swords your rebuttal was that I was an "extremist" for simply arguing for more diverse topics on Q&A. The irony there was you were trying to present yourself and the show as already representing diversity of the political spectrum. But perhaps you're not aware enough to notice the problem in your position. That's pretty normal for a "progressive".

Misty!!! Hi!!! How goes the research paper into mopping?

Misty, you know too well that I called you an extremist because of the colourful words you tried to use to describe issues. Remember? And especially when you start talking about feces.

And if you remember correctly, my dear friend, my point to you was the QandA talks about issues that are in the media, or have been in the media the previous week. So, if you are upset they spend time on climate change and gay rights, then tell the entire media to stop posting up opinions, comments, articles on them. Today alone i spotted 2 climate change articles. And none on ethnic crime (or is that crime against ethnics?).

May I also add Misty, my dearest old friend, that ethnic crime is a very nice strawman created by dummies like yourself to try and lay blame on the rise of crime on "multiculturism", instead of on the true cause, being the growing divide in social equality.

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: The Insiders sack Piers Akerman - more ABC bias.
Reply #62 - Feb 11^th, 2014 at 2:01pm

Misty, which of these was biased?

Quote:

Discuss the Questions

Here are the questions our panel faced this week. Tell us what your answer would be or what you think our panellists need to say.

SOCHI GAY LUGE

Pat Birgan asked: Malcolm, imagine you are a young gay man competing in the luge at the Sochi Winter Olympic Games. You win a medal. Do you use your moment of glory to protest against Russia's anti-gay propaganda laws or refrain, despite one of the fundamentals of Olympism being the right to practice sport without discrimination of any kind?
What do you think?

UNIONS ROYAL COMMISSION

Joe Ortenzi asked: If we really want to get to the bottom of illegality in unions, why does the government prefer a Royal Commission, which is expensive, has no significant powers and may preclude any legal activity, rather than a police investigation which would exert the rule of law? It looks to many of us like a desire to keep it a political, rather than a criminal decision.
What do you think?

CANS AND CARS

Mitchell Comans asked: Why are there so many on both sides of politics who refuse to let uncompetitive businesses die a quiet death? If we don't want to eat tinned fruit or if we want to drive a European hatchback instead of a huge Australian sedan, why fight it? Personally, I enjoy not living in 1983 and wonder why others don't.
What do you think?

QUESTION FROM THE FLOOR

An audience member asked: What is the role of Coles and Woolworths in bringing down small business?
What do you think?

QUESTION FROM THE FLOOR

An audience member asked: The Shadow Attorney-General doesn’t actually present any real solutions, the issue is that we are spending a lot of money on an industry that isn’t functioning – could that money not be spent to re-tool those skills into an industry that can be profitable? And what initiatives are being developed?
What do you think?

NBN SATELLITE FULL

Bobbie Oakley asked: Dear panel and audience and viewers. Are you aware that just before Christmas I was informed that the NBN satellite for satellite broadband for a lot of regional people (our only option) is now full? There is no room left on the satellite for us. Apparently there are over 30,000 people registered or waiting for that satellite and about 200,000 people will need it in the near future. Malcolm, this is a serious problem for us. We have no other option for the internet. Do you find this satisfactory?
What do you think?

NAVY INQUIRY

Reinilda Delima-Froyland asked: A recent Fairfax report featured a detailed interview with the asylum seeker who made the original allegation against the Navy. It’s triggered unanswered questions about the validity of the ABC's report on "asylum seekers' burnt hands" versus the government's attack on the ABC. Will the government come clean now by allowing an independent inquiry?
What do you think?

QUESTION FROM THE FLOOR

An audience member asked: I don’t think Australians are disappointed about the boats – I think it is the secrecy behind what we feel that the Abbott government is doing.
I feel that you are taking Australia back to an archaic form of dictatorship under the guise of democracy.
What do you think?

AUSTRALIA NETWORK

Jack Yang asked: Ms Albrechtsen and Mr Turnbull, when other countries are pouring huge sums of money into their international broadcast operations, ABC has been the subject of much discussion and speculation over the past few weeks and debate about its future funding.

The Australian Network operated by ABC is now relayed through 679 re-broadcasters in the region with the capacity to reach 131.4 million people - up 32 per cent since July 2013. ABC’s partnerships have extended our digital reach by 109 per cent in the past six months from 1.1 million to 2.3 million visitors a month. One example of this is the growth in ABC Learn English community, which now includes almost 900,000 followers. The BBC's comparable English learning community is 498,000 and Voice of America is at 662,000.

