Billablog

Dear Canberra Press Gallery 2 - or, Haven't we heard all this before?

2012-02-21T00:33:00.002+11:00

In June 2010, I wrote this:

Dear Canberra Press Gallery,
Look, I know you’re bored. I know Kevin Rudd isn’t the kind of prime minister who whacks himself in the eye with a cricket ball, or confesses infidelity, or tells the opposition leader “I’m going to do you slowly,” or makes a fawning goose of himself in front of royalty, or goes out of his way to be seen cheering any kind of sporting event... So I know that’s rather boring for you, but this is the beat you chose, so could you try reporting about things that are actually happening, rather than the things you wish were happening?

Obviously, that was too much to ask.
Now I know what some of you must be thinking,
“But Bill! There really was a leadership challenge happening. Julia Gillard successfully challenged Rudd just a few days later. You were wrong.”

Well, yes and no. I stand by my observation that the Gillard challenge began as a media concoction. What is observable is that rumours of a challenge to Rudd’s leadership had been rife in the media for months – long before anyone began to take it seriously. Leadership speculation is the ultimate self-fulfilling prophecy. If you say that speculation is increasing about the leadership of the party, that in itself increases the speculation. It’s true just by virtue of saying it.

I’ve already described how to manufacture a leadership crisis. Say what you’d like to think is happening and let human nature do the rest. It’s school-yard stuff really. Here’s how you might do it…

“So, PM, do you have a response to what X said about you?”
- Why? What did X say?
“Oh? So you haven’t heard?”
- Heard what?
“Oh, never mind. It’s probably nothing.”
- What’s probably nothing?
“Well, I didn’t hear it myself, so I can’t be sure.”
- Can’t be sure of what?
“Well, I just overheard Y talking to Z and apparently Y was saying that X reckons you’re a bit of a wobblebottom.”
- X called me a wobblebottom?
“‘A bit’ of a wobblebottom. But I don’t know, I just heard Y say so. Wondered if you had a response.”

Meanwhile...
“So X, what’s this about the PM saying you called him a wobblebottom?”
- What?
“The PM reckons you called him a wobblebottom.”
- Why on earth would the PM think I called him a wobblebottom?
“Buggered if I know. Go figure!”
- Well if that’s what the PM takes me for after all the loyalty I’ve shown, then the PM really is a wobblebottom.

Later...
“It’s true.”
- What’s true?
“X. He called you a wobblebottom.”
- X really called me a wobblebottom?
“Yep. Told me directly.”
- After saying it to Y?
“Dunno. ’Spose so.”
- X is a good minister and has always been supportive. He was probably just blowing off steam.
“Maybe. Still, it’s not a good look if you let him get away with that kind of thing. People will question the strength of your leadership”

And, as Mr Ellis would say, so it goes.

Having got their change of leader in 2010, the press gallery is bored again. After filling columns about Julia Gillard’s voice, hair, partner, dress sense, and even her earlobes, they’ve run out of trivia and now they want to write it so that the Gillard prime ministership was all a dream – like that season of Dallas.

It does appear that after months of relentless media agitating, the rumours of a Rudd challenge are finally beginning to grow legs, with several Labor MPs willing to comment one way or another. This does not prove that the whole, banal soap opera was not fomented by media who would rather report personality politics than stuff that’s actually happening.

When a heavily edited video of Kevin Rudd swearing in frustration was leaked onto YouTube last Saturday night, it was fascinating to look at twitter and watch everyone claim it as proof of their own narrative. The kind of spinning and re-spinning that used to last a week, all came one after another in less than an hour. When the story broke, the angle was that this would be damaging to Rudd. Therefore, it must have been leaked by those who are out to damage Rudd. Within ten minutes, it started to become evident that it would not be as damaging to Rudd as first predicted. Without missing a beat, it was then claimed that since it wasn’t damaging him as much as expected, that meant that Rudd himself must have leaked it in order to gain sympathy and make it look like Gillard and her backers were trying to smear him. Naturally, everyone took it as confirmation of an ongoing leadership struggle.

It seems a large chunk of the current crop of journalists honestly think that this is how it’s done. It doesn’t matter if it’s relevant, it doesn’t matter if it’s important, just keep it simple enough for people to talk about. Don’t blame the 24-hour news cycle. 24-hour news should mean more time for policy analysis, not a ravenous appetite for salacious trivia.

Leave the fluff to these folks...

What we really do

2012-02-16T15:12:00.000+11:00

Far be it from me to let a bandwagon go by without jumping on it...

The Best of the Best-ofs: Morrissey

2012-02-06T17:37:00.008+11:00

Every one of these compilations will contain Suedehead, Every Day is Like Sunday, The Last of the Famous International Playboys and The More You Ignore Me, The Closer I Get. After that, it becomes a question of who compiled it, what label it’s on, and which phase of his career he wants to remind people of at the time. What all of these collections remind us of, in their own strange way, is how Morrissey can be both a neglected treasure and (dare I say it?) devious, truculent and unreliable.

“Suedehead” The Best of Morrissey - 1997

You know it was the mid-90s because it was named after the best-known single. Released by EMI at around the same time as the underrated Maladjusted was released on another label, which suggests they exercised a contractual option, this is probably as good a compilation as you could expect at the time. It features all the notable singles, the rare cover of The Jam’s That’s Entertainment and the UK version of Tomorrow, which features an early fade of the vocal and the curious piano coda. It was the first album to include the singles, Pregnant for the Last Time and the duet of Interlude with Siouxsie Sioux.

At all stages of his career, Morrissey has tended towards self-parody – sometimes deliberate, sometimes unintentional. This collection avoids that tendency better than most.

For: First compilation, includes several non-album tracks.

Against: Seemingly minimal involvement from Morrissey himself, currently out of print.

The Best of Morrissey - 2001

Released right in the middle of his exile from recording, this North American release manages to avoid the problem of Morrissey’s mid-90s label-hopping and includes material from his time at EMI, BMG and Mercury. As such, it’s the only collection to include selections from the whole of Morrissey’s solo career at the time of release.

It’s a genuine best-of, featuring singles, album tracks and rare B-sides such as Hairdresser on Fire and the brilliant Sister I’m a Poet. It’s nice to see the inclusion of underrated singles like Sing Your Life and Alma Matters, despite conventional wisdom saying they were forgettable. Do Your Best and Don’t Worry is a curious choice when there are better songs to represent the Southpaw Grammar album but it’s nice that it’s included at all, as well as the Maladjusted-era B-side, Lost.

For: Broad selection

Against: Difficult to find in some areas

Greatest Hits - 2008

Firstly, Greatest Hits is nothing of the sort. It’s mostly a collection of what you might call the comeback years, but adds Suedehead, …Sunday, …Playboys and The More You Ignore Me, licenced from EMI. The pop sheen of these earlier songs jars with the edgier production of the newer work. Two previously unreleased tracks, All You Need is Me and That’s How People Grow Up were later included on the Years of Refusal album. Although all the other tracks are bona fide chart singles, I Just Want to See the Boy Happy and In the Future When All’s Well don’t stand up among Morrissey’s best or his greatest hits. It would have been better to leave the EMI-era stuff out completely and make it a true 21st century compilation.

Also, Greatest Hits has been given the everything-as-loud-as-everything-else mastering treatment which is almost tolerable on the recent tracks but does nothing for the earlier ones which had a bit of subtlety.

Greatest Hits comes with the option of a short bonus live CD recorded at the Hollywood Bowl, which makes it a slightly more attractive option for people who have all the music on the main disc already. The special edition also came with a weblink to register for “A very special Morrissey release,” which hasn’t eventuated.

For: Collects all the hits of the comeback years, bonus live disc.

Against: Brickwall mastering, not actually his greatest hits.

Very Best of Morrissey - 2011

It’s promoted as an overview of the classic years, which is both a euphemism for the EMI years and an implication that the years since have been less than classic. A message from Morrissey on a fan site lamented the possibility that this might be his first album not to chart on release. For this, he blamed EMI’s distribution which is a fair point, but the other factor is that there’s very little new here. Obviously, you’re not supposed to expect anything new from best-of compilations but we should expect a new collection to do a little more than, to quote the classics, slip them into different sleeves.

It does have the advantage of being selected by Morrissey himself and it’s a typically idiosyncratic mix. The usual hits are there but the singles from Your Arsenal are left out, but the two grungiest tracks from that album, You’re Gonna Need Someone On Your Side and Glamorous Glue are included, the latter being released as a single to promote the album. Kill Uncle is ignored completely but the melodramatic B-side from the same era, I’ve Changed My Plea to Guilty is featured. Three other B-sides including Girl Least Likely To (written with Andy Rourke) and the full nine minutes of Moon River make the list. It’s interesting that Moz has chosen Break Up the Family from Viva Hate, when he hasn’t shown any particular affection for the song previously. Curiously, only one track is included from Vauxhall and I, despite it being regarded as one of his best works. There is the US versions of Tomorrow and My Love Life, with the latter having a later fade. As with the reissue of Bona Drag (see below) the concluding verse of Ouija Board Ouija Board has been cut out entirely.

The attraction for fans who already have all of this already is the solo version of Interlude (identical to the duet version, but with Morrissey singing the entire song) and the option of a bonus DVD with remastered videos, four of which have not previously been available on DVD.

The album has an interesting flow to it, mostly starting out with the rockers, moving on to polished pop and concluding with torch songs. It really would be a great collection if not for the fact that it covers the same material as many others.

For: Decent remastering, compiled by Morrissey, bonus DVD.

Against: Haven’t we heard all this before?

If you had to choose one, choose…

Well, not Greatest Hits because it isn’t. Other than that, they all do the job well. “Suedehead” is the closest to an actual greatest hits. It was deleted just prior to the release of Very Best Of but there are still plenty of copies around. The Best Of gives what it probably the most objective overview and I’m very tempted to choose that one. Very Best Of has the advantage of being the one Morrissey has been the most closely involved with, so you might as well get that one. At least it will make him happy. Or perhaps not.

Suedehead from "Suedehead" The Best of Morrissey

Suedehead from The Best of Morrissey

Suedehead from Greatest Hits

Suedehead from Very Best of Morrissey

See also,

Bona Drag - 1990

With a new album due and not enough material to fill it, Bona Drag became a compilation of the singles and B-sides that Morrissey had released every three or four months in 1989 and 1990. There was already ample precedent for this in Morrissey’s career. The Smiths albums Hatful of Hollow and The World Won’t Listen were both collections of non-album tracks. At the time of release, Bona Drag was completely redundant to anyone who had been buying the singles but today, it stands as a collection of some of Morrissey’s best work. This was a time when many of his B-sides were as good as anyone else’s A-sides. The lyrics of Interesting Drug are probably more relevant now than they ever were. My one complaint is that the beautiful Will Never Marry is faded early and we miss out on the minor key coda.

World of Morrissey - 1995

1994’s Vauxhall and I was regarded as a triumphant return to form and Morrissey was reinstated as a national treasure, so it’s typically contrary that he would follow it up less than a year later with this bizarre, slapped together collection. There was close to enough non-album material since Bona Drag to fill an album, but rather than do that, World of Morrissey is padded out with three tracks from the live album Beethoven Was Deaf and album tracks from Your Arsenal and Vauxhall and I.

It’s a worthwhile sampler if you can find it going cheap, but otherwise pretty pointless.

My Early Burglary Years - 1998

Another North American release, this collection immediately scores points for being the first album release to include Nobody Loves Us, one of Morrissey’s best ever songs which was criminally hidden on the B-side of the unremarkable single, Dagenham Dave. (It has since been added to the expanded edition of Southpaw Grammar.) An excellent collection of rare tracks including the live version of T-Rex’s Cosmic Dancer, plus a couple of album tracks from Southpaw Grammar. Unfortunately, as with World of Morrissey, the version of Jack the Ripper is the live version available on Beethoven Was Deaf rather than the much rarer studio version.

Swords -2009

Morrissey clearly saved up a lot of songs during his seven years without a record label – enough to make this full album’s worth of B-sides and bonus tracks from the singles released off You Are the Quarry, Ringleader of the Tormentors and Years of Refusal. Most of them are just as good as, if not superior to those albums. The exception is Sweetie-Pie, which is unlistenable, but Ganglord, Shame is the Name and Good Looking Man About Town are excellent.

As with Greatest Hits, a carrot for those who bought all the singles is another short live disc, this time recorded in Warsaw. The sound quality of this live disc is pretty awful but this is almost refreshing in a way, now that most live recordings are so polished as to make you wonder. Predictably enough, the live set focuses on Moz’s recent albums but two interesting inclusions are Why Don’t You Find Out For Yourself and You Just Haven’t Earned it Yet Baby.

Bona Drag - 20th anniversary edition - 2010

There’s something awfully meta about a remastered, expanded, anniversary edition of an album that was really only a company-pleasing stopgap in its day. There are six additional tracks added but what is not mentioned is that several of the original tracks have been changed as well. Piccadilly Palare has gained a third verse that was edited out of the original, although this is not the “no Dad,” version which has been posted on some fan sites. The entire “table is rumbling” section has been cut out of Ouija Board Ouija Board and the ambient guitar strums have been chopped off the intro of Suedehead. Sadly, the full-length version of Will Never Marry has not been restored.

Of the bonus tracks, most of them are worthy additions, especially The Bed Took Fire and the demo version of Please Help the Cause Against Loneliness, which was written for Sandie Shaw. The problem is that by tacking these tracks on the end of the album, it ruins the end of Disappointed. The self-deprecating “Goodnight, and thank you,” had been the perfect conclusion to the record. I don’t know why Let the Right One Slip In has been included. It’s a nice enough song, but all the other bonus tracks come from the same era as the rest of Bona Drag while …Slip In is from the Your Arsenal sessions.

Suedehead from Bona Drag 1990

Suedehead from Bona Drag 2010 remaster

Eye of Newt

2012-01-31T22:21:00.001+11:00

A criticism of not just Mitt Romney but all the candidates, past and present, in the Republican primaries is that it’s an incredibly negative campaign and that no one is offering a positive vision for the future. They all say they have a positive vision for the future but when asked to quantify it, the positive vision seems to be to dig up Ronald Reagan and the future is 1986.

Then Newt Gingrich said something that most definitely qualifies as a vision for the future. He said that by the end of his second term (and I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt that he doesn’t mean a Grover Cleveland style second term) there will be the first permanent colony on the moon. The need or purpose for such a base isn’t clear to anyone but the two pieces of speculation are that it’s either about minerals or that we’ve stuff this planet up so much that it’s time to look for alternatives.

Anyone who knows me knows there are few greater supporters of space exploration. The return is far greater than the investment and the investment is a pittance compared to many other escapades. The shuttle program could have continued for a few more years (or better still, a replacement developed) for the amount of petty cash that was lost in Iraq. That’s not hyperbole – I’m talking about actual petty cash that actually went missing. Having said that, the first question regarding a moon base is, Why? Even some of the people who have already been there say that a return to the moon is pointless. Been there, done that, let’s go somewhere new.

Here’s an even more interesting question: What if such an outlandish idea had been proposed by, oh let’s say, John Kerry, or Howard Dean, or Dennis Kucinich? Or even Hillary Clinton or Ron Paul? Do we really need to imagine how much they would be mocked for it by the right wing? Would it not surely have destroyed their campaigns even sooner? Yet (and I know I’ve said this before) Newt Gingrich is still being taken seriously. Why? Is this fair and balanced?

We report, you decide.

A picture is worth a thousand words…

2012-01-27T11:44:00.001+11:00

Most of them wrong.

This photograph of the prime minister and opposition leader being whisked away from a function yesterday when protests got ugly, went viral within minutes of it being released. Some published it completely. Others, including the ABC’s news home page cropped it to focus on Julia Gillard and her bodyguard.

Reports were quick to highlight how weak Gillard looks in this picture. They mentioned how she is clutching onto the security guard, “visibly rattled,” or “clearly distressed,” or some similar description. That certainly is the first impression of what was happening during this particular hundredth of a second of the fracas. The problem is that it’s all projection.

Have you ever had your photo taken in the middle of falling over? Or moments after a fall? I’m guessing not, but if you did, you’d probably look a little frightened and helpless yourself.

What we also know about this moment is that Julia Gillard lost a shoe while being rushed to the car and that moments later she stumbled almost to the ground. She was already the only person in the whole group wearing a skirt and heels, losing the shoe would make anyone additionally wobbly, she quite understandably loses her footing for one moment and… SNAP!

I suggest that you possibly wouldn’t look particularly dignified or statesmanlike in the same situation, regardless of how calm you might actually be. Unless you would, give the woman a break and cut out the patronising crap.

THE LOVE WE MAKE - Paul McCartney (2011)

2012-01-25T22:06:00.000+11:00

There are many stories surrounding the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001 that deserve to be told. This is not one of them.

I’ll admit that I had written that line long before I put the disc in the player. The blurbs and promotions give the distinct impression that this “chronicle of Paul McCartney’s cathartic journey through New York City in the aftermath of 9/11,” is a shameful attempt to use an atrocity as an ego trip. Indeed, the promotional material stops just short of claiming that Paul McCartney came to heal America just as the Beatles had (apocryphally) helped America to get over the Kennedy assassination.

Fortunately, the film itself is nothing like what the descriptions suggest. Shot in grainy black and white by Albert Maysles (of Gimme Shelter and early films of the Beatles in the U.S.), it’s a genuine fly-on-the-wall account of the lead up to the Concert for New York City on 20 October, 2001. There is no commentary, either direct or implied and there are clearly no situations contrived for the benefit of the film. The events that prompted the concert are only mentioned during snippets of conversations, although there is an interesting moment when McCartney ponders how an avowed pacifist should react to the attacks.

The film also isn’t cut to be too flattering to McCartney either. Moments after gladhanding people on the street, he’s shown in the car saying, “Right, get me out of here.” There are of course all the usual shots of fan mobbing and references to the Beatles, but it’s a refreshingly candid portrait of McCartney.

Things get interesting at the venue where we see Paul planning arrangements, instructing musicians and somewhat nervously presenting his idea for the new song, Freedom, and confessing to its corniness. We also see how even some of the most famous people in America can be reduced to gibbering fanboys in the presence of The Beatle. There are no complete musical performances. That's fair enough since it's not what the film is about, but if that's what you were hoping for, you'll be disappointed.

Although The Love We Make is far better than expected, there is still much of it that is suspect – such as why Paul would hire a film crew to document his contribution to the concert, and why release it to coincide with the tenth anniversary of the attacks? While the film is not quite as self-serving as I thought it might be, McCartney is not completely innocent of trying to make it all about him.

That would be forgivable if proceeds from this DVD went to the Robin Hood Relief Fund, as the proceeds from the concert and album did. However, there is nothing to suggest that this is the case. As such, The Love We Make is better than it looks, but approach with caution.

