That’s how Robert Vienneau described me after some of my stoushes last year.
It seems as if my luck is holding in that respect at any rate. While I’ve had plenty of supportive responses after being booted from the Fin, I’m sure not everyone is sorry to see me go. Most of those in the latter class, however, haven’t seen any need to gloat.
I would have been disappointed, however, if Andrew Bolt had not lived down to his usual form on this occasion. Sure enough, as his fans have advised me both by email and in comments here, he’s written a gloating column, expressing the hope that Laura Tingle (a far better journalist than Bolt could ever be, even if he was trying) will be next to go.
Bolt can’t even manage an original line of attack, dragging out the tired misrepresentation of a 2007 blog post that the Telegraph ran last week.
The great thing about having Bolt as an enemy is that you get his fans thrown in as part of the package. There’s something comforting in knowing that, if someone dislikes you, there’s a high probability that they are the kind of person who comments on Bolt’s blog.
Of course, it isn’t much of a distinction to be one of Bolt’s enemies. With the exception of the late Paddy McGuinness (who at least had some style to combine with the vitriol) I can’t think of anyone who is less discriminating in his hatreds.
John Quiggin 
Well, you will know, JQ, that you have made a lucky escape when, to follow the readership enhancement trends, they fill your collumn space with raunchy pinup picks.
I wish I could remember where I read this, but it was definitely uttered by Salvador de Madariaga, the 20th-century Spanish political philosopher and diplomat: “In real life there are no victories, only defeats of our adversaries, so let us always hope that our adversaries are stupider than we are.”
The saving grace of P. P. McGuinness (I speak as one who copped the occasional spray, as well as receiving the occasional compliment, from him over the years) was that he literally did not care what anyone thought of him. In his less-than-couth he was fearless. Whereas Bolt’s antennae are as perfectly calibrated towards political power as were those of any time-server under Stalin. “Lavrenti Bolt”, I sometimes find myself thinking, or at other times “Andrew Beria.”
I wish I could remember where I read this, but it was definitely uttered by Salvador de Madariaga, the 20th-century Spanish political philosopher and diplomat: “In real life there are no victories, only defeats of our adversaries, so let us always hope that our adversaries are stupider than we are.”
The saving grace of P. P. McGuinness (I speak as one who copped the occasional spray, as well as receiving the occasional compliment, from him over the years) was that he literally did not care what anyone thought of him. In his less-than-couth fashion he was fearless. Whereas Bolt’s antennae are as perfectly calibrated towards political power as were those of any time-server under Stalin. “Lavrenti Bolt”, I sometimes find myself thinking, or at other times “Andrew Beria.”
Oops! My bad. I seem to have ended up posting a comment twice. Apologies for that.
@BilB
Well, I’m always learning. You say Tingle is a far better journalist than Bolt. I hadn’t known that Bolt is a journalist! Well, I’ll be.
Oops. Directed to JQ.
John, I couldn’t say that I agree with every thing you say but on ecomonic matters I trust your expertise. I appeciate you having this blog because it helps me understand issues that can be hard to get to grips with otherwise. I think you do the world a service it doesn’t always deserve. As for Bolt, I wouldn’t p*ss on him if he were on fire.
You’re quite right PrQ. While I don’t always share your opinions, they are at any rate well-informed, thoughtful and honest — which is a good deal harder a thing to achieve than most suppose. The same cannot be said of The Blot. Robert above is onto something when he notes the alignment of Blot with those of privilege. In a more rational world than this one, Blot would have a proper job rather than singing songs of inequity, ignorance, arrant Unsinn and misanthropy for his supper. In a way, Blot is amongst the tragedies of the system he defends. He might well have been a better man, and now he is an ethical and intellectual abyss.
I think Paul Keating, of all folk, noted that you were nothing if you didn’t have people who hated you. He also noted that the better the quality of those who hated you, the better you were — or something. I’m not sure I agree, which is perhaps as well because by this standard, being hated by The Blot isn’t much of an achievement. I will agree that you deserve better enemies.
One might add that the true measure of Blot is found in the quality of his acolytes. Blot draws to him all who find an ethical and intellectual abyss the best of all possible worlds.
A favourite t-shirt is one that Crikey had printed, back in June 3rd, 2010.
People might laugh at me, but I find politics globally and locally in particular, depressing.
I thought we’d ducked the Cameronite/ Merkelite/ Tparty disease here.
Even Australians would pause for thought, count their blessings and be greatful that, as to austerity, we had avoided the plague. This despite Labor’s shortcomings and the inability of the wider public to grasp the rational, scientific Greens message, but it’s gone wrong, like a bad trip.