Janet and Malcolm, if you think ABC is not precisely and quietly fulfilling its brief, why do media partners across the Indo-Pacific region sign up to the Australia Network again and again?

What do you think?

CORBY: PROCEEDS OF CRIME

Gerard Hosier asked: Should Australia's "proceeds of crime law" be applied to Schapelle Corby ,for her exclusive interviews, book and films, in the same way as it was attempted to be applied to David Hicks?
What do you think?

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: The Insiders sack Piers Akerman - more ABC bias.
Reply #63 - Feb 11^th, 2014 at 2:03pm

Misstttyyy, from the week before my dear:

Quote:

Discuss the Questions

Here are the questions our panel faced this week. Tell us what your answer would be or what you think our panellists need to say.

ABC VERSUS ABBOTT
Alicia Scott asked: Last week Prime Minister Tony Abbott attacked the ABC arguing that the national broadcaster takes "everyone's side but Australia's" and journalists should give the navy the "benefit of the doubt" in regards to the ABC's coverage of allegations that navy personnel inflicted bodily harm on asylum seekers.
Are Abbott's claims of bias in the media justified or does the Prime Minister need to be reminded that, as Liberal MP Craig Laundy paraphrased, "There are many great things about living in a democracy ... One is the luxury of free speech"?
What do you think?

ABC BIAS VERSUS NEWS LIMITED
Philippa Noakes asked: Is it an untenable position for the Coalition to criticize the perceived bias of the ABC, while accepting the benefits of the apparent bias in News Limited papers?
What do you think?

ABC – SNOWDEN/GUARDIAN
Daniel Carrigy asked: Prime Minister Tony Abbott criticised the ABC’s reporting of the Indonesian spying scandal, expressing particular concern that the information came from Edward Snowden, whom he deemed a traitor. Considering the damage caused with our relationship with Indonesia, does the panel believe the reporting of this story was truly in our nation’s best interests, or should the ABC have let sleeping dogs lie, considering the incident was six years old?
What do you think?

QUESTION FROM THE FLOOR
An audience member asked: I've just graduated as a journalist, are you really suggesting that as a new graduate I should really not publish a story this big [Edward Snowden] if it was dumped in my lap?
What do you think?

UNIONS AND ALP VERSUS ABCC
Michael Manikas asked via video: With no experience on construction sites, how on earth can the police play watchdog to the construction industry? What right do the Greens and ALP have to block the reintroduction of the ABCC to oversee the industry?
What do you think?

DROUGHT AID
Hannah Glass asked: The failed takeover of GrainCorp by the US corporation ADM was “seen as a litmus test” for foreign investment in Australia. After deploring foreign ownership and its associated $500M investment as “not in our interests”, Barnaby Joyce is now asking the government for $7 billion to “save” the agricultural industry from drought and a decline in foreign trade. How can you justify asking the government for so much money when you reject foreign investment and trade?
What do you think?

SAVING SPC ARDMONA
David McKone asked via video: If the Nationals are traditionally meant to represent the interests of farmers and primary producers of this land, then how would the closure of SPC Ardmona and the loss of 1000 direct jobs and up to 3000 indirect jobs and 50% of the region's farmers who are dependent on the plant, actually be in their interest? Or is the decision not to invest pure Liberal Party ideology?
What do you think?

QUESTION FROM THE FLOOR
An audience member asked: Isn’t the issue debt rather than the drought?
What do you think?

BEING AUSTRALIAN
Nick Chapman asked: Is being a 'Great Australian' any different to being a great citizen of any other country in the world?
What do you think?

Now I know this is going to involve using your brain, but can you remember a week ago what was in the news?

So...where's this bias? Mist?

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

aquascoot

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 35217
Gender: male

Re: The Insiders sack Piers Akerman - more ABC bias.
Reply #64 - Feb 11^th, 2014 at 2:24pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 1:50pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 1:31pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 1:01pm:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 12:50pm:

myself.

seriously, as an observer of the many fights between mistie and those of the left

pecker
karmy
yourself
george

he always posts quite logical things and the replies are usually that he is a janitor.

you do yourselves no favours with that sort of juvenille piffle.

i actually think the only people from the left who TRY to present an arguement and not emotive BS are greenswin and the wiseone. Now i'm not sure i'd want those 2 opening the batting for the leftard team

thoughts?? Wink

Thoughts?