Feature: * * ½
Extras: None
Audio: Dolby stereo, Dolby 5.1, DTS

Don’t be a Loser

2012-01-22T12:11:00.000+11:00

“Who here has never been in love?” asks the host from under an umbrella while the contestants stand in the rain. “Come on, be honest!” she goads as a few sheepishly put their hands up.

“The Biggest Loser this year, is all about singles,” we are told and there is so much wrong with this that I’m going to have a hard time putting it all in order without punching a few walls.

We can see what the basic idea is here. The Biggest Loser has been going for a few years so it’s time to bring in a new gimmick by mashing it up with Farmer Wants a Wife or some such. That would be bad enough. Hell, the original idea of The Biggest Loser is bad enough. Making weight loss a race is unhealthy in itself and they make their participants try to lose unhealthy amounts of weight over a dangerously short time period which risks triggering the body’s starvation response. Most reality television is merely stupid but The Biggest Loser is seriously irresponsible.

Now they’re making it even worse by making the humiliation not just about body image but about their love lives as well. The message is clear: they’re too fat for love. Ha ha! Look at the fatties out in the rain! They’ve never been in love! They’re probably virgins! Haha! But, as the captions inform us, they’re “ready for love.”

“You’re all here because you want your lives to change,” lectures the presenter, who goes on to list some of the torment they are in for before stating, “At the end of it all, sixteen singles will be ready.”

Ready? Ready for what, exactly? Ready to submit themselves to the judgement of people who wouldn’t have looked at them before? Ready to present themselves with confidence? That’s got nothing to do with weight and if that is what was sapping their confidence, shows like The Biggest Loser have plenty to do with that.

That promo got me angry enough, but this next one is even worse:

The contestants are forced to explain themselves, to explain how their weight has stopped them finding love. One perfectly attractive girl says she has never kissed a boy while another poor lady is shown wondering how she can give someone a loving relationship if she doesn’t have the confidence to look at herself in the mirror. None of this is challenged as the wrong way of looking at things. It’s never pointed out that they have internalised the media’s perception of beauty or that accepting yourself doesn’t come from changing yourself.

Then there’s the soundtrack. The use of the Beatles’ final ever song to promote crap like this is vulgar enough in itself, but let’s just think about the words of the song in relation to what it’s being used for.

It’s real Love,
Yes it’s real.

No. It. ISN’T!

Real love is for better or worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health. If you need it spelled out for you, it also means for fat or for skinny you pricks!

We all know that ‘reality’ television is a social disease that chews people up and spits them out. Most of the time, I don’t care. If some precocious brats think that subjecting themselves to ridicule on The X Factor is going to set them on their way to becoming the next Miley Cyrus, or that their tomato-julienning skills are going to impress the pants off of Master Chef and have them rubbing shoulders with Heston Blumenthal, then more fool them. I don’t give a shit. But when television producers take a group of already vulnerable people and submit them to physical and psychological stress, and play on their insecurities, in public for fun and profit, under the guise of self-improvement – that’s when a civilised society should say Enough is enough!

I don’t blame the contestants. I know what it’s like to be desperate for love and to be willing to try anything to find it. To them I would say: you are all beautiful and deserving of love just as you are. If you want to try to lose weight for yourself, that’s fine. But if you’re doing this because you think it’s the only way you can love or be loved, then I have to tell you that’s not how it works. I never had a weight problem, but I never had a girlfriend until I was a couple of weeks off thirty. I don’t know why, but I know it wasn’t weight. Just because you’re single or lacking confidence doesn’t mean you have to put yourself through this. And just look around at people who have partners. Are they all TV beautiful? Do they all have model figures? Of course not! If someone won’t accept you as you are now, then they don’t deserve you afterwards. If there are people who would only love you if you lost weight, then fuck them and fuck anyone who tells you to.

There are many reasons why people watch reality television. Some watch it because they’re silly enough to believe the premise of the show. Some watch it to be catty about the contestants in their choice of song or frock or dish or whatever. Some people watch it to hear what bitches the judges are. As usual, the network and producers don’t care WHY you watch, so long as you watch. That’s where you can make a difference.

Do NOT watch The Biggest Loser. Don’t watch it, “just to see how bad it is,” or “just because it was on after ____,” or because they have a guest star you like. Just do NOT watch it for any reason. I want to be perfectly clear about this: if ANYONE watches The Biggest Loser for ANY reason, then YOU are the problem and I will blame you for it.

Choose your values

2012-01-21T13:17:00.001+11:00

It’s always been taken as a given by all sides of politics that “values voters” (as if there are voters who don’t vote according to their values) are a wholly owned subsidiary of the Republican party. As the candidates tear each other apart in ways the Democrats only wish they had the nerve to, you just know that by the middle of the year, they will all be lining up behind one saying that he’s the one to lead the country and that all those awful things they said earlier about what a disaster he would be somehow don’t matter any more.

It’s not that Democrats don’t do this either, but they tend to be a little less rigid in their dogma. This recognition of nuance in such important issues often plays into the Republicans’ hands, allowing them to portray the Democrats as wishy-washy, but it also makes it less uncomfortable for them to unite behind one candidate once they’re chosen. Although Hillary Clinton had some vehement support, I can’t imagine there were too many Democrats who sat out the election just because Obama pipped her for the nomination. Likewise, if Clinton had secured the nomination, there might not have been quite as much voter enthusiasm, but surely not enough to swing the election for McCain. Even John Edwards would have been perfectly acceptable in terms of policy.
What a minute! John Edwards? That deadbeat? Are you serious? Don’t you know what he did?
Yes. More on that later.

This year’s Republican primaries will no doubt be chosen as 2008’s were - that is: in terms of who is the least hated. John McCain had few real friends in the party but he had the least sworn enemies. What makes this primary interesting, is watching to see which specific set of professed values the Republican party will be willing to sell out.

First, there’s the value of ideological consistency. If 2004 taught us anything (which is debatable) it’s that Republicans can’t stand a flip-flopper. Remember the footwear they brought to the convention to wave about as they taunted John Kerry? That should automatically rule out Mitt Romney who shifted the moderate positions he held on abortion and gay rights as governor of Massachusetts to reflect the hard line national Republican position in 2008. That’s nothing compared to what he did next though. The biggest weapon Romney has against Obama is that he made public health cover work. But since the official Republican position is that public health cover is bad cos socialism, Romney is saying that he will reverse Obama’s attempts to do for the country what Romney did for Massachusetts. Of course, anyone can change their mind. It’s a sign of maturity to amend one’s position according to new information, changed conditions or personal epiphany. Then again, it could just be rank opportunism. So we shall see if Republicans choose either nuance or opportunism, and flip-flop on flip-flopping.

Then there is the so-called tea party. By rights, the tea party should be right behind Ron Paul, a small government, anti-tax, isolationist, strict constitutionalist. The fact that they would support an idiot like Michelle Bachmann over someone who has spent his entire political career espousing the same ideals the tea party claims to, just goes to show what a bunch of astro-turf phonies they are.

Ron Paul scares the hell out of Republicans because he proudly represents the logical conclusion of many Republican policies. He wants to end the Federal Reserve, abolish the IRS, hand all government operations that aren’t nailed down in the constitution to the states and, most controversially, let the rest of the world take care of itself. The one point on which Paul has been willing to step back from his position of personal liberty and pander to the party is that he’s not too keen on the gays either. For all this, Paul is still regarded as mad old Uncle Ron. We are also constantly told that he is a marginal candidate. He has been in the past but this year he has been consistently placing respectable seconds and thirds while Cain, Bachmann, Huntsman and Perry have all dropped out. Ron Paul cannot be written off.

Now we come to that most euphemistic of values - family values. Somehow, Newt Gingrich is still in the race. I had to chuckle this week at reports of an ABC interview with “a former wife” of Gingrich’s who alleges that he asked for an (ahem) open marriage. Not “the” former wife, “a” former wife. This has to tell us something, no? Now I have always held that marital fidelity has no bearing on one’s ability to run a country. Indeed, history has shown as much. But Republicans like their candidates squeaky clean. Except when they don’t, which is why it will be interesting to see which side they come down on this time around.

Of course, marriages do break up. People change, people drift apart, these things happen. In Gingrich’s case though, it’s a case of ’tain’t what you do, it’s the way that you do it. In both of Gingrich’s remarriages, the relationship began when his was still married to his previous wife. He left his first wife while she was recovering from cancer. Oh, that reminds me, what were we saying about John Edwards? He filed for divorce from his second wife while she was fighting multiple sclerosis. His affair with his current wife began around the same time as he was attempting to destroy Bill Clinton over the Lewinsky scandal. Whatever you may think of the Clintons, the fact is that they saved their marriage. I guess Newt is more the cut-and-run type.

None of this actually disqualifies him from becoming president or even implies he lacks qualification. However, Republicans also like to talk about character. Gingrich and his supporters tell us that it’s disgraceful of the media to bring this up at all. This from the same party that insisted the life and times of Bill Ayers had everything to do with Obama’s candidacy. For his part, Gingrich has acknowledged his straying and blamed it on the pressures of work and his love for his country. As lame excuses go, that ranks second only to the captain of the Costa Concordia’s story that he slipped and fell into a lifeboat. It surely suggests some malleability in family values that Gingrich is still a strong contender against Romney, who is still married to his first wife and has five children, Rick Santorum, who doesn’t even get an erection except for the purpose of procreation, and Paul, who would contend that it’s nobody else’s business either way.

It all reveals the contradictory nature of expressed Republican values. Of course, politics and government are all about compromise, but that’s another thing that Republicans are none too keen on as candidates try to outdo each other on their unwillingness to bend. It will be interesting to see which set of values is eventually set aside and how the other candidates will rationalise it.

Record Collection Porn: 80s 12-Inch Single Edition

2012-01-11T23:04:00.001+11:00

Let me say from the outset that this is not about 80s nostalgia. I have no time for it. I was there the first time and they were crap – and crap isn’t any less crap just because it’s nostalgic crap. In fact, seeing the 80s revised into some kind of golden ages gives me a slight idea about what it might have been like to grow up in the 1960s – pop culture has conspired to suppress all the crap so they end up looking much better than they were.

Of all the things we remember the 80s for – big hair, loud colours, new romantics, ra-ra skirts, stone-wash denim, poodle metal, superstrats – one that never gets mentioned is the phenomenon of 12-inch singles. As mentioned on one of the records below, a 12-inch single was just like a 7-inch single, only bigger – and longer. Although the format began in the 70s along with disco, and continued into the 90s before going the same way as the 7-inch single for the same reason, by the mid-80s, any single with an outside chance of charting was also released as a 12-inch and often with an extended remix.

It was not a remix as we interpret the word today. In fact, on most extended versions, the mix (that is, the balance of instruments and vocal parts and their placement in the stereo picture) was exactly the same as the regular version. In these cases, a better description would have been Extended Edit, or in some cases, Unedited Version.

There were many ways artists and/or producers made songs longer for the larger format. Sometimes they were the full length version of the recording before it was edited down for released. Sometimes they had extra parts added. Sometimes they just let the song play out. If you can get hold of the 12” of World Party’s Ship Of Fools, the extended version is created by not fading out until two minutes later, giving the listener a rare glimpse into what happens after the fade. Dire Straits’ Money For Nothing didn’t need extending because the album version goes for 8 minutes anyway.

A common method of creating a 12-inch mix was a simple cut-and-paste job. Firstly, play the intro twice. If you can’t resolve the intro musically in order to play it again, it doesn’t matter – just stop at the end of the intro, throw in some S-S-S-sampled B-B-B-beats and start again. Next, play the first verse without the vocal. Do the same with the chorus if you feel like, then start with the first verse proper. If there’s a middle-8, play an instrumental copy of it before the second verse. If there’s a guitar solo or other instrumental part, double the length. Then repeat the final chorus with lashing of gratuitous delay and Bob’s yer uncle! You’ve got yourself a 12-inch extended version.

12-inch singles also had a fascinating mystique to a young collector. They were never played on the radio, not included on compilations and certainly not available on cassette. The only way to hear the extended version was to buy the record.

I had wondered whether to include these examples in the order they were released or in the order that I discovered them. In the end, I went with a bit of both.

Tina Turner: We Don’t Need Another Hero
This is the first 12-inch single I bought. The main reason was because I had just received a turntable for Christmas and this was the song I liked most in the 12-inch rack at my local record store.
It’s a bit of a tease as extended versions go. It’s exactly the same as the regular version up until about two thirds of the way through. The song is from Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome, so composer/producer Terry Britten’s sense of drama may have had something to do with how the 12-inch version was arranged.

Thompson Twins: King for a Day
I bought this a week later and it was the first 12-inch of a song that I really wanted to have the 12-inch of. Yes, it’s the Thompson Twins, of Hold Me Now – what’s your point? Despite looking very mockable, they had some really nice songs and don’t forget this record was produced by the great Nile Rodgers.
It’s a particularly long version that in part follows the standard method mentioned above but also features some actual different mixes in parts and still doesn’t outstay its welcome.

Mike Oldfield: To France
This was the first time I had heard this song, but I would buy anything with Mike Oldfield’s name on it, so at first it was hard to where it has been extended. Even without comparing it to the album version, it’s pretty clear now that an additional instrumental section has been edited in just before the end of the song.

Marillion: Market Square Heroes
I had never heard anything of Marillion before this, but the record was calling to me. This is actually the B-side of Punch and Judy and I truly don’t know if that’s an extended version. I suspect probably not. Truthfully, the reason I bought this is… well, just look at it! How cool is it? Fortunately, the song isn’t bad either.

Paul McCartney: No More Lonely Nights
This is where it all came together - Paul McCartney and an extended mix and a picture disc. I was holding out hope when I bought this that it would be the ballad version of No More Lonely Nights, which is not only one of the greatest ever Paul McCartney love songs but also one of the greatest ever David Gilmour guitar solos. Ah, but no such luck – it’s the playout version, which closed his forgettable film Give My Regards to Broad Street. It might be just as well. Doing an extended version of the ballad would be like trying to improve on perfection.

There were actually two extended mixes of this track. This one was released in the UK and I actually like it better than the more collectable Arthur Baker mix released in the US.

Tears For Fears: Everybody Wants to Rule the World
Probably a good example of an obligatory extended edit, although the bassline at the beginning does sound rather similar to Michael Jackson’s The Way You Make Me Feel, which was still two years away. The full guitar solo is used until the recording appears to peter out and starts again for the final chorus and a repeat of the first part of the solo, which is faded early.

Prince and the Revolution: Raspberry Beret
This “new mix” starts out with the same intro that is used on the official video but not used in the album or single version. As the song nears conclusion, it repeats the minor key variation used in the intro (complete with cough) and finishes up just noodling around. It seems like he started with an interesting idea but didn’t know where to take it.

Cliff Richard and The Young Ones: Living Doll
In 1986, even a novelty charity record had an extended 12-inch (ooh-err!) and the fact is lampooned in the extended portion of the song. There are also skits at the beginning and end that weren’t on the 7-inch version.

Genesis: Invisible Touch
Um, I have no explanation for this one. I was young and curious. Don’t judge.

Men At Work: Down Under
Not released alongside the initial 1981 single, but remixed for a 1986 best-of album. I believe this is the version that was included on that compilation as well. In terms of the mix itself, there are some subtle differences, with Colin Hay singing the beginning of the final chorus solo. As an extended edit though, it’s awful.

Icehouse: Crazy (Mad Mix)
At which point, we begin naming the remixes, preferably along the same theme as the song. Rather than follow the same old formula, Iva Davies completely reconstructs the song in a genuine remix and re-edit. We also discover that the guitar solo which is cut down to a middle-8 on the album/single version actually goes for a whole verse and more as originally recorded. This mix takes an already bombastic song and cranks the dramatics up well beyond 11. It’s all utterly mad but then, that is what it says on the label.
The B-side features the rather lovely Midnight Mix, which does away with the rhythm section altogether and suddenly it’s become a song of seduction – which goes to show how important mixing can be.

George Michael: I Want Your Sex (Monogamy Mix)
Now this is creative! I Want Your Sex was a controversy-baiting single dressed up as a safe sex message. As nookie songs go, it’s exactly mid-way between Barry White and Salt’n’Pepa. However, if this record had finished at the 5-minute mark, it would still have fulfilled all the requirements of a 12-inch. Instead, it’s presented in three sections – Rhythm 1: Lust, Rhythm 2: Brass in Love, Rhythm 3: A Last Request. As I understand it (I haven’t heard the album), the first two sections follow the album arrangement, with the final section (also on the album but not in the same order) turns it into a 13-minute epic.
I was fascinated by the idea of three sections looking at the cover in the record shop, but couldn’t come at actually buying a George Michael record. I picked this up at a market many years later. Listen without prejudice.

Roger Waters: Radio Waves
The Radio KAOS album is regarded as a bit of a mistake by most which is quite unfair. Waters’ intention was to make a straightforward rock and roll album and naturally threw in some apocalyptic fear and a message of redemption for good measure. In fact, the album’s other theme of corporate dominance and dedication to all those who find themselves at the violent end of monetarism are more relevant than ever.
Appropriately for the musical objective of the album, an extended version of the lead single was released. It’s a fairly formulaic mix, but interesting coming from an artist like Waters.

George Harrison: When We Was Fab
George’s wonderfully dry sense of humour was all over this record. The A-side is clearly labelled “unextended version,” but the B-side featured the “reverse ending,” where the song plays all the way through to the end, and then comes back playing backwards!

Paul McCartney: Once Upon a Long Ago
A good example of an extended version being a less edited version than the single release. An additional intro is tacked on at the front, but most of this version is the song in its entirety with an ad-libbed repeat of the first verse at the end and full length solos. The extended string note right at the end is a nice touch. A beautiful and underrated song.

Travelling Wilburys: End of the Line
Even a band of five traditionalists like the Travelling Wilburys couldn’t avoid the obligatory 12-inch mix, and this mix is exactly what you would expect when fulfilling obligations.

Paul McCartney: Figure of Eight
This is a rare example of a 12-inch single which features a completely different recording to the album version. While not listed as an extended version, this live-in-the-studio take is longer than the album version and much closer to the arrangement that opened Paul’s live shows at the time.

Billy Bragg: Sexuality (Manchester Mix)
It may just be coincidence, but naming the mixes after the cities they were done in (the B-side features the London Mix) looks like it may be a tribute to The Smiths, who named the three versions of This Charming Man Manchester, London and New York. The latter was pulled almost as soon as it was released and never heard again until included on The Sound of The Smiths.
The Manchester Mix of Sexuality was mixed by Owen Morris, who would later produce Oasis. This is both extended version and true remix, with Johnny Marr’s guitar pushed to the front of the mix. What more could you ask for?