The first inklings of trouble came when Bligh tragically fouled up on privatisation and Rudd and Gillard weren’t able to mend their differences, allowing the hard right factions to interfere on behalf of a reactionary, obscurantist platform closer to Abbott or Kevin Andrews’ thinking than anything one could associate with an ALP outlook and of course the other cancer, neoliberalism, took root as Gillard remained on the defensive and people lost confidence, not because things have been bad, but through the lack of ability of the current government and state governments to offer inspiration, combined with the steady chipping away of optimism from Abbott and Trolls like Bolt.
The country has been dumbed down exponentially over the last five years and and the refusal of Conroy and his ilk to prevent the destruction public broadsheet broadcasting, has been criminal, although typical of the reactionary lack of imagination of the Labor Right, who could see no more use for public broadcasting than as a source of a few bucks from privatisation.
The potential of broadsheet msm became nothing better than something to censor, for no better reason than behind closed doors deals between party opportunists and developers be exposed.
So, the public have remained ignorant and become fear-laden. They still swallow Murdoch, despite its unmasking. For every person watching a Panorama or Newsfront doco, another ten will be watching ACA or TDT and more still preoccupied with celebrity mags, Alan Jones or soap opera ‘reality”shows, if they’re not wasting time with Foxtel.
Just as Labor is collapsing, possibly permanently, under the weight of its own ignorance, false consciousness and contradictions, the hard right is moving into control of the msm.
All feels very nineteen-thirties and that marching song we’re not allowed to mention the name of, gets steadily louder.
I fear,”I am a Camera”.
I’m not laughing at you @Paul Walter.
You’ve summed it up fairly well.
@Fran Barlow
Here here!
Now Sam, If you have been self educated and could not afford to go to a proper school, I apologise but… typing here here is particularly stupid… even Fran coud tell you that….
From Wiki
Hear, hear is an expression used as a short, repeated form of hear him, hear him. It represents a listener’s agreement with the point being made by a speaker. It is often incorrectly spelled “here here”
Please don’t let it happen again
(And tell all your mates who do it all over the internet)
@chrisl
I’m sure at your proper school they told you what was meant when they called you a prat.
There, there!
and i thought it was “hear! here!”
as in:- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hear!_Here!#Hear.21_Here.21_.28U.S._version.29
a.v.
@Freelander
Yep, enjoyed that one….nothing quite so gratifying as seeing someone pop the pomposity of a purist.
Here, here!
@chrisl
Ha, never knew. Only ever heard it. Thanks for that.
No problem Sam …. It is hardly your fault as grammar and spelling hasn’t been taught for many years…. You only learn grammar if you learn a second language. But it is interesting to be called a prat and a pompous purist to point these things out.
Didactic pedantism rears its ugly head again…and there should be more of it, superfluous redundancies notwithstanding.
They’re goes another thred.
Anyway, back to the phone hacking scum…
Oh Oh Megan, I dont want to be too pompous ,pedantic or a prat ,but you might want to revisit your #21 (or is that You’re)
when are the yanks going to book ’em? before or after the election? will the board move first? or the justice dept?
a.v.
@chrisl
I didn’t call you a prat.
I simply implied that that was what you were habitually called at school.
I expected one as erudite as you purport to be would know the difference.
@chrisl
I didn’t refer to you as a pompous purist for correcting Sam. I referred to you as a pompous purist for the way you corrected Sam.
“…typing here here is particularly stupid…”
“particularly stupid” – how’s that for a scornful tutorial?
Got him!
Thanks for kind words, Megan. Am glad these things worry you also, but do hope you have a spare stash of prozac, coz I think you’re gunna need ’em.
Just coming from FB, someone posts that a new Pennsylvanian law prevents doctors from informing a patient if their ailment is due to gas fracking.
Ok cool it everyone
There were probably gentler ways of correcting me, but as a recovering pedant myself, I can’t get too offended. Criticism cheerfully accepted!
Anyway, my original intention here was to agree with Fran’s opinion of the conservative commentariat in this country. Tribalists like Bolt will use any talking point to attack a notionally progressive government (or to support a notionally conservative one), even if it means reversing the content of last weeks campaign. Tim Blair and Gerard Henderson are no different. All this has been said many times before, so rather than spend 5 paragraphs saying it again, I’ll just save myself the trouble and agree with Fran Barlow and Paul Walter.
week’s
chrisl:
2 things:
1) …. never mind, it was obviously lost on you;
2) In your comment @13, could you define your term “coud”?
Oh! He’s gone.
In more ways than one!
Re: Rupert. In a just world he would already be in chains.
I imagine #21 was lost on him which adds to his being an unintended sauce of amusement.
I rarely comment here but regularly visit, finding Prof Q’s intelligent and articulate posts a great antidote to the nonsense that pervades the MSM. I also enjoy the conversation amongst the commentators.