Mist is an interesting supremist. That's about it. The moment he gets lost in his own crazy world, he refers back to anuses and feces. As he has nothing else going for him. And most probably because he sees so many feces in his job.

The last time we crossed swords your rebuttal was that I was an "extremist" for simply arguing for more diverse topics on Q&A. The irony there was you were trying to present yourself and the show as already representing diversity of the political spectrum. But perhaps you're not aware enough to notice the problem in your position. That's pretty normal for a "progressive".

Misty!!! Hi!!! How goes the research paper into mopping?

Misty, you know too well that I called you an extremist because of the colourful words you tried to use to describe issues. Remember? And especially when you start talking about feces.

And if you remember correctly, my dear friend, my point to you was the QandA talks about issues that are in the media, or have been in the media the previous week. So, if you are upset they spend time on climate change and gay rights, then tell the entire media to stop posting up opinions, comments, articles on them. Today alone i spotted 2 climate change articles. And none on ethnic crime (or is that crime against ethnics?).

May I also add Misty, my dearest old friend, that ethnic crime is a very nice strawman created by dummies like yourself to try and lay blame on the rise of crime on "multiculturism", instead of on the true cause, being the growing divide in social equality.

i would think if you got a random sample of suburban aussies and made them watch an episode of Q and A they would puke. Wink

Back to top

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: The Insiders sack Piers Akerman - more ABC bias.
Reply #65 - Feb 11^th, 2014 at 2:35pm

aquascoot wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 2:24pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 1:50pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 1:31pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 1:01pm:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 12:50pm:

myself.

seriously, as an observer of the many fights between mistie and those of the left

pecker
karmy
yourself
george

he always posts quite logical things and the replies are usually that he is a janitor.

you do yourselves no favours with that sort of juvenille piffle.

i actually think the only people from the left who TRY to present an arguement and not emotive BS are greenswin and the wiseone. Now i'm not sure i'd want those 2 opening the batting for the leftard team

thoughts?? Wink

Thoughts?

Mist is an interesting supremist. That's about it. The moment he gets lost in his own crazy world, he refers back to anuses and feces. As he has nothing else going for him. And most probably because he sees so many feces in his job.

The last time we crossed swords your rebuttal was that I was an "extremist" for simply arguing for more diverse topics on Q&A. The irony there was you were trying to present yourself and the show as already representing diversity of the political spectrum. But perhaps you're not aware enough to notice the problem in your position. That's pretty normal for a "progressive".

Misty!!! Hi!!! How goes the research paper into mopping?

Misty, you know too well that I called you an extremist because of the colourful words you tried to use to describe issues. Remember? And especially when you start talking about feces.

And if you remember correctly, my dear friend, my point to you was the QandA talks about issues that are in the media, or have been in the media the previous week. So, if you are upset they spend time on climate change and gay rights, then tell the entire media to stop posting up opinions, comments, articles on them. Today alone i spotted 2 climate change articles. And none on ethnic crime (or is that crime against ethnics?).

May I also add Misty, my dearest old friend, that ethnic crime is a very nice strawman created by dummies like yourself to try and lay blame on the rise of crime on "multiculturism", instead of on the true cause, being the growing divide in social equality.

i would think if you got a random sample of suburban aussies and made them watch an episode of Q and A they would puke. Wink

You love to always put yourself into the "average".

May I point out.

1. You aren't the average.
2. If the average you seek was true, then this country would be totally f**ked.

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

Postmodern Trendoid III

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 10266
Gender: male

Re: The Insiders sack Piers Akerman - more ABC bias.
Reply #66 - Feb 11^th, 2014 at 3:01pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 1:50pm:

Misty, you know too well that I called you an extremist because of the colourful words you tried to use to describe issues. Remember? And especially when you start talking about feces.

Incorrect. Read here: http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1391510268/255 Read particularly reply 258, as most of the conversation is in quote boxes. Nowhere did I use "colourful words". I merely described what topics I'd like to see on Q&A. You dismissed and ridiculed topics I'd like to see discussed on the show. It's not hard to see who is the extremist when someone flat out refuses to talk about some topics.

Quote:

May I also add Misty, my dearest old friend, that ethnic crime is a very nice strawman created by dummies like yourself to try and lay blame on the rise of crime on "multiculturism", instead of on the true cause, being the growing divide in social equality.