The Cure: High
Curiously enough, I did actually hear this version for the first time on the radio and that’s what made me buy it because I’m not really a Cure fan. This is both an extended edit and a remix and I think this mix is far superior to the album version. As smitten as that!

Curb your outrage

2012-01-10T15:07:00.004+11:00

There is an old and wise saying:

Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

I can’t help thinking of this piece of wisdom while watching the controversy over Teresa Gambaro’s comments about migrants.

“Who?” you may well ask.
Exactly!

Apparently, she’s the Liberal member for Brisbane and apparently she’s suggested that new migrants should be taught to use deodorant and how to queue politely.

Of course, we could talk about how this trivialises the issue of multiculturalism, we could talk about how it appeals to racists, we could talk about the irony of a daughter of Italian immigrants saying something like that but really, who cares?

Who had heard of Ms Gambaro this time yesterday? Anyone? And now, thanks to the outrage sparked by her comments, she has gone from being unknown outside her electorate and party room to having a national profile. Way to go! And don’t try to tell me this is going to harm her image. I’ll lay odds that no-one who has spoken out against her would have voted Liberal anyway. Meanwhile, every Herald-Sun reader has just become a fan. We all know there are Liberals and their supporters who wear pissing off the left like a badge of honour. I’ll bet Andrew Bolt has already written his latest “defending free speech” column citing this as an example. How many callers will talkback radio air saying, “She just said what everyone else is thinking.”? Menzies House must be creaming themselves.

Need I remind anyone that this is how Pauline Hanson got her start?
Previously unknown political figure makes stupid comment sparking moral outrage, suddenly becomes darling of racists and reactionaries.

To engage in assessments of Gambaro’s insensitivity and detailed rebuttal of her premise is to make her more important than she is. That doesn’t help anyone.

I was perfectly happy having never heard of Ms Gambaro. Forgive me if I am not shocked to learn a Coalition backbencher said something stupid. Rather than taking the bait and giving the reactionary right another matyr, progressives should let the inanity of her remarks be self evident and never argue with an idiot.

Update: Sal Piracha presents a differing view here: The Idiot and the Village

GEORGE HARRISON, LIVING IN THE MATERIAL WORLD (2011)

2012-01-08T18:48:00.001+11:00

The title of Martin Scorsese’s documentary on the life of George Harrison is more than just a reference to George’s second solo album. A recurring theme throughout the film is George’s ambition to leave his body (or the material world) in the best way possible.

A little over half the film is spent on his time in the Beatles, but even the stories we’ve heard before, such as the Beatles’ rough apprenticeship in Hamburg, aren’t as stale as they might be because they are shown through George’s eyes. Astrid Kirchherr recalls the time she photographed John and George in Stu Sutcliff’s room shortly after she had informed them of his death. It’s actually a pretty well known photograph but I had never heard the history behind it before.

There is no narration, with George’s story being told via interviews with family and friends, and with George himself. Many of these are from unused interviews for the Beatles Anthology and there are also some very interesting, rarely seen television appearances. Elsewhere, Dhani reads passages from George’s letters and diaries. The new interviews indicate just how long it has taken to make this film. Billy Preston died in 2006 after a long illness and we all know where Phil Spector is now.

Unlike so many similar projects, the breakup of the Beatles is not presented as some great turning point, but as a natural progression, which is just as George would have regarded it.

No-one is written out of the story. Patti Boyd is interviewed and reads passages from her book and her relationship with Eric Clapton is dealt with candidly. Although George’s creative output at the time suggests he might have been more upset about the breakup than he let on, the film respectfully sticks to George’s story that he was cool with it so long as they were both happy.

The film discusses George’s work with Monty Python and the subsequent creation of his production company, Handmade Films, but curiously, no mention is made of his record label, Dark Horse Records.

On the extras side, there are additional interviews with Paul McCartney, Jeff Lynne and Damon Hill, a live performance of the Ravi Shankar collaboration Dispute and Violence (which sounds not unlike something Frank Zappa might do) and a lovely moment in the studio where Giles and George Martin listen to the multitrack of Here Comes the Sun with Dhani. The Damon Hill piece also features home video by George. The moment where he gate-crashes a doorstop press conference with Damon Hill after he lost the 1994 World Championship is priceless.

Living in the Material World is a beautiful film about a beautiful man and it flows like a well-sequenced album. Just as it’s about to make you cry, it makes you laugh, but before you laugh too much, it reminds you that there are greater things – just like George’s music.

Feature: * * * * ½
Extras: * * * * *
Audio: Dolby 5.1, DTS, Dolby Stereo

The Bonus Discs - Wish You Were Here

2012-01-05T23:02:00.001+11:00

Wish You Were Here is generally considered by both band and fans to be the last true Pink Floyd album. That may seem like an odd thing to say when the group remained a going concern for the next twenty years. It does make sense though, when you consider that it was the last genuinely collaborative Pink Floyd album before a creative spurt from Roger Waters overwhelmed the others and his subsequent departure left them directionless. It’s a bold and ambitious album even for Pink Floyd inasmuch as it combines parts that are almost ambient techno with parts that are almost country, yet it’s still accepted into that second most damning* of labels, “classic rock.”

The second audio disc doesn’t contain a complete live performance as with Dark Side of the Moon. Instead, we have three studio out-takes and three live tracks from Wembley in 1974, before work commenced on the album. There is a full run-through of Shine On You Crazy Diamond, before it was split into two sections, plus Raving and Drooling and You’ve Got To Be Crazy which eventually became Sheep and Dogs respectively on the Animals album. Raving and Drooling is clearly unfinished and is of historical interest only. Most marathon Pink Floyd pieces are careful to stay just the right side of tedium, but this one doesn’t. By contrast, You’ve Got To Be Crazy is fully formed and was actually edited down somewhat by the time it got to the studio version. As such, this disc could almost double as a bonus disc for Animals. Since this disc also comes with the “experience edition,” it makes the 2-disc option more attractive than Dark Side.

Of the studio tracks, Wine Glasses is the beginning of Shine On You Crazy Diamond Part 1, then there is Have a Cigar featuring Roger Waters’ guide vocal. It’s been said that Waters wasn’t happy with Roy Harper’s guest vocal on the song, but this reveals they definitely made the right decision. The disc concludes with an alternative version of Wish You Were Here featuring Stephane Grapelli. It’s a beautiful version, stripped of the radio effects in the album version.

Disc 3, the first DVD, contains the 48kHz stereo mix of the album and two multi-channel mixes; the original quadraphonic mix, and a 5.1 surround mix done in 2009. The quad version is quite different from the stereo version with the most noticable changes being different solos in Wish You Were Here and a rather clumsy execution of the “whoosh” at the end of Have a Cigar. The 5.1 version follows the stereo arrangement more closely. It was originally intended for an SACD release in 2009 and is now scheduled for release this month. Both the surround mixes are available in either 448kbps or 640kbps Dolby streams.

The second DVD features the concert screen films with animation by Gerald Scarfe. These are much shorter than the Dark Side films since they were only used on the first half of Shine On and Welcome To The Machine. The darkness of the latter seems like a precursor to The Wall film. Also included is a short promotional film by Storm Thorgerson from 2000. It was created as a Flash animation and hasn’t aged well.

As with The Dark Side of the Moon box set, the Blu-ray disc has all the content of the DVDs in 24-bit, 96kHz, high resolution audio.

The box comes filled with the same goodies as the Dark Side box. Conveniently, card sleeves are supplied for all the discs so that you can store them outside the box if you choose to. The previous box didn’t include this. Although the photo books are a bit better, featuring some very interesting unused cover art, the Wish You Were Here Immersion edition is considerably lighter on content than The Dark Side of the Moon Immersion edition. This can simply be put down to the fact that there isn’t as much in the vault related to Wish You Were Here as there is to Dark Side, although they could have fleshed the set with a full live performance. The high-resolution option is attractive, however the remixing and remastering engineer for the project, James Guthrie has stated that “The SACD is absolutely the best way to hear the new 5.1 mix,” so you might want to factor that into your decision.

Worth paying extra for?
Yes, but not worth as much as the Dark Side box.

Wish You Were Here - 1985 CD release

Wish You Were Here - from the Shine On box set, 1992

Wish You Were Here - 1994 remaster

Wish You Were Here - 2011 remaster

* The most damning is, of course, “progressive rock,” which Wish You Were Here manages to count as too.

The Hysteria Hysteria

2012-01-05T12:27:00.001+11:00

Using etymology as an argument of convenience...

The story so far:
The latest issue of The King’s Tribune features some very interesting, if challenging articles from Justin Shaw and Ben Pobjie on the place of pornography in modern society.

This caused an almighty twitstorm, centred around the use in the articles of one particular word: “Hysterical.”
There are some excellent posts on the substance of the debate HERE, HERE and HERE and I have little to add to any of them.

My only observation is that it seems to be an argument of convenience to hone in on that one word and cite it as evidence of misogyny. The word was originally used to mean (and I’m paraphrasing here) a woman’s ladybits causing her to go all funny. (Disclosure: I learnt this about twelve hours ago)

Misogynist? Absolutely! IF used in that context.
However, you don’t have to be a professor of linguistics to see that Justin Shaw was using the word in its modern meaning of over-the-top, exaggerated, hyperbole. Another modern definition of the word is to mean extremely funny, but that’s clearly not Shaw’s intended use.

If you’re going to pick apart the arcane origins of words and insist on classical definitions, you must be consistent about it.

Remember this the next time you use the word “Bastard” (a child of unmarried parents, sometimes called ‘illegitimate’ as if it’s the child’s fault and something to be ashamed of) as a term of abuse.

Remember this the next time you use the word “Gay” (it used to mean “happy,” don’tcha know!) to describe someone who is homosexual.

Remember this the next time you use the word “Bugger” (a verb, to sodomise, that is, to penetrate the anus with the erect penis as Gail Dines would probably describe it) as a general exclamation of dissatisfaction with something that has just occurred. Or to describe a lovable rogue.

Remember this the next time you use the word “Terrific” (which is to “terror,” as “horrific,” is to “horror”) to describe something that is very good.

Remember this the next time you use the word “Fantastic” (meaning “of fantasy”) to describe something that is clearly real.

Remember this the next time you use the word “Incredible” (meaning lacking credibility) to describe something you might also regard as fantastic or terrific.

New releases for 2012

2012-01-03T22:06:00.001+11:00

Which will be on your wish-list?

Paul McCartney presents Paul McCartney's Baroque Fantasy by Paul McCartney
- Paul McCartney

Oi! Gaga! You Think That's Crazy? THIS is Crazy, Bitch!
- Bjork

Half the Tracks That Were on the Last Best-of and Three that Weren't
- Pink Floyd

Fuck You, Noel!
- Beady Eye

Yeah? Suck This, Our Kid!
- Noel Gallagher

I'm Just Awfully Clever!
- Damon Albarn with Damien Hirst, Van Dyke Parks, Perry Farrell and the Academy of St Martin in the Fields

Tony Bennett sings Half of Your Favourite Songs and Someone Else Does the Rest
- Tony Bennett

Hey, That Sounds Like a Good Idea
- Rod Stewart

The Osbournes, Huh? Get Me Some of That Action!
- Gene Simmons

Well, the Singer's Solo Career Didn't Go So Well
- James

You Too, Huh?
- Pulp

I'm a Scouser, Me!
- Ringo Starr

Your Favourite Songs Murdered in Cold Blood volume 12
- The Cast of Glee

Identity Crisis
- The Black Eyed Peas feat. Adele feat. Snoop Dogg feat. Katy Perry feat. Kanye West feat. Kelis feat. Bruno Mars...

The One Where We Apologise for the Previous Album
- Metallica

Oh Alright, "Buckingham Nicks" Then!
- Fleetwood Mac

Aw Mum, You're Embarrassing Me!
- Madonna

The London Telephone Directory
- Read by Stephen Fry

Beyond the Bottom of the Barrell
- INXS with Justin Bieber

Thinking of Linking

2011-12-31T21:03:00.002+11:00

Volume three of all the web pages I've posted, retweeted, liked, dugg, stumbled or otherwise taken note of during the year. (I know that Reddit is supposed to be the cool way to do this now, but it's truly the worst designed site since the Drudge Report)

Arranged into broad categories and in vaguely chronological order of when I found them, and now with a new section highlighting the year in stupid.
As usual, linking does not necessarily imply agreement and/or endorsement, blah blah blah...

News and Politics - Australia
Queensland floods from space
History of Australian states in gif form
Why we hate Gerry Harvey? Analysing a PR disaster
Spotted on a t-shirt in Cronulla
Abbott's game plan: power at any price
Catherine Deveny Q and A Drinking Game
Tony Abbott has things on his mind. None of them good.
Ben Pobjie's minutes of the first Q and A
$40 million: it’s how much each gold medal costs us
The "shit happens" video
Aunty, we have a problem
Liberals' policy hatched in One Nation heartland
That's not guts, Scott Morrison. That's not an apology
Alan Jones' disgusting interview with Julia Gillard
When pacifist Greens want military action, it's time to ask if their policies really can fly
Antony Green: Pauline Hanson and the NSW Legislative Council election
'Alfred' the sham
No Carbon Tax campaign must urgently delouse
Low-road debate sells our children short
Married to the lynch mob
Abbott fell into obvious trap
Paul Keating's letter to John Robertson
Bernard Keane interviews Lindsay Tanner
Every Federal Hansard back to 1901
Power of success behind Abbott's one-track style
You can lead the Liberals to government but you can't make them think
Decline and Fall – Insiders and Donald Trump
Dickhead removal strategy
Wally Lewis laces up for political protest
Household Income and Income Distribution, Australia, 2007-08
Are the Christian Left politically homeless?
Power of success behind Abbott's one-track style
Julia's tax will be worse than herpes We'll have to take Terry McCrann's work on that, but as to his rational - "It'll be with you forever and on everything," - what do you call the GST‽
What happened in the House yesterday?
Death threats sent to top climate scientists Sure, both sides do it.
Tony Abbott:"If you want to put a price on carbon why not just do it with a simple tax?"
Abbott attacked for links to climate denier Lord Christopher Monckton
Greg Hunt's thesis: "A tax to make the polluter pay" Awkward!
Two bald men fighting over a comb
A tribute to Greg Jericho
Mungo: Time for a Greens reality check
Tory Errorist: Liberal stand-over thug prompts Greenie tears Credit where due to this crazy right-wing site for calling thuggery
A brief history of Australia’s tax system (pdf)
Carbon Tax Facts
Extreme Makeover Takeover
Stop throwing out names
Dickhead! Funny how this wasn't played as much as the "Why did you lie?" lady.
What About Bob?
It's my party: expelled DLP member
The Factbricator
Gambling survey finds support for pokies reform
The Tony Abbott Tea Party
Debating Lord Monckton "If your doctor told you that you had cancer and Lord Christopher Monckton told you to ignore their advice would you listen to him?"
Sentencing remarks of his Honour Magistrate Rosencwajg Re: Derryn Hinch
Plain packs will cause shortage, says big tobacco Um... yeah.
Tony Abbott’s flawed friendship with the freaks and flat-earthers
A Sad Day for the ABC
Up to 20 returned Tampa asylum seekers have been reported killed, dozens more have simply disappeared
What if Australia had an FPP system in 2010?
How the taxpayer helped Tony Abbott flog his book
Why repeated demands for a double dissolution are constitutionally impossible
The Political Sword was selected for preservation by the National Library of Australia
Malcolm Fraser: There is a better way to deal with asylum seekers - one that would recognise the decency of Australians
The fee, me and Alan Jones: how question of money turned crowd nasty
Mr Jones Goes to Canberra
Protesters rage at false report trucks stopped They lied. Surprised?
Unanswered questions on the Convoy of No Confidence
Tony Abbott should try acting decent
Relative slams 'medieval' plan for Kelly's bones Do the words "rest in peace" mean anything?
Snobs and whingers: the new Australia
Outposts between Sydney and Canberra had stocked up for the Convoy of No Confidence that never arrived
I supported the Malaysian solution. Go ahead, laugh. Not being a journalist or a politician I'm free to admit when I'm wrong.
A sleazy new low for Abbott
Gillard, Rudd and Labor's personality tragedy
Greek tragedy that is the real Julia show
One for you, nineteen for me
Abbott's pit bull politics are effective, but at what cost?
Bogans – Not a Social Group, An Attitude – A Response to Dr. David Nichols
Declining Labor may have to tie knot with the Greens
To change this climate, Labor needs a bold new leader: it's Turnbull
Hockey needs more than Google for his economic research
A similar point to the above
Bolt's columns did not deserve to see the light of day. End of story
How Andrew Bolt should be punished
Briefing for clubs shows they remain profitable after pokies reform
Andrew Bolt and the Racial Discrimination Act - The Age Education Resource Centre
Hypocrisy leaves holes in the kid gloves
Some thoughts on the Occupation
Tony Abbott wants to cut off the NBN, but Victoria makes a different call
The assault on Commonwealth Ombudsman Allan Asher is payback for his plain talking on immigration detention policy
Your Majesty, you're an anachronism: how Paul Keating gently dished up a harsh reality
Robert Doyle is a...
When thousands occupied Melbourne and really ran amok
Bolt from the past: a heartfelt history lesson to the man I loved
Never mind abolishing Question Time, abolish the press gallery
Blood on the tracks a terrible trauma never forgotten
Qantas CEO has 'gone mad' say pilots
Joyce bets the house
Entertaining exchange between pilot and tower after Qantas grounding
The men who saved the party
Deal then no deal: how Qantas stranded Labor
Joyce must not cripple our national carrier
Me at the RSL AGM
'Let them eat yellowcake' JB brings some nuance to the uranium debate
Gillard and Obama: appearance and reality
Labor hopeless, Abbott a hollow man
Abbott's sniping tactics are on the nose
Abbott earns reprimand for speaking out of school
Laid-back Australians find they have quite a lot to whinge about
Remembering a young officer who fell through the cracks
Seriously though, Mr Abbott
How can Abbott’s Liberals be called “conservative” or “pro-business” after this?
After months of outrage, Coalition senators finally had to concede they had no hope of sinking the government's wicked carbon-tax bills.
Revealed: secret plan to cut nurse numbers
Enough with the Green trivia, let's canvass some policy
In politics, moral outrage is a slippery slope
A hole in his head where his brain should be
Kyle Sandilands – A Troll of Australia’s Making
Jackie O was the girl at school who giggled while the head bully threw your book in the bin
An Open Letter To Jackie O
Tony Abbott overtakes Mark Latham as the most unpopular Opposition Leader in living memory
Surplus Schmurplus
Howard Jacobson on Peter Roebuck
Tony Abbott is NOT unpopular. He is not unelectable. He is not “unfit to lead”
Go @%! yourself: O'Farrell's whip lashes out on Twitter
A True Reflection?
Politicians tweeting. Can you pick the real ones from the made up ones?
Gambling addiction and personal responsibility
Sandilands' apology translated
The great debate that no one's talking about David Marr has a right to his view but projecting it onto Peter Lloyd is ridiculous. Different people have different reasons.
Lessons of a brutal game
A dumb reshuffle puts spotlight back on Gillard’s woes
Lib costings debacle - "auditors" fined. Amateur hour all round.
Anyone but Gillard vs. anyone but Rudd
Australian Exceptionalism
Year of living hypocritically
Floods, follies and a great big tax: that was the year that was
Father Bob gives final Christmas message