My recent Bolt story:
Rafe Champion linked to a Bolt “article” in a comment at Club Troppo. I checked the paper that Bolt referred to and found that it had been debunked at Judith Curry’s site by sort of skeptic Richard Tol. If a paper is so bad that even “skeptics” find serious flaws in it, then the paper must be particularly poor. Of cause any one reading Bolt’s post would have received no inclination about the shocking quality of the paper he referenced.
It is clear that what Bolt does is not journalism, it is propaganda.
But that’s what happens when highly opinionated bigoted billionaires own media. With Fairfax under new ownership except it too to become “fair and balanced”.
Stephen Spencer,
“It is clear that what Bolt does is not journalism, it is propaganda”….
and entertainment of the Kings Cross strip show variety which appeals to politically perverted minds.
The term for it is Polliography. “Pollio” is the explicit portrayal of distorted political subject matter for the purposes of ego arousal and public incitement.
nb Pollio should not be confused with the tragic disfiguring disease Polio, even though Pollio can have similar effects to the minds Pollio addicts.
….with a little more “research” on the subject I have discovered that for polliographers the experienced is enhanced with self stimulatory Mythterbation, usually engaged in private although public displays of the practice are not uncommon.
Frankly, I think that the whole thing is digusting and should be banned.
I don’t like Bolt much but this demonising of him as a non-journalist who indulges in propaganda is just as tribal as the worst right-wing nonsense in Quadrant or at Catallaxy. He is not – he is a skilful journalist who writes from a viewpoint in politics that many of us find disagreeable.
Likewise I enjoyed John’s posts at the AFR and have read them there for years. But the end of his very long spell there might signify something other than a right-wing plot. Maybe just a change. Stutchbury is a top jounalist.
It’s better to try not to join camps. What I hear repeatedly is the same kind of monotone bleating from both sides of politics – “I barrack for good against the forces of darkness”. Then exchanges degenerate (in blog discussions) into an echo chamber where one only hear’s a simple transformation of one’s own views with the most heated discussions focusing on changes to a well-rehearsed script. The current exchanges an example of this.
Ooh come on. Next you will be saying Windsckuttle is a historian!
You have gone down in my estimation, Harry.
He may have been a journalist once. But that must have been a long long time ago. Long before he found his current gig as a mealy mouthed shock Jock playing to the lowest common denominator for the applause of the mob and for the affection of his wealthy patrons.
Oops! It’s “Windschuttle”, Freelander, not “Windsckuttle”! Even opponents have the right to get their names rendered accurately.
Not all of KW’s historical output is worthless by any means. The Killing of History, though its frenetic tone hasn’t worn well, was the product of some serious research. KW’s trouble (I don’t profess to know the origin of Bolt’s trouble) is, I would say, only 10% intellectual and 90% a clear case of bad conscience.
For many years KW was a slavering apologist for Marxist terror of the most murderous kind (think: Pol Pot; the evidence of his 1970s Nation Review babbling is all over the Internet as well as in any academic library). Unlike Orwell and Koestler when confronted with the consequences of their youthful political follies, KW has never shown the smallest contrition for his own – decidedly non-youthful – follies, or even the smallest ability to explain why he adopted them, though his decision to save his skin during the Vietnam War by avoiding the draft could perhaps be put down to undergraduate peer pressure.
Overall, for what it’s work, I agree with Dr Clarke.
Ironic to bleed for Bolt’s alleged demonisation, when demonisation is Bolt’s stock and trade.
Skcutbuttle not a name worthy of remembering.
@Robert (not from UK)
So if someone’s babbling is all over the Internet, why not provide a link?
@hc
False equivalence and nonsense. You’ll need to define journalist to start making that case.
Blot is neither a skilled liar nor a journalist. He is a scribbler who scribbles for his supper. A mewling mindless drone, destroyed by his patrons.
@Fran Barlow
He’s mostly a ideological tool of the right-wing power hitters. Lachlan Murdoch gave him his high profile slot on ten and the Rino saved him from the chop in a poor ratings period. So much for Free Market philosophies eh. If is wasn’t Bolt, Murdoch would’ve just found another propaganda tool to further promote his ideologies.
Murdoch now even has “his” ABC to do his bidding. Talking of ABC who saw Pell’s painfully pompous performance? A self -parody, unintended of course. He accidentally displayed some of his “private” views ..
andrew bolt is a dangerous demagogue.
alfred venison
@Freelander
Yeah, I watched it. Pell’s reaction to the question of homosexuality was particularly interesting. The way I interpreted it – he virtually condoned it, and even maybe sanctioned it, short of gay marriage. My understandings of the Catholic Church’s position obviously needs recalibrating.
Unfortunately, I’d much prefer someone like John Lennox to argue the case for religious belief to at least provide some intellectual enlightenment about it.