There is so much wrong here I do not know where to start. "Social equality"?! What is that? What does it even mean? There can only be equality of opportunity. Never equality of outcome. You simply can't regulate humans to be equal. You'd have to cripple and lobotomise everyone at birth (even then some would excel and others would be mediocre as they progress through life).

The second problem is the presumption that, even if "social equality" is to be achieved, how does this fix crime? Crime will exist as long as laws exist. But laws will always exist, so there will always be crime. The real problem here is limiting crime to an acceptable level. This requires social conditioning. Equality doesn't mean anything here. People have to be conditioned or "engineered" into believing that certain behaviours are acceptable and certain behaviours are not. And if you import people from a culture where certain behaviour is tolerated and accepted, but not tolerated or accepted here, then we could call that "ethnic crime".

Moreover, crime is actually a necessary evil. It shows what behaviour is acceptable. You can't have the good without the bad; they work in an ineradicable dialectic. We hold up what is good behaviour by contrasting it with the bad. Not that we should tolerate certain behaviour. Equality here doesn't even enter the equation. In fact, it makes the situation hazy and confusing, especially to shallow thinkers like yourself.

The word equality needs to be expunged from the lexicon. It's a weasel word, and used to often justify the most horrific atrocities. Just like your old country with its bloody and murderous past. No matter how many they killed or how much social engineering and bureaucracies they set up, they couldn't achieve the secular paradise.

Back to top

IP Logged

aquascoot

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 35217
Gender: male

Re: The Insiders sack Piers Akerman - more ABC bias.
Reply #67 - Feb 11^th, 2014 at 3:10pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 2:35pm:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 2:24pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 1:50pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 1:31pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 1:01pm:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 12:50pm:

myself.

seriously, as an observer of the many fights between mistie and those of the left

pecker
karmy
yourself
george

he always posts quite logical things and the replies are usually that he is a janitor.

you do yourselves no favours with that sort of juvenille piffle.

i actually think the only people from the left who TRY to present an arguement and not emotive BS are greenswin and the wiseone. Now i'm not sure i'd want those 2 opening the batting for the leftard team

thoughts?? Wink

Thoughts?

Mist is an interesting supremist. That's about it. The moment he gets lost in his own crazy world, he refers back to anuses and feces. As he has nothing else going for him. And most probably because he sees so many feces in his job.

The last time we crossed swords your rebuttal was that I was an "extremist" for simply arguing for more diverse topics on Q&A. The irony there was you were trying to present yourself and the show as already representing diversity of the political spectrum. But perhaps you're not aware enough to notice the problem in your position. That's pretty normal for a "progressive".

Misty!!! Hi!!! How goes the research paper into mopping?

Misty, you know too well that I called you an extremist because of the colourful words you tried to use to describe issues. Remember? And especially when you start talking about feces.

And if you remember correctly, my dear friend, my point to you was the QandA talks about issues that are in the media, or have been in the media the previous week. So, if you are upset they spend time on climate change and gay rights, then tell the entire media to stop posting up opinions, comments, articles on them. Today alone i spotted 2 climate change articles. And none on ethnic crime (or is that crime against ethnics?).

May I also add Misty, my dearest old friend, that ethnic crime is a very nice strawman created by dummies like yourself to try and lay blame on the rise of crime on "multiculturism", instead of on the true cause, being the growing divide in social equality.

i would think if you got a random sample of suburban aussies and made them watch an episode of Q and A they would puke. Wink

You love to always put yourself into the "average".

May I point out.

1. You aren't the average.
2. If the average you seek was true, then this country would be totally f**ked.

i got my finger on the pulse. you can see the greenies etc on Q and A and they speak with such certainty and such conviction. Its shared by 8 % of the population. I'll take the 92 % thank you.

Why do you think labor and liberal are tough on country shoppers....because their polling tells them the "average'aussie
thinks that way.
Why havent gillard or rudd or abbott passed gay marriage laws...because their polling tells them the average aussie doesnt like it.
If that makes the country "f^^ked" you and the 8 % should leave.
What you will do instead , is try to get taxpayer dollars to fund josef goebbels type indocrination programs on the ABC.
Thank goodness the 92 % see right through it. Wink

Back to top

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: The Insiders sack Piers Akerman - more ABC bias.
Reply #68 - Feb 11^th, 2014 at 3:13pm

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 3:01pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 1:50pm:

Misty, you know too well that I called you an extremist because of the colourful words you tried to use to describe issues. Remember? And especially when you start talking about feces.