News and Politics - US
A New Year's Resolution for the Rich - Rather prescient given what happened later
Sarah Palin's PAC Puts Gun Sights On Democrats She's Targeting In 2010 - No way could this possibly be seen as an incitement to violence. How could you think such a thing?
Knoxville church shooter's manifesto leaves no doubt: murders were political terror against liberals
Proper transcript of Dupnik's comments on vitriol at the NYT blog
Ayn Rand and the VIP-DIPers
At Least Stand By Your Free Speech
Tucson Shooting Survivor: "It Looks Like Palin, Beck, Sharron Angle and the Rest Got Their First Target"
How to Protect Foreign Aid? Improve It
In search of monsters
Lawrence O'Donnell tears Glenn Beck apart on religion
America’s Most Isolated Federal Prisoner Describes 10,220 Days in Extreme Solitary Confinement
Obama's "Shah Problem" - President Obama is doing what Jimmy Carter did with Iran in 1978 Ronald Reagan's children reject Republican claims over his political legacy
TRIVIA: Who said this? "The profits of corporations have doubled, while workers wages have only increased by one quarter. In other words, profits have gone up four times as much as wages." PS: He thought it was a bad thing.
Sarah Palin Hasn't Raised Very Much Money This Year
150 Achievements Of Liberalism That Conservatives Seek To Destroy
Jon Stewart vs Boll O'Reilly
Martin Luther King, Jr. misquoted after Osama bin Laden killed
You Might be a Teabagger If…..
Among Libya's lobbyists
Why Republicans May Be Skipping 2012 Presidential Run
Happy now?
Challenge to Sarah Palin: Produce YOUR Academic Papers
Maddow and a friend on birthers

NY1 Exclusive: Man Cleared In Central Park Jogging Case Demands Apology From Trump
Obama, Trump Together for Correspondents' Dinner Obama should give these kind of arse-handings more often. It's a disgrace that you can only tell the truth at a comedy night.
Rumsfeld Muddies The Water As He Clarifies His Remarks On Torture To quote from the classics, The purpose of a clarification is not to make things clear - the purpose of a clarification is to put oneself in the clear.
Zakaria destroys Rumsfeld’s Iraq war talking points
Comfort Cold as Dead: Osama bin Laden Meets His Demise
16-Year-Old Girl Who Challenged Bachmann To Debate Receiving Threats Of Violence, Rape Someone show me an example of Democrats doing anything approaching this
Accused Arizona gunman ruled incompetent for trial but he was still able to get a gun
A Letter From New Orleans: Year 6 of a 5-Year Lifespan
Things that happened while everyone was obsessing on Weinergate
It’s completely asinine for Christians to...
The Republicans are playing a cynical political game with hugely high economic stakes From that well known leftist rag, The Economist
Four things Republicans used to believe: The party used to be conservative, but not extreme
Has Whole Foods Really Become a 'Faux Hippy Wal-Mart'?
Betty Ford in the White House Can you imagine what the modern day media would have done with this perfectly innocent and playful photo?
Federal Debt as Percent of GDP by President
Edwin Edwards buffs his tarnished image in advance of roast
102 Things NOT To Do If You Hate Taxes
The Tea Party, the debt ceiling, and white Southern extremism
US contractor to sue Donald Rumsfeld over 'Iraq torture'
Reporters say they were attacked by security guards at right-wing conference
The GOP's Genius Plan to Beat Obama in 2012
Growing up: Leaving behind naive glibertarianism
USA 3.0
Danziger Bridge guilty verdicts draw reaction from national, local officials
Top 10 Things Texas Gov. Rick Perry Doesn’t Want You To Know About Him
Seven ways Rick Perry wants to change the Constitution Scrap federal income tax AND balance the budget? No way is Rick Perry crazy
A Letter to Scott Walker from a Wisconsin Teacher
Eric Cantor’s Hatred Of Government Is More Important Than The Safety Of His Constituents
Quitting 9/11 - the pressure on victims & families to be national beacons
Remembering 9/11 and daring to dream
Don't divert New Orleans' recovery money, Mayor Mitch Landrieu urges Congress
Rick Perry’s Hardcore History of Investment in Porn
Stopping the World
Condemned Georgia inmate has much support, little hope
Were Twin Towers felled by chemical blast? NOT a conspiracy article - actually makes a fair bit of sense.
Who are the real job creators?
What if Solar Power had the same subsidies Fossil-Fuel?
We are the 99 percent Read some of these stories before you judge
Archbishop Philip Hannan's funeral procession to feature upbeat gospel music
The Occupied Wall Street Journal
Protests a warning shot to Wall Street
Your Money Doesn't Love You Anymore
BART Cuts Cell Phone Service to Stop Protest
Bachmann Hires ‘Kill The Gays Bill’ Supporter Arrested for Terrorism
Bobby Jindal and Edwin Edwards have been the best Louisiana governors, poll respondents say
Tea party group to Bachmann: Quit the presidential race
5 Reasons To Be Glad That You Didn’t Watch the CBS News Debate
Romney's Gubernatorial Emails Missing What a surprise!
David Frum: When Did the GOP Lose Touch With Reality?
The Fundamental Flaw In Libertarian Thinking
Mitt Romney and Rick Perry accused of blatant untruths about Barack Obama Surely not!
No Horton on Wall Street but lots of Whos
Mike Bloomberg's Marie Antoinette Moment
People "Are Occupying Wall Street Because Wall Street Has Occupied the Country"
Did a Harvard economics class cause the financial crisis? Students walk out of lecture that 'has driven inequalities in society'
For River Ridge couple, each new child is 'a natural extension of our love'
Reggie Clemons - the next Troy Davis?
Krugman: Taxing Job Creators (possibly paywalled)
The Republicans' Farcical Candidates - A Club of Liars, Demagogues and Ignoramuses
Romney would be a much better pres than Gingrich Hardly a high bar
Union Leader makes case against Mitt Romney
Virtual Embassy Tehran Now Michelle Bachmann has something she can say she'll close down
Barack Obama Celebrates Bill of Rights Day With Support for Indefinite Detention Bill
American public to Congress: Get out. All of you.
This Is No Christian Nation
1968: The Clay Shaw trial on JFK conspiracy charges
Christopher Hitchens’ Unforgivable Mistake
Christopher Hitchens and the protocol for public figure deaths
Anonymous donors pay off Kmart layaway accounts
Romney’s Three Paths to Victory
THE COUNTRY'S PROBLEM IN A NUTSHELL: Apple's Huge New Data Center In North Carolina Created Only 50 Jobs
“If I Were a Poor Black Child”…White Saviorism and the Politics of Personal Responsibility
Shale Gas Industry Using PsyOps Tactics Tested in Iraq
Rachel Maddow on the history of how Halliburton and the U.S. military became so intertwined
A Hedge Fund Insider Explains Why Retail Investors Should Flee The Stock Market
The GOP race has entered 'The Tyson Zone'
'He has a right to speak,' said the cop to the banker
The shocking truth about the crackdown on Occupy
GOP Again Holds Working America Hostage to its Perverse Ideological Priorities
Rich People DON'T Create Jobs: 6 Myths That Have to Be Killed for Our Economy to Live
Gingrich - Honeymoons in Space
Self-Adoration Reaches Newt Heights
The Top 15 Most Dangerous Conservative Politicians And Government Officials To Watch In 2012
How the media made Ron Paul Seriously? That would be to mistake lethargy for strategy
The Myth of American Exceptionalism

News and Politics - UK
Top Gear's offensive stereotyping has gone too far, says Steve Coogan
Denis Healey kept in the dark about Polaris upgrade Yes Prime Minister close to the truth.
190 moments that made the Guardian
Margaret Thatcher's 'Sarah Palin snub' enrages US right Possibly the best decision Thatcher ever made
Murdoch 'deeply depressed' by scandals - aw, diddums!
British PM tells Pakistan elite: 'Many of your richest people are getting away without paying much tax at all – and that's not fair'
Tory candidate “lied in phone-in about honesty”Prince Philip pictured at Nazi funeral He may be mad but there are lessons in Prince Philip's explanation of how 3rd reich could seem attractive in the 30s.
A letter to Viscount Monckton of Brenchley from the Clerk of the Parliaments 'I must therefore again ask that you desist from claiming to be a Member of the House of Lords, either directly or by implication, and also that you desist from claiming to be a Member "without the right to sit or vote".'
"We always knew we were going to have to eat a shit sandwich over the BSkyB deal. We didn't know it would turn into a three course dinner."
House of Commons Select Committee - Unauthorised tapping into or hacking of mobile communications
A warning from history: Eighty years ago, a banking collapse devastated Europe, triggering war. Today, faith in the free markets is faltering again
For Amy I've developed a lot more respect for Russel Brand this year
Extraordinary speech by fearless West Indian woman in face of London riots
The politics of a petrol bomb
Nothing 'mindless' about rioters
"Mindless"
Thatcher Fucked The Kids
An Open Letter to David Cameron’s Parents
Big Brother Isn't Watching You
Phone Hacking 1999 - Tabloids, Authorities and Vodafone all involved
Save The Coliseum
How MI6 deal sent family to Gaddafi's jail
Where was the mention of Margaret Thatcher's victims?
James Murdoch departures 'may herald his exit from papers'
New Year honours include an award for tycoon jailed over stock market scandal

News and Politics - World
"A wonderful development" - Anthropologists on the Egypt Uprising
Gene Sharp: Author of the nonviolent revolution rulebook
Mossad behind assassinations in Iran
Egypt and Iraq - Spot the difference
Egyptian Journalist Ahed Mahmoud Dies Of Gunshot Wounds; First Reported Journalist Death In Uprising
Fukushima Smoking Gun Emerges: Founding Engineer Says Reactor 4 Has Always Been A "Time Bomb", Exposes Criminal Cover Up
Branson implores entrepreneurs to act on climate "Climate change solutions will create more wealth than any other sector over the next decade," Pfft! What would Richard Branson know about business opportunities?
World's last typewriter factory closes down
Muslim Brotherhood says it's not seeking power
Guardian correspondent missing in Libya
Live discussion: Ghaith Abdul-Ahad
The corrosive legacy of Live Aid
1 Million Workers. 90 Million iPhones. 17 Suicides. Who’s to Blame?
Guardian live 'Blog - March for the alternative – Saturday 26 March part 1
Bin Laden was executed, that much is obvious
Malaysians outraged over branding of women This is where we want to send refugees.
Shooter gathered campers in Norway for security check before opening fire
In the ruins of Gadhafi's lair, rebels find album filled with photos of his 'darling' Condoleezza Rice
Commonwealth leaders under fire for refusing to publish human rights report
Egypt's young radicals battle to reclaim the revolution
Prophecies of Fascism
Last of the True Marxists
Call to bury Irish Giant at sea
Experts Disagree on Psychological State of Norwegian Killer

Science and Technology
The scale of the universe Brilliant interactive infographic
The government’s war on science: deliberate attack, or abuse by neglect?
Radiation dose chart
Budget cuts curtail search for alien life
Get some science up ya
Protect Research
Astronauts ponder future as shuttle program winds down
Panorama of Atlantis rollout
First Habitable Planet Close To Being Confirmed By Scientists
Atmosphere Above Japan Heated Rapidly Before M9 Earthquake A possible way to predict earthquakes?
Global Warming & Climate Change Myths Myths vs what the science says
Nutters don't need your excuses "Deaths threats? Seriously Tim Blair? You’re cool with death threats to scientists?"
St Matthew Island
US military goes to war with climate sceptics
Federal Inquiry Is Latest to Clear Assailed Climate Scientist How many times does this have to happen before morons stop banging on about debunked "climate-gate"
OK, climate sceptics: here's the raw data you wanted
Chilling news for climate sceptics: Research by a former poster boy for doubters makes it much harder to deny warming. "Frustrated at what he considered shoddy science, Muller launched his own comprehensive study to set the record straight. Instead, the record set him straight."
Eclipse over the Acropolis
NASA and Slidell: A long marriage ending with final shuttle launch on Friday
Atlantis in place
Neptune was discovered 1 Neptunian year ago
The sad, sad demise of Greenpeace
A mathemetician's response to 'Is the glass half empty or half full?'
Chrome Overtakes Firefox To Become UK’s Second Most-Popular Browser
Five Visualizations to Grasp the Scale of the Universe
The myth of Climate-gate has endured because of media failings
How the Editor of Windows Magazine Became an Apple Fanboy
First ever website turns 20
Where's the octopus? This is amazing!
David Gallo shows underwater astonishments More of the above
13-Year-Old Makes Solar Power Breakthrough by Harnessing the Fibonacci Sequence
Federal Inquiry Is Latest to Clear Assailed Climate Scientist
Will the Space Station be Abandoned?
Scientist left speechless as vast glacier turns to water
Many U.S. Schools Adding iPads, Trimming Textbooks
Hurricane Season 2011: Lee (Gulf of Mexico)
Fifty new alien worlds revealed
Diamond planet found
What chatbots talk about when humans aren't around
'Wi-fi refugees' shelter in West Virginia mountains
Google Unearth: Aussie discovers new treasures from the past - from his office
See a black & white photo in colour
About a third of Sun-like stars are likely to contain Earth-like planets orbiting in habitable zones
Around the World in 60 seconds
The dark side of Apple: one man's monologue of misery
Wasabi alarm, beetle sex win Ig Nobel prizes
Astrophysicist Adam Riess Plays Not My Job
Surely a candidate for next year's Ig Nobels
Dennis Ritchie, Trailblazer in Digital Era, Dies at 70
Kindle fire: The Underachiever
Google’s Management Doesn’t Use Google+
Google+ Is Dead
Earth | Time Lapse View from Space, Fly Over | NASA, ISS
Scientists About to Find The Force
Something Has Exploded In a Spectacular Fashion On Uranus
What Went Wrong With Gmail?
RAPID REACTION: Ian Plimer launches new book on climate change – experts respond
5MB Hard Disk Drive, 1956
When Balance is Bias: Sometimes the science is strong enough for the media to come down on one side of a debate

Media bias files
Yes, it’s you I’m talking about - Mark Latham is spot on about the Australian but would have more credibility if he weren't so self-indulgent himself
What Does Rush Limbaugh's Billboard In Tucson, Arizona Say About "Conservative Media?"
Glenn Beck's Jewish Problem
Auditioning to be a paid caller on right wing radio
One of Sarah Palin's ghostwriters posts a pro-Reagan column on her behalf over at USA Today
Bill O'Reilly: Boehner's Crying Hurts His Credibility
"We Were a Stalin-esque Mouthpiece for Bush" -- Fox News Insider
"time to call out Huffington for getting rich while refusing to pay writers who produced the value she's selling off"
One of the world's most explicitly biased media groups calls the ABC...Biased
Rupert Murdoch issues memo to all News Corp outlets regarding environmental sustainability
Grog's Gamut: Andrew Bolt makes me question my ancestry
The Decline of Glenn Beck: What caused it?
Comedian/Documentarian Harry Shearer calls for better focus in journalism, March 14
Texas beauty queen denies ballooning to size 6
Aunty apologises to Pyne — again — over offensive Q&A tweet I've no time for Pyne, but maybe this will teach Q and A not to let Chaser wannabes choose the on-screen tweets.
Top Fox News Executive Admits Lying On-Air About Obama It's hardly news that Fox News lies, but admitting to it is kind of novel.
Debunking the Myth That Both Sides Do It Using the Words of Glenn Beck
Andrew Bolt: expert offender, expert victim
How an Advertiser Boycott Campaign Helped Push Glenn Beck Off the Air
'I AM NOT IN THE ENTERTAINMENT BUSINEES' and Other Rules of MacNeil/Lehrer Journalism
Roger Ailes said to have concluded that Sarah Palin is an "idiot"
"You can’t run for the Republican nomination without talking to Roger (Ailes),"
Jon Stewart’s Ratings Are Now Higher Than All Of Fox News
Jon Stewart LIVE On Fox News, Tells Host 'You're Insane'
Could Murdoch’s Love of Gossip Doom His Family?
Hugh Grant to Paul McMullen: "You should try real journalism. You could probably do it."
Is Murdoch free to destroy tabloid’s records?
Rupert Murdoch Has Gamed American Politics Every Bit as Thoroughly as Britain's
Billy Bragg: Never Buy The Sun
Murdoch goes on defensive over 'total lies' by MPs Make your own joke.
Fox And Friends Defends News Corp’s Hacking Scandal: ‘We Should Move On’ But of course!
Tragic Day for Norway; Shameful Day for Journalism
An inquiry into the Australian media will quickly discover a couple of awkward facts. The corollary of Alan Kohler's piece is that more people prefer crap. The tragedy is, he's right
Piers Morgan: "Murdoch victim of a 'witch hunt'" The jokes keep making themselves
This Is Why Your Newspaper Is Dying
Ferreting Out Fake Reviews Online
Why Political Coverage is Broken
Rudd's downfall: written in The Australian
Tonight I was exposed as a wealthy con-man on prime-time television. Unfortunately it isn't true. What should I do?
The shameless actions of News Ltd are a threat to our democracy
American Troops In Afghanistan Burn Bill O’Reilly’s Book and yes, it happened
Steve Jobs to Rupert Murdoch: Fox News Is ‘Destructive Force’
Abbott urges wavering Bolt to fight on 'for good of the country'
Uprooting fake online activism
2011 Andrew Olle Media Lecture - Laurie Oakes
The Oz editor bargained over lives in AFP raid
A case study in how media bias works against clean-air rules
Lachlan Murdoch Investigated Over Involvement In News Corp. Bribery Of Australian Politicians

Music and the Arts
Radio programmes from the past
TISM win an ARIA
Gerry Rafferty, 1947-2011
The critics are wrong: The King’s Speech s-s-sucks
Universal and Sony Music plan 'instant pop' to beat piracy - Turns out releasing records to radio a month before people can buy them isn't a smart business model. Who knew?
Graney On The Hottest 100: ‘Be Amazed At My Ignorance!’
World Party Facebook page
Obituary: Nicholas Courtney
Gretsch Master Builder Discuss G6128T-GH George Harrison “Tribute” Duo Jet
John Clarke and Ross Stevenson respond to BBC plagiarism
Star Wars, the Musical. No, really!
Lis Sladen 1948 - 2011
Record Books
Curtain closes on Spicks and Specks
David Bridie has an expectation that people are better than they sometimes are allowed to be
Matt Elsbury : It's All About You
Mornington Crescent on Google Maps
In search of Shakespeare's ghosts
Naughty album covers Actually Yahoo, Jimi did not "decide" to feature nude girls on the cover. Jimi hated this cover and it's not the real design
Did Shakespeare smoke pot? Bard’s hair, toenails could reveal secret
Pulp's Common People in comic book form
Mod Odyssey: Documentary on the making of ‘Yellow Submarine’
The other George Orwell
The genius of George Orwell
Interview with Morrissey c1985
Dave Grohl: "You don't fight at my show, you asshole!"
Confirmation that The Blockheads are owed for their contribution to Frankie's Relax
Wally Stott records
The Beatles on Doctor Who. Really! Not a mashup.
U2 'close to irrelevance', says Bono
'The Smiths and Morrissey changed our lives'
Mike Mills on Why R.E.M. Are Calling It Quits "Now let's do something no other band has done: Shake hands and walk away as friends."
Noel Gallagher and Damon Albarn bury the hatchet over Blur vs Oasis spat
David Bedford 1937-2011
Scottish folk legend Bert Jansch passes away at 67
8 reasons to celebrate Wings
Pete Townshend calls Apple 'a vampire'
Does comic 'bravery' go hand in hand with being offensive and stupid?
The Devil's Dictionary at 100
Jarvis Cocker: 'Music has changed. It's not as central, it's more like a scented candle'
The Best Live Albums according to Slate
The Importance of Being Noel
Johnny Rotten graffiti is 'important' say academics Sod off Grandad!
Are Major Labels About To Abandon The CD? Er, No
The 10 Rules of Movie Watching Advice you shouldn't need
Elvis Costello tells fans not to buy new box set
Amazing collection of animated GIFs
A tribute to Spicks and Specks
Lost in the Hundred Acre Wood: Pat McInally's passion for Pooh Bear
Giant Theremin
One song and they call Tim Freedman a hypocrite on pokies Why aren't the clubs hypocrites for booking him? Still, I don't think Tim Freedman makes his case very well here.
1964: Beatlemania hits New Orleans
McCartney guitarist speaks out for Occupy Wall Street in new video
Scientists claim to know equation for 'hit song potential'
The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame’s women problem On the other hand, who gives a toss about the hall of fame?

Animals
Top 10 Pet Toxins of 2010
The pigeon with a bread necklace: How bird got more than he bargained for after searching for food
Deer culling attracts wild dogs
ASPCA Condemns New Dog Fighting Mobile App
Indonesia's killing floors: don't avert your gaze
Minister Ludwig announces suspension of trade to certain facilities following Animals Australia investigation aired on Four Corners
BanLiveExport.com
Haunted by cruel live trade
Two more Indonesian abattoirs exposed
Government to suspend live cattle exports
Evading meaty realities that make us feel uncomfortable
Pets lost and found
Meat industry joins slaughter protest
New regulations bring reprieve for death row dogs
That brief moment when Andrew Bolt displays some principles before remembering who he works for
The Amazing, Regenerating Dolphin
Crittervision: The world as animals see (and sniff) it
Tattoos are decidedly NOT vegan
Obama Legalizes Horse Slaughter for Human Consumption Possibly the only thing Democrats and Republicans have co-operated on in this congress. I give up!
Dog shoots duck hunter
Say No to balloons
The Dog That Saved a Veteran From Suicide
Ultrasonic Songs of Male Mice
Dog Dumped at Train Depot Waits in Bitter Cold: A Christmas Eve Rescue Heartbreaking.

Humour and Satire
Alexei Sayle on Reformed Drug Addicts
The Glenn Beck Conspiracy Theory Generator
Ikea Stonehenge
Harry Shearer - Touch My Junk
"I'm free!"
The President's Speech
The One Where George Clooney Sits on Verne
Best troll ever
Hamlet in Powerpoint form
Clarke and Dawe - Please Do Not Attempt This at Home
How to help someone confront their prejudices
Get government out of free enterprise
How one Oregon lawmaker convinced his colleagues to ‘Rick Roll’ the state legislature
Jaws, as reviewed by climate deniers
Why did Obama's birth certificate take so long?
Pretty much every “women’s” magazine ever
John Lithgow Performs Gingrich Press Release (possibly geo-blocked)
Hansard
Internet debating
Planet Earth Doesn't Know How To Make It Any Clearer It Wants Everyone To Leave
Pearls Before Swine: Hold Me
The future ain't what it used to be
Confirmation bias
Fossil -fueled wisdom
Murdoch Issues Zero-Tolerance Policy on Phone Hacking: ‘Let’s Go Back to Just Making Shit Up’
Carbon tax questions
Chavfest 2011!
The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog
Hackgate: The Movie
Norwegian Muslish Gunman's Islam-Esque Atrocity
Harrison Ford Settles a Feud
Obama Turns 50 Despite Republican Opposition
Best WiFi names
Existential Star Wars
A Brief History of Corporate Whining So that's where GetUp got the idea
The global financial meltdown in rhyming couplets Genius!
iPhone apps that First Dog on the Moon would like to see
So you’re MAD about something on the Internet…
5 Vintage Versions of Modern Social Media from Centuries Ago
I look down on you for not understanding my trendy jargon
Republican Front Runners as imagined by The Simpsons
A handy Venn Diagram to illustrate Andrew Bolt's relationship with reality
John Calvin and Thomas Hobbes
Jesus Christ Files Lawsuit Against GOP For Slander
Clarke and Dawe - Attention People Smugglers
Too many Chief Executive Officers, not enough doctors…
The Wild Bore of Texas
DIY Media Inquiry
Stop Forwarding That Crap To Me
Short memories
When useful idiots become just idiots
Pat Robertson Says Falling Satellite Means God Thinks Satellites are Gay
Last American Who Knew What The Fuck He Was Doing Dies
Dumbass Comments: The Gettysburg Address
The Bolt Retort
Tablets
Open-Minded Man Grimly Realizes How Much Life He's Wasted Listening To Bullshit

Just plain stupid
PowerBalance Admits Their Wristbands Are a Scam
Glenn Beck Stands By Egypt Caliphate Conspiracy Theory: 'I'm Not Wrong' - of course you're not Glenn.
Glenn Beck suggests that Muse’s performance at the Grammys is “basically a call for revolution.” Whatever you do, don't let him hear I Predict a Riot by Kaiser Chiefs
Does the Alternative Vote Bring Tyranny to Australia?
Charlie Sheen as Charlie Brown
When the wind doesn't blow . . . which is nearly all the time Hey Terry, where I'm from, "When the wind doesn't blow," is almost never!
Islam's the problems, not Muslims, says Senator Cory Bernardi ...because he's an idiot
'Throne Up' in royal wedding sick bags
"Ingrid Seward, editor of the royal-watching Majesty magazine, told The Sun newspaper: 'This is completely tasteless.'" - If your job is editing a magazine about royal family gossip, you don't get to decide what's tasteless
In a race for the presidency, could Sarah Palin beat Charlie Sheen? - really, somebody did this research
Frederick Forsyth Repeats Nonsense - Australia not about to Adopt FPTP
Top 20 Crazy Tea Party Reactions To Obama’s Birth Certificate
Rush on for affordable copies of royal wedding dress
Mike Huckabee Debuts His New Cartoon Series About Time Travel and Revisionist History
Disney seeks SEAL Team 6 trademark
Alan Jones impressed by 'laser' speed breakthrough
John Lennon Might Maybe Have Been a Secret Republican
Monckton goes Godwin Gotta wonder about a man who insists on being called "Lord" talking about how bad it is to accept authority.
Monckton apologises for Nazi jibe
Hockey takes 'Rudd' on Canberra tour Really Joe? I mean, really??
Bachmann pledges to ban pornography
Motivating The Base & Australia's Electoral Fraud I think I upset a few people in the comments
Men use 'sniff test' to tell clothes' cleanliness, survey shows Yes, somebody needed to do a survey to work this out - then published it as news.
Fox News thinks the UK has a president
"Traffic lights are a Bolshevist menace"
PayPal founder unveils floating country Brilliant! The pirates have never had it so easy.
Abbott calls for election to decide leader In case you haven't noticed Tony, this is a Westminster system. We don't elect the prime minister. Ever.
Tea Party Nation wants all small business owners to stop creating jobs by not hiring anyone in protest of President Obama and the Democratic Senate. Suicide economics! Brilliant!
Lesbian London link is a riot
Gillard's a goner, Shorten's still bloody. Stand up, Simon Crean
Tea Partier: ‘John Boehner Is A Socialist’ I don't know which is funner - calling John Boehner a socialist or a Fox News muppet getting all upset as a bizarre, hyperbolic accusation.
Bill O'Reilly Threatens to Quit Over Obama's 'Buffet Tax' Bring it on, Billo!
The Hamster Wheel - Julia Song All of this was considered fit for broadcast on Sydney radio because nobody swore. What a fucked up values system!
Rumors Of Extramarital Affair End Campaign Of Presidential Candidate Who Didn't Know China Has Nuclear Weapons
Shutup, Twitter Isn’t Censoring Your Dumb Trends
Kim Jong the second?

Egotism
01 Aug Most popular tweets: Q & A, part 2
Carbon Capture Report I have no idea what this is about
Going viral
Imaginary Q and A
I am famous! One of my tweets was on #imaginaryqanda

Miscellaneous
What teachers make
Nerd saves entire BBC archive for $3.99, you can help for free
Your Memento - National Archives
The Blind Man Who Taught Himself To See
Long Stabby Things, Whacking off, WTF
Paul McCartney's Ex Lied About Abuse, Says Ex-Publicist
Make your e-books smell right
Nostradamus' cherry jelly recipe
Immaterials: Light painting WiFi
10 Myths About Introverts
Equal parts sad and brilliant
Dog people are 18% more likely to choose Paul as favourite Beatle
Gorgeous Time-lapse of North American Cities at Night
Living in the Future
Boston Globe creates a Twitter board for the newsroom
Questioning Whether Bipolar Disorder Is An Illness
Celebrities with records
A double-bluff on Kotex
Virtual classes of cold-blooded killing The one where Jim Wallace makes sense
A true challenge for Masterchef and its ilk
Conversations with a blue ball
Double rainbows over Melbourne Note that the bright one seems to be coming out of the Commonwealth Bank headquarters
The Left, the Right and the New Atheism: a response to PZ Myers
How to Sit with Sadness
The new world of work needs to be fair as well as efficient
Letters of note: David Bowie
How to Recreate the Look of Instagram Filters with Vintage Cameras and Films
Star Wars imperial march played on two floppy disk drives Nerdgasm!
Pinkwashing
Does Richard Dawkins exist?
It's okay to not like things
The 5 most annoying archetypal online reactions to a famous person’s death
Whack! Did that make you think?
Is That an Emoticon in 1862? Actually, I say No. I say it's closing the bracket that was opened at the beginning of the sentence.
Seven Bar Jokes Involving Grammar and Punctuation
Great photo gallery of Flinders St Station
At last: how to do sarcasm online
The Closed, Unfriendly World Of Wikipedia
the 46 stages of Twitter
Beautiful Photos of Freeway Interchanges
Art Deco font
If you can pronounce correctly every word in this poem, you will be speaking English better than 90% of the native English speakers in the world.
Tweets a solace for the lonely

The Bonus Discs – The Dark Side of the Moon

2011-12-24T01:03:00.001+11:00

By my quick count, this is at least the fourth time The Dark Side of the Moon has been remastered since it was first mastered for CD in 1986, so the first question is, Have they got it right yet? As the documentary on the second DVD points out, the original version included many third-generation takes. In other words, all the tracks on the tape had been used up, so these were mixed down to another tape so more parts could be added. The 30th anniversary remaster fixed this by going back to the original takes and synching them all together, meaning that each individual part is of the highest possible quality. This latest remaster isn’t quite as loud as the 2003 version but you have to listen very carefully to hear any major difference.

Beyond that, there isn’t much more to say about the main album. I mean, it’s The Dark Side of the flippin’ Moon, mate! If you don’t know what to expect, then I’ll let you get back to figuring out how to get off the desert island you’ve been stuck on for the last 40 years.

So, to the other discs, and they really have got it right with this set. Six discs, six versions and roughly six hours of content may seem like overkill for a 42 minute album but the reality is that any fan who wants one of these versions is going to want all of them so it makes sense to collect every version that’s been available over the years in the one place. Although some of the versions have been previously available, the multi-channel mixes haven’t exactly been easy to play.

Disc 2, the live performance from 1974 (also available on the “experience edition”) is probably the most expendable disc in the set. Don’t expect anything like Pulse. It’s interesting to hear Dark Side performed live by all the people who made it, without an 11-piece band and all the production values of modern concerts, but it’s more of an historical curio than something that will reward continued listening.

On Disc 3, things start to get really interesting. This DVD contains three different versions of the album in 5 different streams. There’s the original mix of the album in 48kHz LPCM stereo and two multi-channel versions. The 5.1 surround version is the mix that was created for the 30th anniversary edition in 2003. Unfortunately, it was only ever available on SACD which made it difficult for most of us to hear the surround version. Releasing it on DVD means many more will be able to hear it. What’s even more interesting is the original quadraphonic version. Dark Side was originally mixed for quad but since quadraphonic equipment did about as well in the 70s as SACD did in the in the noughties, few got to hear the album as intended. For well over ten years the technology has been available to make original quad mixes available in a format that anyone with a surround system can play. There are several ’blogs around that do digital decodings of original quad LPs that are often better than many CD remasters. I don’t understand why more artists and/or record companies haven’t taken advantage of this niche market. Personally, I prefer the quad mix, but it’s all a matter of taste of course.
The 5.1 and quad versions are in Dolby format at the regular bitrate of 448kbps and also the higher quality 640kbps bitrate. Higher quality DTS or DVD-A options are not available, but all versions are on the Blu-Ray disc in 24-bit 96kHz high resolution.

The fourth disc contains the audio/visual material, which comes in three parts. It starts with live performances of Careful With That Axe, Eugene and Set The Controls For The Heart Of The Sun, filmed live in Brighton in 1972. It’s hard to see why they included this. The only way it relates to Dark Side is that it appears to be the same show that some of the tracks in Disc 6 were recorded at. Other than that, these spacey jam pieces from earlier days seem completely out of place here. There is also a 25-minute documentary made for the 30th anniversary edition, previously only available to the media, but the real highlight of the disc is the concert screen films. Some parts have been seen before on Pulse but this features restored film in full screen, not circular as was shown at the concerts. The full films from the British, French and US tours are included and it’s all very interesting experimental filmmaking in its own right. The music comes mostly from the studio mixes, with some tweaking, especially in the extended Speak to Me. There is also an additional section in the films from the French tour called Assorted Lunatics which has only the spoken-word parts without music. The audio is PCM stereo or Dolby 5.1 (not quad, which would be more authentic as the band toured with a quad PA) but this is something of a side-issue as the music fades out as soon as each film clip ends.

The Blu-ray disc contains everything on both DVDs, but in high definition and with high resolution audio. This means that if you have a Blu-ray player, the DVDs are basically redundant but they have done well to supply the multi-channel and video content in formats that suit everyone’s systems and don’t force people to upgrade just to access content that is exclusive to the Blu-ray.

Many of the “wow!” moments are saved for the last disc. The main part of the disc is a complete early mix of the album from 1972. Although clearly unfinished compared to what we are familiar with now, even if the album were released in this form, it would still have become a classic. The most notable differences are in Richard Wright’s two pieces. The Great Gig In The Sky does not yet have the vocals of Clare Torry (who is now credited with Vocal Composition) and Us And Them is a very sparse arrangement without the guitar arpeggio. Eclipse features some lovely guitar lines that ended up buried in the final mix.

The remainder of the final disc is a collection of alternate versions and out-takes. Two pieces from a 1972 live performance (when the suite was called Eclipse) indicate that they knew exactly what they wanted to do. The Travel Sequence and the Mortality Sequence would eventually become On The Run and The Great Gig In The Sky, respectively. There is also a studio version of The Travel Sequence which is less of a bluesy jam than the live version and more like an unused theme for Top Gear.
The Hard Way is taken from the Household Objects project, which would later become Wish You Were Here, which makes one wonder why it was included here. It doesn’t immediately sound like Pink Floyd, which was the point of course. In fact, if you didn’t know better, you’d think the track was much newer than it really is. Finally, there are two demo tracks. Richard Wright’s solo demo of Us And Them is beautiful just on its own, and Roger Waters’ demo of Money sounds like a demo.

Worth paying extra for?
For the music, absolutely! However, whether it’s worth buying a 12-inch box, two photo books, replica concert tickets and backstage passes, a facsimile of Roger Waters’ hand-written interview questions, a cheap looking cotton scarf, nine cardboard coasters and (I am not making this up) three marbles in a bag, plus a new coffee table to store the whole lot on, will depend on the individual.

Money - 1986 CD release

Money - 20th Anniversary Edition

Money - 30th Anniversary Edition

Money - 2011 remaster

Of droughts and flooding rains

2011-12-23T22:47:00.000+11:00

Not long after I started this moderately amusing waste of time, I wrote briefly of a visit to Ballarat. When I was there in January 2008, Lake Wendouree had dried up in the drought and the lake needed mowing in some places. When I went there again a year later, a grass fire had started in the lake.

This is old news, but thanks to recycled water and some massive deluges, Lake Wendouree is being rehabilitated.

I think the locals are happy about it too

Soundtrack to the trip:

Wait, Wait, Don’t Tell Me
Le Show
Noel Gallagher’s High Flying Birds
Bang! - World Party
Thirty Three & ⅓ - George Harrison
The Way It Is - Bruce Hornsby and the Range
All That You Can’t Leave Behind - U2
Australian Idle - Tim Freedman

Three suggestions for the ALP’s membership drive

2011-12-02T16:42:00.004+11:00

As part of the ALP National Conference, Julia Gillard has announced a target of 8,000 new members. Here are some suggestions if they want to reach that target:

Try being the Labor Party.
The main reason that so many have abandoned Labor in favour of the Greens is that they see in the Greens what they used to see in Labor. While it’s right and proper to pitch to the centre, you have to realise that you are the centre and that for every wavering Liberal voter you pick up, you’re going to lose two to the Greens. Be the party you say you are.