Incorrect. Read here: http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1391510268/255 Read particularly reply 258, as most of the conversation is in quote boxes. Nowhere did I use "colourful words". I merely described what topics I'd like to see on Q&A. You dismissed and ridiculed topics I'd like to see discussed on the show. It's not hard to see who is the extremist when someone flat out refuses to talk about some topics.

Quote:

May I also add Misty, my dearest old friend, that ethnic crime is a very nice strawman created by dummies like yourself to try and lay blame on the rise of crime on "multiculturism", instead of on the true cause, being the growing divide in social equality.

There is so much wrong here I do not know where to start. "Social equality"?! What is that? What does it even mean? There can only be equality of opportunity. Never equality of outcome. You simply can't regulate humans to be equal. You'd have to cripple and lobotomise everyone at birth (even then some would excel and others would be mediocre as they progress through life).

The second problem is the presumption that, even if "social equality" is to be achieved, how does this fix crime? Crime will exist as long as laws exist. But laws will always exist, so there will always be crime. The real problem here is limiting crime to an acceptable level. This requires social conditioning. Equality doesn't mean anything here. People have to be conditioned or "engineered" into believing that certain behaviours are acceptable and certain behaviours are not. And if you import people from a culture where certain behaviour is tolerated and accepted, but not tolerated or accepted here, then we could call that "ethnic crime".

Moreover, crime is actually a necessary evil. It shows what behaviour is acceptable. You can't have the good without the bad; they work in an ineradicable dialectic. We hold up what is good behaviour by contrasting it with the bad. Not that we should tolerate certain behaviour. Equality here doesn't even enter the equation. In fact, it makes the situation hazy and confusing, especially to shallow thinkers like yourself.

The word equality needs to be expunged from the lexicon. It's a weasel word, and used to often justify the most horrific atrocities. Just like your old country with its bloody and murderous past. No matter how many they killed or how much social engineering and bureaucracies they set up, they couldn't achieve the secular paradise.

Misty, what is social equality? Really? I'm going to equate that to your own conditioning Sad

It really is quite sad, that when someone speaks of social equality, you straight away assume one is talking about outcomes. No, no, no. Social equality means equal rights, and equal access to opportunities (health,education). Would I say our current society offers this? Obviously not. And as a result of the inequalities that exist, this is where crime spawns from. Can it ever be eradicated? Probably not, I agree with you. But the rises we have seen have come from the direct result of our society becoming less equal.

Can I get an example from you as to what you would consider an actual ethnic crime? An actual example, Misty. I'm curious to understand what crime is occurring in Australia that is accepted by the "ethnics" back home, but we deem intolerable. And then I'd be interested to investigate further to truly understand the underlying cause.

Oh and Misty, my reply 258 was actually:
Quote:

I'm not ridiculing all the issues. I'm ridiculing how you call the issues.

The only issue I will ridicule is ethnic crime, because I'm curious to understand how it's different to normal crime?

so Am I ridiculing the issues you've raised, Mist? Or how you choose to refer to them? Think about it. Use that PHD brain.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Feb 11^th, 2014 at 3:28pm by sir prince duke alevine »

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: The Insiders sack Piers Akerman - more ABC bias.
Reply #69 - Feb 11^th, 2014 at 3:16pm

aquascoot wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 3:10pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 2:35pm:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 2:24pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 1:50pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 1:31pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 1:01pm:

aquascoot wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 12:50pm:

myself.

seriously, as an observer of the many fights between mistie and those of the left

pecker
karmy
yourself
george

he always posts quite logical things and the replies are usually that he is a janitor.

you do yourselves no favours with that sort of juvenille piffle.

i actually think the only people from the left who TRY to present an arguement and not emotive BS are greenswin and the wiseone. Now i'm not sure i'd want those 2 opening the batting for the leftard team

thoughts?? Wink

Thoughts?

Mist is an interesting supremist. That's about it. The moment he gets lost in his own crazy world, he refers back to anuses and feces. As he has nothing else going for him. And most probably because he sees so many feces in his job.

The last time we crossed swords your rebuttal was that I was an "extremist" for simply arguing for more diverse topics on Q&A. The irony there was you were trying to present yourself and the show as already representing diversity of the political spectrum. But perhaps you're not aware enough to notice the problem in your position. That's pretty normal for a "progressive".