Stop accepting the Liberals’ narrative.
You have allowed the Liberals to turn the idea of a budget surplus into a national fetish and done nothing to capitalise on the fact that the Hawke-Keating government practically invented budget surpluses as something that could reasonably be expected in a good year.

Of course a budget surplus is an honourable aim but there’s a time and place for such things. Delivering a small, technical surplus just so that you can say you did does not impress anyone and only plays into the opposition’s hands. The situation is summed up in a tweet by the brilliant Shock Jock Coach:

It’s like you’re trying to impress the Liberal Party’s girlfriend. “Oh, you like a budget surplus, huh? Sure, I can do that! Wanna see it?” She’s only going to laugh at you and vote Liberal anyway. Let it go. You know who else said good leadership was about taking unpopular but necessary decisions? John Howard! But you probably won’t throw that back at the Liberals either.

Decide once and for all whether you want a leader or just a front-person.
The documentary Labor in Power recalls the time Kim Beazley – not the most intimidating man even in his most passionate moments – stood over Bob Hawke during a cabinet meeting impasse and said, “Bob, you’re our leader, now bloody well lead!”

“Old jellyback,” as he was later dubbed by Paul Keating was so concerned with popularity and consensus that he couldn’t pick a side when he needed to. Keating – who is seen by generation-X through through the same rose-coloured glasses as many baby-boomers view Whitlam through – had far less qualms about setting the agenda, but what the Keating fan club forgets is that the only election he won was the one where he was opposing John Hewson’s Fightback policy. Three years later, when John Howard offered absolutely nothing other than that he wasn’t Paul Keating, the Liberals won in a landslide. It didn’t help that your own advertising admitted that Keating’s hubris was toxic with the “You don’t have to like him, but you’ve got to respect him,” line.

Beazley took none of his own advice as leader in opposition, adopting policies that offered so little difference to Howard’s that it was hardly worth changing the stationery for. Latham had all the mongrel of Keating but little of the substance.

In Kevin Rudd you had someone with the vision to lead, the substance to back it up and could pull it all off without insulting people. So naturally, you ditched him for being…, well, a leader. Rudd’s so-called micro-management and lack of consultation was replaced by Julia Gillard who immediately started talking about what “I” have done, what “I” have decided and what “I” will do, and the result was a hung parliament and wishy-washy approximations of Labor policy. Under the current leadership, the apology to the stolen generations would surely have been watered down to an expression of regret, ratifying Kyoto would have become in-principle support and the masterstroke of guaranteeing the banks at the beginning of the global financial crisis (which resulted in Australia becoming a safe haven for cash from all over the world) probably wouldn’t have been thought of.

The ALP, like the country as a whole, wants a combination of leadership and consultation and can’t quite come to terms with the fact that these two qualities are not always compatible. There is a crisis in leadership in the ALP, but it’s less to do with any particular leader and more to do with the powerbrokers not being able to make their bloody minds up.

Address these fundamental issues, and you might stand a chance at winning people over, or back.

Why So Surprised?

2011-11-23T21:14:00.000+11:00

Or, Obligatory Kyle Sandilands ’blog

That Kyle Sandilands is an idiot and a creep is beyond question. It’s a truth self evident. Therefore, it’s somewhat curious that we are still shocked when he offers more evidence. It must take a special kind of talent for a known prat to find new and shocking ways of being a prat.

As far as I can work out, Sandilands first came to national prominence when he replaced Ian “Dicko” Dickson as judge on Australian Idol. Dickson himself had been cast as the Simon Cowell character on the judging panel* - the mean one who tells the contestants exactly how crap they are. When Dickson left, it became Sandilands job to make the contestants cry. He is literally a professional arsehole. So why are we so shocked when he does what he was employed to do?

Apparently, he’s done it again, saying nasty things about a journalist who bagged his latest television venture with his ever-present sidekick Jackie O (or Henderson, to her family). Compared to some of his other stunts, it’s pretty mild. The most notable thing about it, ought to be the irony that a man who made his name telling people their acts are shit should throw such a hissy fit over someone telling him that his act is shit.

I watched all of twenty seconds of his show. I switched over out of voyeuristic curiosity and switched off as soon as he said Justin Beiber would be coming up to the sounds of obviously canned applause. So, Sandilands and “O” hosted a shit show, journalist says it’s a shit show, Sandilands chucks a tantrum, move on.

Maybe it’s because he attacked a journalist in the employment of News Ltd that Sandilands is copping just as much abuse for being who he is as he did during the infamous, “lie detector” segment when a teenage girl was hooked up to a lie detector on live radio and quizzed by her mother about her sexual experiences. When she revealed that she had been raped, Sandilands broke the uncomfortable silence with, “Right… is that the only experience you’ve had?”

I’m going to be controversial here and give Sandilands a pass on that particular incident. Why? Because it is absolutely impossible that he could have been solely responsible for that stunt. It would have to have been approved by the show’s producers, the co-host, Miss O, who inexplicably goes uncriticised in all of this, the station and network’s legal departments, not to mention the girl’s own mother. The outrage is that such an idiotic stunt ever got as far as it did. I’ll forgive Sandilands for that stupid follow-up question because it’s entirely understandable that a person like he is, would react to the realisation that he’d bitten off more than he can chew by vomiting all over the desk. The fact is that Sandilands is employed to be who he is. Blaming him for being a dickhead is like blaming a dog for wagging its tail. The real culprits are his enablers.

Two questions have come up both then and now:

Why would anyone employ him?
Well, duh! He rates! So long as he rates, he’s going to have a job. If media outlets only employed people who made a rational and responsible contribution to public discourse, three quarters of the media would be unemployed. The station doesn’t care if people tune in because they hate Sandilands, just so long as they are listening and hearing the ads the station is paid to play.

Why does anyone sponsor his show?
Duh! See above. Holden and The Good Guys have so far pulled his ads from his show. Mind you, Qantas pulled their ads after the lie detector but Sandilands and “O” (who, it must be remembered, is every bit as responsible for the content of the show as Sandilands) still have a show that is popular enough for them to try and make the crossover to television.

Sandilands and “O” do what they do for the same reason Alan Jones does: it pulls the punters.
If you have to blame someone, don’t just blame Sandilands for behaving the only way he knows how, blame those who encourage it by producing the show or by listening to it.
Also, ask yourself how disgraceful the program has to be before Miss O’s self respect finally kicks in and she decides she’s better than that.

* I’ve never watched the horrible show, but you just can’t help learning these things sometimes.

How to make a speech to a gathering of Australian MPs

2011-11-17T16:51:00.001+11:00

Governor General, Prime Minister, the Honourable Leader of the Opposition, distinguished guests,
Thank you for this warm welcome, and… Gidday! [pause for applause]

Our country has no greater friend than Australia. We are, great mates. [pause for applause]
And we have shared this great friendship since each of our countries were knee high to a grasshopper.

Whether it was [old tragedy] or [more recent tragedy] or [current challenge] Australia was always there to say, “no worries, [pause] “she’ll be right.” [pause for applause]

I am fortunate to share a deep personal friendship with your prime minister. I can say without hesitation or fear of contradiction that he/she is a top bloke/sheila*. [pause for laughter and applause, smile and wink at PM]
You know he/she can always be relied on to be fair dinkum.

There are of course, times when we don’t see eye-to-eye on everything. If I live to be a hundred, I’ll still never understand the rules of cricket or how the heck you can eat vegemite. [pause for laughter and applause]

But I know that we stand as one on what’s really important: courage… loyalty… freedom… mateship. [pause for quiet murmurings of agreement]

I thank you again for your friendship to our country and your hospitality during my stay in your great country. You have been bonza. [brief pause for laughter] A little ripper! [longer pause]

I look forward to a continuation of the special relationship between our two countries, and may God bless the people of Australia.
[move to sit down, return as applause begins]
Cheers!

*Be sure to check which of these applies at the time

Time to Call the Quit Line – For Good

2011-11-11T18:29:00.001+11:00

I support any effort to reduce smoking, but I have to say that the latest law to regulate how cigarettes are packaged makes me uncomfortable. In fact, it brings out a libertarian streak in me. I think that restrictions on the display of cigarettes and the warnings on the packets are already as strict as they can reasonably be.

For five years now, explicit pictures and warnings have taken up the majority of space on a cigarette packet. Now, those packets cannot even be displayed at the point of sale – you’re left to wonder what they’re hiding behind those little roll-a-doors. Yet, there are people who still buy cigarettes. If the pictures of cancer on the packet still haven’t deterred them, I honestly don’t see how making the picture bigger is going to change anything. If you asked someone who bought a packet of cigarettes today, why they didn’t heed the myriad warnings about how dangerous it is, I doubt they would reply, “The picture wasn’t big enough.” I also don’t see how forcing cigarette manufacturers to sell their product in generic, dull coloured boxes will do anything other than create a counter-culture fashion for other generic, dull coloured things. After decades of information and education, anyone who buys cigarettes in this day and age knows exactly what they are doing and what they are getting. In the 90s, there was a brand of cigarettes called Death. Their gimmick was truth in marketing. They clearly proclaimed that their product, if used as intended, would kill you. People still smoked.

Anti-smoking campaigns have been very successful. Smokers have gone from being the cool people, to being the naughty people, to being almost outcasts. The success has not just been in Australia. Perhaps one measure of how far we’ve come is that fact that during the US presidential campaign in 2008, Republicans tried to counter Barack Obama’s popularity by revealing that he was (gasp!) a secret smoker!

Smokers are a minority and it’s an ever-dwindling minority, thanks in no small part to regulations that make it harder and harder to promote smoking. For all that, I think it’s a dangerous precedent to allow government to ban a legal product from identifying itself, or at least distinguishing itself from the competition. It’s been said that if this new proposal prevents just one person from smoking, then it will have been worthwhile. I can see that point, but I don’t think it’s government’s job to save the last few stragglers from themselves. I think this new proposal goes too far.

And yet, I think it doesn’t go far enough.

Ever since the television advertising of cigarettes was banned in 1976, successive governments have been gradually banning everything to do with cigarettes… except cigarettes. It’s time to stop faffing about and go all the way.

I am not talking about outlawing tobacco tomorrow. That would be unworkable and cruel to many remaining addicts. Ozzy Osbourne has said that nicotine is the hardest addiction to break and Lord knows, there speaks a man who ought to know.

What I am suggesting is that we set a deadline for a phased withdrawal, just like with leaded petrol, analogue television and incandescent light globes. Announce that from 1st January, 2020, the production, sale and consumption of tobacco products will be banned, so start making your plans now! These may be lifestyle plans for smokers, business plans for retailers and producers (and indeed, anyone in the business of helping people to quit smoking - after all, they rely on smoking for their business too), and economic plans for governments that still have a nice little earner from tobacco excise. That should give everyone fair warning. The minimum age at which it’s legal to buy cigarettes is 18. Raise that age by one year every year. This way people who started smoking legally are not turned into outlaws overnight, but by the time the full ban comes into force, no-one under 26 should ever have smoked legally anyway.

As with leaded petrol, by the time the deadline comes around, many producers and retailers may have discontinued the product anyway, which will only accelerate the phase-out. After the deadline, anyone whose addiction is such that their doctor feels quitting would cause more discomfort than good can obtain cigarettes by prescription.

Would this cause job losses? Quite probably – but no more or less than any change of industry. Digital cameras caused the loss of thousands of job in the photographic film industry around the world. Did any of us stop to think of that before we bought that digi-cam? Did we oppose diesel trains out of concern for coal miners? Did anyone object to sewerage on the grounds it would put the dunnymen out of a job? Industries change, and a deadline helps everyone to manage that change.

We are past the point of appealing to people’s sense of reason or hip pocket. Anyone who is not already persuaded by the health, ethical and economic arguments will not be convinced by more of the same. Constantly increasing taxes on tobacco under the guise of discouraging smoking is a conflict of interests. We say we want to prevent smoking, but we still take the money and factor it into the budget. Cigarettes would never be allowed to be sold if they were brought onto the market today. They’re a left-over from a time when we didn’t know any better and we have spent nearly forty years trying to catch up. If we are serious about stopping smoking, this is the way to do it.

Seven Suffixes

2011-11-10T16:46:00.001+11:00

which should be stricken from the English language immediately:

- gate

- ageddon

- 101

- inator

- pocalypse

- athon

- licious

Oh, Andrew!

2011-11-09T17:08:00.002+11:00

It’s the way you tell ’em!

I do my best not to give Andrew Bolt any more oxygen than he already has, but his love letter to Alan Joyce today reveals a stunning lack of awareness even for Bolt.

“But there’s one other stereotype Joyce smashed. This tough, cool union-buster is also gay, sharing his life with a New Zealand man.

What a fine challenge to the notion of gays as effete, flighty and soft - a straitjacketing that limited the media careers of gay friends, keener to talk politics than showbiz”

Leaving aside the fact that this patronising comment is just as insulting to gays as the stereotypes he mentions, has Bolt considered the possibility that Joyce is choosing to identify as gay in order to get preferential treatment?

“And, again, what a rejection of the role Labor wrote for Joyce as a Liberal zealot, conspiring with Tony Abbott”

Really? How does that work? Did Bolt just admit that being gay is incompatible with being a Liberal zealot and/or conspiring with Tony Abbott?

“Stupid stereotypes. How they kill our possibilities. How they dull our reason”

You can make your own joke about the irony of this coming from a man who writes about people who are too white to be aboriginal and continues to do so in a plausibly deniable fashion. Stereotypes dull our reason do they, Andrew? When did you figure this out?

We can see what Bolt is up to here. He’s preparing to make criticism of Joyce look like homophobia. He wants to protect Joyce from… well, people like him. I didn’t know Joyce was gay until this morning and I don’t care. It’s irrelevant. It makes no difference to the way I see him. I don’t care which way you swing. If you’re a decent person, then you’re a decent person and if you’re a prat, then you’re a prat.

The stereotypes that Bolt decries (for once!) reveal more about himself than anyone else.
Keep tearing at those straw men Andrew! Pretty soon, another one will fall down and crush you. Again.

How to tell if you’re biased

2011-11-02T20:37:00.001+11:00

I have written before that if I am considered a leftie, it’s only inasmuch as I oppose the crazy right (as opposed to the moderate right, which does exist although is often smothered by louder voices). I’ve also confessed that I tend to support the side that acts like less of a dick (a relative term) and that this tends not to be the right wing. These are my honest observations – if anyone would like to show me where I’m wrong, I am certainly open to that discussion.

I also pride myself on always trying to apply the same standards to all sides. It’s this that usually leads to accusations of bias on my part from those who would rationalise intellectual dishonesty, hypocrisy, contradictions or just plain dickishness.

It’s a very deep question whether we judge people or parties by their words and deeds, or judge words and deeds by people or parties that say and do them. You can get an idea by asking yourself a few questions:

The next time Julia Gillard says something, ask yourself how you would feel if Tony Abbott said it.
If you think Bob Katter says crazy things, ask yourself if you’d still think so if Bob Brown said them.
When Barack Obama announces a policy, ask yourself if you’d still agree or disagree with it if were John Boehner’s policy.
When Sarah Hanson-Young makes a comment, imagine if Barnaby Joyce had made the same comment.
If Richard Dawkins says something brilliant, ponder how brilliant it would be if it came from George Pell.
And the next time Twitter’s favourite Canberra correspondent tweets something seriously questionable, ask yourself if you would react the same way if one of our favourite News Ltd whipping boys posted the same thing.

Don’t just say X wouldn’t say something like Y. Do it for the intellectual exercise. Ideally, your reaction should be exactly the same. I know it sounds obvious, but it might be harder than you think when you try it.

Welcome to the Nanny State

2011-10-26T22:49:00.001+11:00

Much as we’d like to, it’s impossible to legislate common sense. That’s the main reason we need other laws. Since most of us understand that “rational self-interest” is a contradiction in terms, you’d think that requiring gamblers to nominate how much they are prepared to lose before feeding their money into a poker machine would be a fairly benign, uncontroversial requirement because it’s… well, common sense.

Tony Abbott though, sees it differently. Echoing the sentiments of the pokie clubs, he has said, “I know the values and principles of my party and we are instinctively resistant to anything that smacks of the nanny state.”

Ah yes, the “nanny state,” the first refuge of anyone who thinks people ought to be able to do what they want, regardless of the harm it may cause. Well, if Tony and his party would oppose poker machine reform on the grounds that it smacks of the nanny state, how do they feel about…

Speed Limits
Mandatory seatbelt laws
Mandatory motorcycle helmets
Mandatory bike helmets
Blood alcohol limits for driving
Banning marijuana
Banning cocaine
Banning amphetamines
Banning heroin
Compulsory education
Occupational health and safety regulations
Compulsory superannuation
Insider trading laws
Public decency laws
Firearm restrictions
Film, television and literature classifications
The age of consent
Minimum ages to work, vote, smoke, drive, and drink
Banning two-up 364 days of the year
Banning SP bookmaking
Building codes
Defamation law

All of these could be described as nanny-state policies. If you want a libertarian dream world, go the whole hog. Don’t just use an argument of convenience on a single issue.

Feel free to add your own.

A scene from an alternate reality

2011-10-23T16:34:00.001+11:00

I haven’t said much about the Occupy [insert nearest city here] demonstrations in Australia, mainly because others like Geordie Guy, Kimbo Ramplin, Mike Stuchbery and Geoff Lemon have said it so much better.
One little addition occurs to me…

It’s pretty much agreed that the queen’s visit was at least partly behind Melbourne Mayor Robert Doyle’s decision to have to protest moved on. Let’s just imagine what might have happened if the mayor hadn’t acted and ’er maj’s eyes were sullied by the sight of a few crusty drum circles in the city square.

Lord Mayor: Your Majesty, I must apologise for this inexcusable disruption of the peace by that unruly mob over there. I assure you, this doesn’t usually happen.

The Queen: Look ’ere cobber, I don’t know if you get the news over here or if you just have the memory of a pot smoking goldfish, but two months ago, half of England was orn fire! Windows were smashed, shops were looted, whole blocks were burned down and people died! You think this is a disruption? You call than an unruly mob? That’s nowt! HTFU, me ol’ china and pour me another G&T while you’re about it.”

“Pics or it didn’t happen”

2011-10-23T15:59:00.000+11:00

I posted this on my Tumblr ’blog yesterday. It’s the place I use for little tidbits and anything that isn’t good enough to post here (if you can imagine such a thing). I was torn on whether I should post it here but decided to put it on the other site because it contains confronting images.

Then the post went slightly viral, getting over 100 hits in an evening. Maybe that happens to anything with a NSFW warning, but it made me wonder if I should have posted it here all along.

I’ll leave the decision up to you. If you’re up for it, the post is here:
Two photos

On the day's events

2011-10-21T20:34:00.001+11:00

It's not as if the Occupy Melbourne (or Sydney, or especially Brisbane) protests are not predominantly a bunch of bandwagon-jumpers with victim envy, copying and ultimately trivialising important statements being made by others overseas.
But one has to note the irony that on the day the world rejoiced at the death of a tyrant, Melbourne City Council send police with horses, dogs and capsicum spray to disperse a peaceful demonstration that was not hurting anyone or stopping anyone from going about their business.

In doing so, they have proven the protesters' point, which up until now, had always been pretty contrived.

Let freedom ring!

Hooray! Now what?

2011-10-21T12:33:00.000+11:00

Forgive me if I cannot get on board with the cheering over the rough justice that was meted out to Gaddafi* this morning. The question is not whether he deserved his fate, but whether this bodes well for the next Libyan regime. While it’s understandable under the circumstances, celebrating death as an instrument of political change is not very far removed from the Gaddafi regime. Whether this is the beginning of a new era of freedom and democracy is a wide open question.

Progressives really need to get their story straight. We support due process, except when the Hollywood ending feels better. We are against the death penalty, but make an exception (if only by silence) for the likes of Amrosi. We hate western interference in the internal affairs of sovereign nations, except when we agree with it. We are against angry mobs, wildly overstating their case and peddling conspiracy theories, except when we like them.

Democracy does not come from removing and/or killing a tyrant. It does not come from having free elections. Only when a previously elected government is voted out and there is a peaceful transition to the new government, can a nation be called genuinely democratic. This has not yet happened in Afghanistan, where every election has endorsed the president installed by the occupying forces**, and often under suspicious circumstances. It has not happened in South Africa. It has not happened in Zimbabwe, where Robert Mugabe won the first free election in 1980 and gradually became a dictator. Iraq? Don’t make me laugh. Russia? I’ll believe it when I see it. Egypt? Syria? Place your bets.

As one Libyan on the radio today put it, killing Gaddafi (in crossfire between rebels and loyalists, according to reports at time of writing) is almost a mercy killing, meaning he will never have to face due justice. I shed no more tears for Gaddafi than I would for any of the other murderous tyrants whose people are rising up against them. But I must wonder if and when genuine democracy will ever come so long as we endorse, even under extraordinary circumstances, the take-him-out-and-shoot-him model of political change.

If the last sixty years have taught us anything (and I’m not sure they have), it’s that the enemy of your enemy may also be your enemy.

* There are numerous acceptable ways of spelling his name in English. This is the spelling I have seen recently. If you know of others, fine.

** Not a pejorative term, just the way it is.

Who lied? And when, and why and how?

2011-10-17T22:06:00.001+11:00

The passage of the Carbon Tax bill last week reminded us all (as if we’ve ever been allowed to forget) that Julia Gillard lied during the election campaign when she said there would not be a carbon tax under a government she leads. As usual, the reality is a little less simple.

Let’s make one thing clear from the outset: Julia Gillard was extremely foolish to make such an unequivocal statement. It was always going to come back to bite her just as John Howard’s statement that a GST would “never ever” be a part of his policy would come back to bit him. John Howard learnt from his mistake though. He never again made absolute statements. He always gave himself an out. Gillard should have learnt from his mistake too.

I’ve written previously about how government policy is what can pass the parliament because the parliament is the government. As such, the policies of either major party are negated when the Australian electorate chooses not to give either of them a clear majority.

Gillard in fact has several ways to rationalise her pre-election statement. She could tell the truth and say that she is not the supreme leader of this government and that the ultimate decider of policy is what can pass the parliament. Or she could be honest and say that her comments were assuming an ALP majority. Or if she wanted to be cheeky, she could invoke John Howard’s distinction of “core promises.”

The Liberal party has been prepared for comparison to John Howard’s “never ever” statement and remind us that John Howard took the GST to an election. That, he did. However, the Coalition polled just 48% of the primary vote in that election, which is less than the ALP polled in 2010. No-one called that “the death of democracy.”

Then there was WorkChoices. John Howard never said a thing about that in the 2004 election campaign. In fairness to Howard, he probably didn’t know himself that he would do that – he just saw his chance when the coalition won control of the Senate, and grabbed it. When confronted with the fact that he never took it to an election, Howard’s explanation was that everyone knew it had been on the Liberals’ wishlist for 20 years but they’d never had the number for it before. In fairness to Howard, he never said he wouldn’t introduce WorkChoices. He had learnt from his previous mistake. Likewise, everyone knew it was ALP policy to introduce a market-based system for reducing carbon emissions. And it was much fresher in the memory than the Liberal party’s historical desire for industrial relations reform.

Based on the election figures, if Gillard has no mandate for the carbon tax, then John Howard clearly had no mandate for the GST. If John Howard had a mandate for WorkChoices based on the dubious logic that he never said he wouldn’t, then the majority of the current parliament has a mandate to implement policy that they can come to an agreement on. Any one of these is an intellectually defensible argument – but make your mind up and stick by your story.

No leader ever frames their policy statements according to how they would be affected by a hung parliament. So was Howard’s lie of omission in 2004 better or worse than Gillard’s omission of premise in 2010?
The other question is who voted Labor on the strength of Gillard saying there would be no carbon tax? Anyone?

Shorter QandA

2011-10-10T18:14:00.000+11:00

If you’re worried about missing Q and A this week, here’s a quick summary of what will inevitably happen this week (or any other)

Kevin Rudd… derp… derp… assassinated… derp… derp… derp… leadership ambitions… derp… derp… Julia lied… derp… derp… derp… carbon tax… derp… tax bad… derp… derp… mandate… derp… democracy… derp… election… derp… derp… Tony Abbott crazy man… derp… derp… budgie smugglers… derp… grandstanding questioner… derp… derp… John Howard was right… derp… derp… lame joke from twitter… derp… faceless men… derp… derp… stop the boats… derp… derp… derp… attempt to juxtapose live exports and refugees… derp… Bob Brown… derp… derp… stupid conspiracy theory… derp… derp… derp… fawning tweet sucking up to panel member… derp… embarrassing video question… derp… derp… derp… artistic guest panellist starts an answer they can’t finish… derp… derp… poker machines… derp… derp… nanny state… derp… derp… gay marriage… derp… derp… tweet lamenting absence of Malcolm Turnbull… derp… derp… Murdoch justification… derp… derp… derp… sly suggestion of leftie bias on ABC… derp… derp… I’ll take that as a comment… derp… derp…
Thank you and goodnight.

My first unboxing video

2011-10-09T19:17:00.000+11:00

If you’ve ever researched a potential technology purchase online, you’ve probably come across a big trend on YouTube of ‘unboxing’ videos. The people have just received their goods and open them up right there on cam for you.

Unboxing videos can be informative if you’re lucky enough to find one made by someone who knows what they’re talking about. More often than not, they’re about as useful as this:

A Present-Day Himself

2011-10-07T15:39:00.001+11:00

The untimely passing of Steve Jobs has brought a torrent of praise. Most of that praise is well deserved. His influence on modern life, whether one is immediately aware of it or not, is significant. However, the enthusiasm by some to gush over his achievements ends up doing him a disservice. Reports have compared Jobs to Thomas Edison, Pablo Picasso and Leonardo Da Vinci – sometimes in the same sentence. This is not fair to any of them.

It’s fair to say Steve Jobs was a visionary. His gift was not so much in either the creation of the hardware nor the coding of the software, or even in the specific design of either. Jobs’ brilliance was in gathering people who are experts in those fields and motivating them to make it work like this and look like that. The products which Jobs presided over the design of, are perfect marriages of complexity, simplicity and beauty. (yes, it’s a ménage a trois – what’s your point?) This is not to say that Apple is never overrated. I believe they have cheapened their brand somewhat over recent years by overstating the significance of features and the careful rationing of some of those product features. Early iPhones didn’t even have 3G at a time when any other phone worth talking about did. One of the big new features of the iPhone 4, released last year, was video calling – a feature I’d had on my Nokia since 2008, and it wasn’t state of the art even then. And it challenges credulity to think that the new features of the iPad 2 couldn’t have been worked into the iPad 1, released less than a year earlier. If nothing else, it would have saved the poor buggers at Foxconn a lot of retooling.

I don’t attribute any of this to Steve Jobs personally. I am neither a fanboy, nor a hater, just trying to keep some perspective. Steve Jobs did not invent the Graphical User Interface or the mouse. That would be Xerox. In fairness, Steve Jobs never claimed to have invented those things, nor did he ever encourage the notion that he did, but listening to some reports today, it would be easy to believe it was all Apple’s idea because the Macintosh was the first commercially available computer to have a GUI. This was Steve Jobs’ real talent – to be an aggregator of ideas. He didn’t invent the MP3 player. Instead, he perfected the idea and expanded the notion to become a smartphone and a tablet computer. This list of what Steve Jobs did and didn’t do sums it up very nicely.

That’s one reason why comparisons with inventors and designers of the past are inappropriate. The other reason is that it’s just so unnecessary.

Seriously, how brilliant do you have to be, how broad your influence, before you get to stand alone? How great must your achievements be before they don’t have to be described in terms of what others did? Steve Jobs was not a modern day Da Vinci. That’s the difference between being a couple of decades ahead of your time and a couple of centuries ahead of your time. He was not Pablo Picasso, the main reason being that Steve Jobs’ designs are beautiful. I’m not saying that Picasso wasn’t a great artist but I wouldn’t want to have to look at one of his works for several hours a day. The Edison analogy probably comes closest to being fair. They were both showmen as much as innovators, and that showmanship was invaluable to promoting the product. Both created a simple music player that would evolve into something that changed the way we live. But who was Thomas Edison the contemporary equivalent of? The answer is: a long line of people who were equal parts genius and madman, looking everywhere for an idea that would make them rich and famous. Edison managed to find a couple.

I stopped describing Paul Kelly as a modern-day Henry Lawson (although I still believe it’s a fair comparison) after reading how Lawson was offended at being called an Australian Rudyard Kipling. Although it was meant as a compliment, Henry Lawson was not Rudyard Kipling – he was Henry Lawson. Every teenage guitarist wants to be the next Jimi Hendrix. There are those in their 50s still trying to be. The point they all miss is that Hendrix wasn’t trying to be the next Robert Johnson, Chet Atkins or BB King – he wanted to be the first Jimi Hendrix. He succeeded, and to this day, there has never been a better one. That’s why my advice to young guitarists is that if you want to be like Hendrix, forget about Hendrix. Throw everything out and start again. That’s exactly what Steve Jobs did. He wasn’t trying to be the next anyone.

This is not to say that some geniuses don’t start out trying to emulate others. Bob Dylan wanted to be Woody Guthrie. Today though, you would never describe Bob Dylan as ‘the Woody Guthrie of the 60s.’ If you had to explain to someone who Bob Dylan is, the most appropriate answer would probably be, “Are you nuts? He’s Bob friggin’ Dylan!”

Steve Jobs was not a modern day Edison, Picasso or Da Vinci. He was not Archimedes, Bach, Alexander Graham Bell, Guglielmo Marconi, Nikola Tesla, John Logie Baird or Frank Lloyd Wright. He was Steve Jobs. If that in itself isn’t good enough for you, then you’re probably in for a life of disappointments.

Definition of Irony

2011-10-06T22:07:00.001+11:00

Mitt Romney's greatest chance of winning the US presidency is also his greatest chance of losing the Republican nomination - his success in creating a public health system.

Greetings from RARA

2011-10-03T20:32:00.000+11:00

Being fairly visible online, I’m deliberately coy about location. If I lived in Melbourne, I would just say ‘Melbourne,’ and leave it at that because it’s both specific enough and vague enough. As it is, I don’t live in Melbourne. I live in a place that’s big enough that you can keep to yourself if you want to, but small enough that someone named Bill who writes a lot about politics and music is enough to identify you. I live in RARA.

“RARA” is my dear departed Godmother’s acronym for what politicians and the media refer to as “Rural and Regional Australia.” It’s a catch-all term to describe any part of Australia that isn’t one of the capital cities. In other words: most of it. RARA encompasses everywhere from large cities to one-horse towns, farmland to industrial centres. If you’re way out in the desert or deep in the bush, then you’re in the next level of RARA: Rural and Remote Australia.

I’ve no time for any silly city vs country stereotypes. I don’t think either is better or worse than the other in principle. Each needs the other. But the next time you feel (rightly) offended if someone calls you an inner-city latte-sipper because you have a heartfelt view about what’s going on, spare a thought for those of us in RARA.

I’ll tell you a little about my corner of RARA and to make it easier, I’ll describe it in the form of fashionable clichés.

Is it full of bogans*?
Partly, yes. Speaking of masses of bogans, did you see the grand final last week?
Is it full of hippy seachangers* and treechangers*?
Yep, them too.
Is it full of whingeing farmers?
Yes, but not as much as it used to be.
Is it impossible to get a decent coffee?
Only if you’re too lazy to walk half a block.
Is it full of right-wing, racist rednecks?
Of course it is! In exactly the same way that the cities are full of gay socialists. And nothing else.

There are lots of things that frustrate me about where I live and I won’t defend it from any reasonable criticism. If I complain about it, it’s because I’ve earnt that right. But if you want to bag non-metropolitan areas, as one, without ever travelling past the end of the tram lines, then frankly, screw you!

*Explanatory links added for international readers.

The Bonus Discs - McCartney & McCartney II

2011-10-02T15:29:00.000+11:00

The paradox of the McCartney and McCartney II albums is that they are both very similar and very different albums. Fundamentally, they are both the sound of Paul McCartney pottering about in his back shed seeing what sounds he could make. He played all parts himself, making them solo albums in the truest sense of the word. The main difference is that on the latter album, he’s working out how to use synthesizers and sequencers. It’s perhaps for this reason that McCartney II is not remembered particularly fondly, as the sounds are now awfully dated while the more basic instrumentation of the first album do not. However, at least every track on McCartney II has a beginning, middle and end. If one wanted to be harsh, you could say there are really only four or five complete songs on McCartney and the rest is a collection of self-jams and half-songs butted together.

Be that as it may, enough has been written about these two albums over the last thirty (or forty, as the case may be) years, and this review is of the bonus discs that come with the deluxe editions of the albums. Unlike Band on the Run, you have to buy the uber-deluxe versions in order to get all the previously unreleased material. That’s a mark against it from the start because fans who want to have all the music don’t necessarily want an expensive coffee-table book as well, beautiful though the books are.

The additional CD with McCartney scrapes to find enough interesting things to add. Perhaps the most sought-after track is the full-length version of Suicide. The story goes that the song was intended for Frank Sinatra but he rejected it. Who would have thought Sinatra wouldn’t be keen on singing a song about domestic violence called ‘Suicide’? Go figure! Other out-takes are Women Kind and Don’t Cry Baby which is in fact, an instrumental version of Oo You – or Singalong Oo You if you like. Other tracks on the bonus CD are Every Night, Hot as Sun and Maybe I’m Amazed recorded live in Glasgow (widely bootlegged as Wings’ Last Flight) and another version of Maybe I’m Amazed from the One Hand Clapping film, also available on the special edition of Band on the Run.

On the DVD side, we have a ten minute audio interview with Paul about the making of the album which is augmented by some pretty nice animation and this is followed some home movies that are soundtracked by the Loma Mar Quartet’s version of Junk (from the Working Classical album). The original promotional film for Maybe I’m Amazed is included without remastered audio. This is interesting because it adds an authenticity to the rather dated. Hi-fi sound would have jarred with the visuals. The version of Suicide from One Hand Clapping was not included in the cut of the film that was released with Band on the Run last year. I guess they were saving that for this release. The DVD is completed with four live versions, two from the Concert for the People of Kampuchea in 1979 and two from MTV Unplugged in 1991.

Maybe I'm Amazed - initial CD release

Maybe I'm Amazed - 2011 remaster

The deluxe edition of McCartney II comes with two bonus CDs and a DVD. The first extra CD collects B-sides and previously unreleased tracks, some of which remind us of why they were unreleased. Bogey Wobble sounds like an early 80s corporate video but it’s still better than All You Horse Riders. In fairness, there’s no attempt to hide the fact that these are experimental recordings, never intended for release. Also included is Wonderful Christmastime, recorded during the same sessions, and the live version of Coming Up, which was released as the A-side of the single in the US. This is its first world-wide CD release. The disc is bookended with two versions of Blue Sway. It opens with the orchestrated version which was completed in 1986 (which explains why it sounds more like it’s taken from the Press to Play sessions than McCartney II) and concludes with the unadorned, original version.

The second bonus CD, only available on the deluxe edition is made up mostly of full-length versions of tracks that were edited down for album release. While most of these edits simply took out unnecessary repetition and noodling, it’s still interesting to hear the tracks as they were initially recorded.

The DVD features a 25-minute special called Meet Paul McCartney, where Paul is interviewed about the new album by Tim Rice, no less. McCartney interviews from this period are interesting because he wasn’t talking about the Beatles all the time. This program also includes the original 4:3 version of the Waterfalls film clip, not the new, cropped ‘widescreen’ version. There are all the video clips associated with the album, plus two live versions of Coming Up – one from the Concert for the People of Kampuchea and a home movie of Wings rehearsing. Although Wings’ popularity was fading by 1979, it’s still interesting to see one of the biggest bands of the 70s crammed into a living room to practice. Also included is the commentary on the making of Coming Up, previously included on The McCartney Years and the newly made video clip for Blue Sway.

Coming Up - 1993 remaster

Coming Up - 2011 remaster

Usually when reviewing bonus discs like this, I ask the question: Is it worth paying extra for? I’m slightly torn on the answer for these releases because while there’s some very interesting stuff included, the question is whether you’re prepared to buy a hardcover book at a price anywhere between $US55 and $US120 to get them. For sure, the books are sumptuous and contain lots of great photos and insight into how the albums were made, but ideally that should be a separate decision from the audio/visual content. The McCartney album’s two bonus discs contain less than an hour of additional material between them. McCartney II’s three extra discs, do give over two hours of rare & unreleased tracks.

Both deluxe editions come with vouchers to download the high resolution, 24 bit, 96 kHz versions of the recordings.

McCartney:
Audio: LPCM Stereo
Worth paying extra for? Not really.

McCartney II:
Audio: LPCM Stereo
Worth paying extra for? Yes, but not this much.

The Only Thing Worse than Being Talked About

2011-09-30T19:19:00.001+10:00

In his screed of self-justification yesterday (you can find it yourself if you want to), Andrew Bolt referred to two years of worry over his court case which was settled this week. Forgive me if I’m not convinced. In the end, Bolt and his employers couldn’t lose.