Misty!!! Hi!!! How goes the research paper into mopping?

Misty, you know too well that I called you an extremist because of the colourful words you tried to use to describe issues. Remember? And especially when you start talking about feces.

And if you remember correctly, my dear friend, my point to you was the QandA talks about issues that are in the media, or have been in the media the previous week. So, if you are upset they spend time on climate change and gay rights, then tell the entire media to stop posting up opinions, comments, articles on them. Today alone i spotted 2 climate change articles. And none on ethnic crime (or is that crime against ethnics?).

May I also add Misty, my dearest old friend, that ethnic crime is a very nice strawman created by dummies like yourself to try and lay blame on the rise of crime on "multiculturism", instead of on the true cause, being the growing divide in social equality.

i would think if you got a random sample of suburban aussies and made them watch an episode of Q and A they would puke. Wink

You love to always put yourself into the "average".

May I point out.

1. You aren't the average.
2. If the average you seek was true, then this country would be totally f**ked.

i got my finger on the pulse. you can see the greenies etc on Q and A and they speak with such certainty and such conviction. Its shared by 8 % of the population. I'll take the 92 % thank you.

Why do you think labor and liberal are tough on country shoppers....because their polling tells them the "average'aussie
thinks that way.
Why havent gillard or rudd or abbott passed gay marriage laws...because their polling tells them the average aussie doesnt like it.
If that makes the country "f^^ked" you and the 8 % should leave.
What you will do instead , is try to get taxpayer dollars to fund josef goebbels type indocrination programs on the ABC.
Thank goodness the 92 % see right through it. Wink

Hmm Rudd was ready, and Tony thinks his personal opinion outweighs the want of the community. And gillard was against all marriage, not just gay marriage.

Actually, the joseph goebbels type of indoctrination is when a news story comes out about the navy burning the hands of individuals, and the government spins the story back onto a INDEPENDENT news agency, telling all how unpatriotic the story was to publish. Rather than accept some responsibility and conduct an investigation, instead apparently the government feels our navy is above all criticism and the law. But you know why? Because they know if they determine the claim to be true, its the government that'll be up sh1t creek .

But look, if the 92% fell for that crap, than perhaps my 30% of 50% was inaccurate, and the dumb level in Australia has rapidly shot up.

But I think it isn't 92%, and most people don't share your lopsided view of what's going on.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Feb 11^th, 2014 at 3:33pm by sir prince duke alevine »

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

aquascoot Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 35217 Gender:	Re: The Insiders sack Piers Akerman - more ABC bias. Reply #70 - Feb 11^th, 2014 at 3:24pm i think the majority do share my view. alan earns a lot more than david marr. david does seem to resent this fact.
Back to top	IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 23619 Gender:	Re: The Insiders sack Piers Akerman - more ABC bias. Reply #71 - Feb 11^th, 2014 at 3:25pm aquascoot wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 3:24pm: i think the majority do share my view. alan earns a lot more than david marr. david does seem to resent this fact. Let's hope not because like I said, if it is the case, I'll have to revise my initial estimates to a higher %.
Back to top	Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of. IP Logged

Dsmithy70 Gold Member Offline ire futuis vobismetipsis Posts: 13147 Newy Gender:	Re: The Insiders sack Piers Akerman - more ABC bias. Reply #72 - Feb 11^th, 2014 at 3:40pm Stupidity & ignorance are the new Black sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 3:25pm: I'll have to revise my initial estimates to a higher %. Revise away
Back to top	REBELLION is not what most people think it is. REBELLION is when you turn off the TV & start educating & thinking for yourself. Gavin Nascimento IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 96644

Re: The Insiders sack Piers Akerman - more ABC bias.
Reply #73 - Feb 11^th, 2014 at 4:17pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 2:03pm:

Misstttyyy, from the week before my dear:

Quote:

Discuss the Questions

Here are the questions our panel faced this week. Tell us what your answer would be or what you think our panellists need to say.

ABC VERSUS ABBOTT
Alicia Scott asked: Last week Prime Minister Tony Abbott attacked the ABC arguing that the national broadcaster takes "everyone's side but Australia's" and journalists should give the navy the "benefit of the doubt" in regards to the ABC's coverage of allegations that navy personnel inflicted bodily harm on asylum seekers.
Are Abbott's claims of bias in the media justified or does the Prime Minister need to be reminded that, as Liberal MP Craig Laundy paraphrased, "There are many great things about living in a democracy ... One is the luxury of free speech"?
What do you think?

ABC BIAS VERSUS NEWS LIMITED
Philippa Noakes asked: Is it an untenable position for the Coalition to criticize the perceived bias of the ABC, while accepting the benefits of the apparent bias in News Limited papers?
What do you think?

ABC – SNOWDEN/GUARDIAN
Daniel Carrigy asked: Prime Minister Tony Abbott criticised the ABC’s reporting of the Indonesian spying scandal, expressing particular concern that the information came from Edward Snowden, whom he deemed a traitor. Considering the damage caused with our relationship with Indonesia, does the panel believe the reporting of this story was truly in our nation’s best interests, or should the ABC have let sleeping dogs lie, considering the incident was six years old?
What do you think?

QUESTION FROM THE FLOOR
An audience member asked: I've just graduated as a journalist, are you really suggesting that as a new graduate I should really not publish a story this big [Edward Snowden] if it was dumped in my lap?
What do you think?

UNIONS AND ALP VERSUS ABCC
Michael Manikas asked via video: With no experience on construction sites, how on earth can the police play watchdog to the construction industry? What right do the Greens and ALP have to block the reintroduction of the ABCC to oversee the industry?
What do you think?

DROUGHT AID
Hannah Glass asked: The failed takeover of GrainCorp by the US corporation ADM was “seen as a litmus test” for foreign investment in Australia. After deploring foreign ownership and its associated $500M investment as “not in our interests”, Barnaby Joyce is now asking the government for $7 billion to “save” the agricultural industry from drought and a decline in foreign trade. How can you justify asking the government for so much money when you reject foreign investment and trade?
What do you think?

SAVING SPC ARDMONA
David McKone asked via video: If the Nationals are traditionally meant to represent the interests of farmers and primary producers of this land, then how would the closure of SPC Ardmona and the loss of 1000 direct jobs and up to 3000 indirect jobs and 50% of the region's farmers who are dependent on the plant, actually be in their interest? Or is the decision not to invest pure Liberal Party ideology?
What do you think?

QUESTION FROM THE FLOOR
An audience member asked: Isn’t the issue debt rather than the drought?
What do you think?

BEING AUSTRALIAN
Nick Chapman asked: Is being a 'Great Australian' any different to being a great citizen of any other country in the world?
What do you think?

Now I know this is going to involve using your brain, but can you remember a week ago what was in the news?

So...where's this bias? Mist?

Pathetic, leftards, just pathetic.

Back to top

IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 96644

Re: The Insiders sack Piers Akerman - more ABC bias.
Reply #74 - Feb 11^th, 2014 at 4:39pm

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 3:01pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 11^th, 2014 at 1:50pm:

Misty, you know too well that I called you an extremist because of the colourful words you tried to use to describe issues. Remember? And especially when you start talking about feces.

Incorrect. Read here: http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1391510268/255 Read particularly reply 258, as most of the conversation is in quote boxes. Nowhere did I use "colourful words". I merely described what topics I'd like to see on Q&A. You dismissed and ridiculed topics I'd like to see discussed on the show. It's not hard to see who is the extremist when someone flat out refuses to talk about some topics.

Quote:

May I also add Misty, my dearest old friend, that ethnic crime is a very nice strawman created by dummies like yourself to try and lay blame on the rise of crime on "multiculturism", instead of on the true cause, being the growing divide in social equality.

There is so much wrong here I do not know where to start. "Social equality"?! What is that? What does it even mean?

Alevine didn't indicate a preference for "social equality", Mistie. He referred to a "divide in social equality".

By this, Alevine alludes to the growing divide in income distribution, as highlighted by such hotbeds of "progressivism" as the US government and the agenda at the recent World Economic Forum in Davos.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marc-h-morial/income-inequality_b_4688614.html

Personally, I don't think this wealth divide is as extreme in Australia as it is in other developed countries such as the US and UK, and especially in most developing countries. However, it's one of the most crucial issues facing the world today.

Who knows? it may even be more important than gay marriage and your concerns about anal sex.

How do you measure "social equality"? Easy: in capitalism, you measure it by income levels.

Do they teach economics at the Acadame these days, Mistie?

Back to top

« Last Edit: Feb 11^th, 2014 at 4:44pm by Karnal »

IP Logged