If the decision had gone the other way, the Hun would still have given him the front page, only it would have been to praise a victory for free speech rather than decrying a blow for it. Sales would have been exactly the same. People who read Bolt are going to read Bolt no matter what he’s writing about.

If Bolt or News Ltd had really been worried, they would have quietly settled out of court, added confidentiality clauses and found something else to write about. Instead, they played it out under the guise of taking a stand on principle. In reality, whether he’s a champion or a martyr for free speech, it keeps Bolt and the papers he’s published in visible, notable and talked about. As we all know, the one thing worse than being talked about, is not being talked about.

This story will be dragged out for a few more weeks, and then Bolt will most likely try to get taken to court for something else. That will keep him as the centre of attention and save him, his colleagues and even his competitors from the drudgery of writing about anything that might resemble news.

Just like their banner says:

Andrew Bolt is Not a Journalist

2011-09-30T10:35:00.001+10:00

Much has been written and said – and much more will be – about the Andrew Bolt verdict this week and how it pertains to free speech. I have already written several times about how the right to free speech does not entitle you to be published or paid for it, or give you immunity from the consequences of exercising that right. I see no reason to restate that point with fresh examples. As to whether the law he was sued under is an ass, I will leave that to people who are more learned and passionate on the subject than I am.*

What I take issue with is the way Andrew Bolt is frequently referred to as a journalist. He is not.

Journalists break stories. The closest Andrew Bolt has come to breaking a story in recent memory was dropping a teaser about having a story that would force Julia Gillard to resign, and then throwing a hissy fit (again, related to free speech) when the story he was (presumably) referring to had to be quickly pulled on the grounds that it wasn’t true. What kind of country are we living in when you’re stopped from publishing a story just because it isn’t true?

Andrew Bolt makes more new than he reports. Like an Australian Ann Coulter (a comparison he would probably consider a compliment) he makes a career out of saying increasingly outlandish things and then cries about censorship whenever he is called out on that outlandishness. That’s not journalism.

Journalists report the news. It could be an impending political scandal, a war, a traffic accident or a cat stuck up a tree – you just never know. Journalism is more than staying in your office, doing all your research on Google, writing a daily “Here’s what I reckon about that” column, and posting photos that readers have taken through their windows on your ’blog.

I am not saying Andrew Bolt has never been a journalist. I know that when he first got his job at the Herald Sun, it was as a journalist. I don’t doubt that he has some journalistic blood. I know he chooses to identify as a journalist. I am saying that what he does now, is not journalism.

“But Bill, you’re not a journalist. Who are you to say who is a journalist and who isn’t?”

No, I’m not a journalist. I never have been one and most likely never will be.
But I reckon I know one when I see one. And I reckon I’m at least as qualified to decide who should or shouldn’t be called a journalist as Andrew Bolt is to decide who should and shouldn’t be called Aboriginal.
That’s free speech for ya!

* My pick of the commentary on the case:
David Marr: "In black and white, Andrew Bolt trifled with the facts"
Jonathan Holmes: "Bolt, Bromberg and a profoundly disturbing judgement"
Michael Gawenda: "Bolt's columns did not deserve to see the light of day. End of story"
Mike Carlton: "Nuts come out after the truth has bolted"

The Message We Are Sending

2011-09-24T13:49:00.000+10:00

The interception of two more boats of asylum seekers off Christmas Island this week had Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott blaming each other for the arrivals. Predictably enough, each of them claimed the other had sent a message to people-smugglers that Australia is open to them. I honestly can’t be bothered delving into the logic of either position except to say that it beggars belief that the utterances of either leader has a direct influence on people’s willingness to risk everything to flee their country of origin, or those who would take advantage of such desperation.

What I will say is that if we’re really concerned about the message we send overseas, we need to look a bit higher than the daily partisan bickering for domestic consumption.

For those who’ve come across the seas
We’ve boundless plains to share;
With courage let us all combine
To Advance Australia Fair.

http://www.dfat.gov.au/facts/nat_anthem.html

I guess there’s a reason we never sing the second verse.

Whither Satire?

2011-09-14T22:11:00.000+10:00

Tom Lehrer once said that he gave up satire after Henry Kissinger won the Nobel Peace Prize, declaring the profession redundant after that. It’s tempting to suggest that political satire is redundant in Australia too. We have a government that offers no leadership and an opposition that offers no alternative. In these most laughable times, there’s no-one on television specifically making an act out of saying how laughable it is. Perhaps there should be.

When talking of television political satire, it’s impossible not to mention The Gillies Report in the nid-80s, but there has also been the most excellent BackBerner around the turn of the century. Right now, there’s bugger all. All we have that approaches satire are the 7PM Project, At Home with Julia and The Gruen Transfer – and they all approach satire very timidly.

The 7PM project started out as an attempt at a local version of The Daily Show, but they stuffed up in trying to mix in actual news. So we had, “Here’s a news headline. And here’s a joke about it. Here’s another news headline. And here’s another joke. Here’s another news headline. Ooh, there’s nothing funny about that – let’s look uncomfortable and move on.” Then they gave a platform to right-wing trolls like Steve Price and Andrew Bolt, brought on as their “serious” analysts and now 7PM is basically an info-tainment program. But the host doesn’t shave – ooh, they’re just so edgy!

The point 7PM missed is that The Daily Show does more serious commentary by staying true to their mission of being a comedy program rather than trying to go half way to being serious. The one thing I dislike about the Daily Show is that they still call it fake news. It’s not. The news is real. The difference is that being a comedy program the Daily Show gets to take something that’s really stupid and say, “Hey, that’s really stupid!”

At Home With Julia buries the occasional satirical observation so deep inside a painfully unfunny sitcom that it’s not worth waiting for, and the Gruen Transfer tells us all how we’re being lied to while praising the cleverness of those lies. There has also been the Chaser, but too often they tarnish their brand by going for the “OMG! I can’t believe you just did that,” laughs. The only place we have for actual, literate satire is the perennial Clarke and Dawe.

While this is going on, supposedly serious programs are leaving it to the audience to make their own jokes. Q and A has given up on its “experiments in democracy,” and is instead going for just being good television (where “good television,” is a euphemism for an entertaining train wreck. Most of the guests are commentators more than anyone involved in policy, the questions are mostly grandstanding and the on-screen tweets are mostly bad jokes and attention-seekers. (Yes, I am as guilty of this as anyone else).

With so much of politics and analysis allowing casual observers to make their own jokes, I for one am beginning to miss informed, well crafted satire.

Why Books Are Better Than Kindle*

2011-09-04T22:19:00.004+10:00

*or Kobo, or Nook, or iPad, or any other kind of e-reader

If you lose one, you’ve only lost one.
You can loan a book to a friend.
Or you can borrow one.
You don’t have to turn it off when your flight is taking off or landing.
Others can see what you’re reading. You might make a new friend based on a common interest.
You can impress your date with the type of books on your shelves. Or, you can see what your date is interested in by their shelves. Both excellent conversation starters.
You can take old books that you no longer want to a book exchange to trade for new books, or at least new-to-you books.
Or you can donate them to libraries or charity shops so they can continue to do good after you’re finished with them.
Or you can leave them somewhere for others to pick up.
A book can be signed by the author.
Books can appreciate in value. Ever seen a bidding war for a version-1 pdf?
The battery never runs out.
Books weather and age. A book can tell a story quite apart from what is written in it.
You can write a dedication in a book you give as a gift.
They have page numbers.
You can throw a bad book across the room, out the window or up a creek with minimal damage.
You can tell when a book has been read and how much it has been returned to.
Books can be beautiful.
Books are biodegradable.
You can use cool bookmarks.
You can highlight passages or make notes by whatever means suit you.
Books are compatible with anything.
No DRM.
Books smell awesome.
Books make a house feel like a home.
Books have different fonts.
A well-loved book will naturally fall open at your favourite part.
A cookbook can be open in the kitchen with minimal risk of damage from spatter.
If you buy a book from one store, you can still books from other stores.
Books come with their own customised dust jacket at no extra charge.
Paper is not a proprietary format.
You don’t have to worry that a newer, better version will come out next year.
Books aren’t printed in Chinese sweatshops. (yet)
Books don’t crash or need their OS updated.
Once you own a book, you own it. The store can’t take it off your shelf when the licencing arrangements change.
Books don’t automatically update when you don’t want them to.
Bookshelves are works of art.
Books are tactile.
Books don’t need protection. They’re either flexible enough to take a bit of bending or hard enough to resist it.
Instant on.

Update: John Carney has written a very witty response here: http://johncarney.posterous.com/68424958

How to Manufacture a Leadership Crisis

2011-09-02T14:38:00.001+10:00

[Headline]
Speculation is mounting about the future of the prime minister’s leadership.
This will always be true. There mere act of saying so automatically increases speculation.

[Question to frontbencher]
Is it true that there is dissatisfaction amongst the parliamentary party with the prime minister’s leadership?
[Answer]
No, I am not aware of any such dissatisfaction. We are all completely behind the prime minister.
[Report]
They deny it. It must be true.

[Question to deputy leader]
Have you been approached to challenge the prime minister for the leadership?
[Answer]
No, I have not.
[Report]
He denies it. It must be true!

Now that the questions have been asked, the natural paranoia and ambition of politicians takes over. The prime minister checks to see if there really is a challenge in the offing. So does the deputy leader. The party, having read of leadership speculation in the papers, assumes it must be what people are thinking about and begin to wonder whether they should question the prime minister’s leadership.

The only thing that is really up to the party is whether the prime minister calls a spill to consolidate the leadership or the party puts up a challenger having read of widespread speculation and dissatisfaction.

A spill is called.

[Headline]
As first reported in these pages two weeks ago, there is a challenge to the prime minister’s leadership.

The prime minister is either re-elected or replaced.

[Headline]
We told you so! But the tightness of the result means the new/old leader is still in a vulnerable position.

Repeat any time you’re bored or when policy is too complicated to bother with. Remember: keep it simple, stupid.

Why I can’t get behind Soften the Fck Up

2011-08-20T00:12:00.005+10:00

www.softenthefckup.com.au

I wanted to like it. I really did. Mike Stuchbery and Ben Pobjie, who I linked to in the previous post about depression and who I respect both as writers and survivors are involved, which gives the initiative some credibility. But the more I looked at it and the more I thought about it, the angrier it made me.

I felt the same way about RUOK? Day. While on one level, it’s wonderful that people are getting the message out about depression and mental illness, it’s being done in such a dumbed down, made-for-tv way that I wonder whether it’s simply trivialising something that was previously ignored. Definatalie wrote an excellent piece on RUOK? Day simply titled, I am not OK. Don’t ask anyone how they are if you’re not prepared to hear that.

Soften the Fck Up is trying to reach men who bottle up their feelings due to the whole ‘boys don’t cry,” thing, and that’s a worthy objective. But there’s no point in telling people to open up and get help if you’re not going to quantify that help.

“Talk about it,” we are told. Yep, good advice – I have no argument with that. “To who?” they then ask. Good question. That’s the one that we really need an answer to. “Could be your mates, your family…” Well yes, it could be, but it has to be someone who would understand and if we going with the premise that these blokes are in a dark place because they’re too tough to open up to people, I’d say their family and their mates may have had an influence on that. This is assuming the bloke has mates he can talk to at all. Then shit gets weird. “Could be your neighbour…” yes, could be, “…the postman…”

WTF? The postman? Is this for real? I don’t know where you guys live but my postman has got shit to do. He doesn’t need to hear all my problems. The biggest problem in talking about depression is trying to find someone who gets it, because millions don’t. It’s not the blokey blokes who need to soften the fuck up, it’s the people they might be turning to. Not everyone can be the listener.

I’ve been that postman before. Okay, I’ve never been a postman, but I think you get the idea. I’ve stayed with friends, helping them through dark times until I was sure they would be alright, but that’s one thing. It’s another to get a call at work, out of the blue, from someone you taught the previous year. This happened to me. I had a student with a fairly severe acquired brain injury in one of my basic computer classes. For the purposes of this story, we will call him Hank because nobody else does. It was a four-week course, one day per week.

Six months later, when my role had expanded to reception work when I wasn’t teaching, I get a phone call:

“Hello, can I talk to a teacher?”

Hmm, strange request, but okay.

- I’m a teacher, can I help you?
“I don’t know what to do with my life. What should I do?”

How do you answer that? How does anyone answer that, especially when they have work to do?

The calls continued for a while, and sometimes they were very brief.

“Hello, are you a teacher?”
- Oh hi, Hank. What’s up?
“I should say yes to education, shouldn’t I?”
- Um, yes. Yes you should.
“Okay, bye.”

Now understand that I wasn’t giving Hank the brush-off. I wanted to help him inasmuch as I could but like the postman, I had shit to do and they weren’t paying me to be a counsellor. Many times I tried to tell him that I was the wrong person to be asking, but Hank had got it into his head that teachers know everything.

“But you’re a teacher. You know things.”
- Hank, I teach computers. I don’t know anything about this stuff.

Then I got a call when Hank said, as casually as if he were wondering what to have for lunch,

“I’m tired of life. I don’t want to go on living any more.”

Right, that has to be taken seriously, but what can I do? I knew that he must have a regular doctor so I gave him the ‘talk to your doctor,’ speech. That didn’t seem to get anywhere. Then I remembered that he had a worker who had come with him to class. For the purpose of the story, we’ll call him Martin.

- Hank, talk to Martin. He knows you. He’ll be able to give you good advice.
“Martin’s out of the picture, he’s in the past.”

I was confident that Hank wasn’t an immediate suicide risk. He really did sound like he was just weighing up options. So once I had convinced him he should “say yes to life,” (his words, not mine), I called the disability assistance centre that I knew he had been attending, at least at the time he came to class. I told them everything that had happened, including that I’d suggested he talk to Martin. What they explained to me was that Martin had left the organisation and moved on, as professionals (or volunteers, I was never really sure) will do and Hank was a bit cut up about it. Muggins here, had just gone and told Hank he should talk to Martin.
Foot, meet mouth.

I apologised profusely to them for the faux pas and any knock-on damage it may have caused. They assured me it wasn’t a bad thing and that it might have helped Hank by making him face up to the change in circumstances.
But here’s the problem:
Hank had done exactly what STFU are suggesting. He talked to someone. He’d just picked someone who couldn’t help him. And it was someone who had some understanding and empathy for mental conditions. Imagine if it wasn’t. Talk to someone? Yes. But it can’t just be anyone. Are STFU going to take responsibility for the consequences if the postman says, “Harden the fuck up ya poofter. Now piss off, I’ve got work to do,”?

I suppose everyone who is approached by these newly softened former blokey blokes is supposed to utter the usual platitudes – get help, see a doctor, call Lifeline. I’m going to tell a story here that I chose not to include in the Monsters post because I thought it might be counter-productive but now I feel that I should.

During one of my lowest ever phases, I called Lifeline.
They didn’t answer.
I spent somewhere between five and ten minutes listening to it ring until it finally rang out. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t doubt that this is a reflection on Lifeline’s resources and not their services. I fully support Lifeline in every way. Even so, I cannot in good conscience advise someone to call Lifeline lest they have a similar experience to the one I had. I can laugh about it now but can you even begin to imagine what that does to someone who is trying to get help? It took me two years to get around to writing the previous post and I still haven’t yet sought a diagnosis for what happens to me. I had considered calling Lifeline previously, and when I was finally low enough and desperate enough to call, they didn’t bloody answer.

Now you can give all the rational reasons why someone shouldn’t take something like that to heart but to a depressed person, you’re wasting your breath. That doesn’t compute in a depressed person’s mind any more than trying to tell an anorexic that they’re not fat. What the person involved takes away is that even Lifeline won’t talk to them.

All that isn’t what has rankled me the most about STFU. What has really pissed me off is the stereotyping of men; that the problem is down to blokes being blokes and they just need to let their guard down and get in touch with their softer side. I wrote last time about why I haven’t done anything more than ’blog about it and the reasons are nothing to do with an excess of blokiness.

I’m as soft as they come. I was a sensitive new age guy long before there was even an acronym for it. If I were any softer, I’d be liquid. So what do I do now?
Get help, talk to your doctor, call Lifeline, blah blah blah…
It’s as if the emotional repression of macho culture has gone so far that you have to be a big tough bloke before you can soften the fuck up and if you were already there, then too bad, we’re looking out for the tough guys here.

I still want to support them. I think it’s great that people are putting it out there and sharing their stories. The fact that people are describing experiences that others might relate to is good thing. It’s at least better than Hugh Jackman waving his stupid bloody coffee cup in my face. Doing anything is better than doing nothing but doing something useful is better still. It needs to be backed up with sound advice and empowerment to go through with getting whatever help may be required, not just pulling a switcheroo on the “are you man enough?” line. That assumes that men are stupid enough to do anything if you just challenge their masculinity.

This is just my initial reaction. I honestly hope to be rebutted. If someone can show me where I’m wrong, I will shout their praises from the rooftops. I will donate, promote and participate. I am certainly not trying to shit on people who are making a worthy effort. But right now, both RUOK? and SFTU strike me like GetUp campaigns: well intentioned, great production values but falling wide of the mark in terms of achieving something useful for sufferers.

I did tweet my concerns the other night:

They were kind enough reply:

I guess I’m in the minority then. What else is new?
It’s not as if being made to feel excluded leads to depression or alcoholism or drug abuse or other forms of feeling crap, does it?

What is a Judeo-Christian?

2011-08-16T23:19:00.005+10:00

There were two rallies held in Canberra today for those with nothing more urgent to do on a Tuesday morning. The lesser of the two was to protest against gay marriage – something that is not on any legislative agenda right now. I’ve already said just about all I have to say on the topic of gay marriage HERE but a comment that leapt out at me was the assertion by DLP senator John Madigan that Australia was founded on the Judeo-Christian ethic.

There is really so much wrong with this very short statement that the senator must be given credit for efficiency. To believe such an assertion, you would have to believe at least one of three things:

That Australian Aborigines were the first Judeo-Christians
That it’s Christian to murder and dispossess the native inhabitants of a country and use that country as a dumping ground for society’s outcasts, or
The continent of Australia is Jesus as a land mass, accepting those rejected by the ruling class.

It bothers me that elected representatives confuse the white settlement of Australia with the white settlement of America. But my broader question is regarding the entire notion of Judeo-Christian values.

I have never met a Judeo-Christian. I’ve met Christians. I’ve met Jews. I have never met anyone who is both. You tend to be either one or the other. Or neither. But not both.

It seems to be accepted that using the term “Judeo-Christian,” recognises the Jewish heritage of Christianity. After all, Jews and Christians share half a Holy book so there is some crossover. But this makes the “Judeo,” prefix redundant. The Jewish origins are implicit in the word Christian so why bother adding it?

The term “Judeo-Christian,” usually only comes up when some of the more militant elements of the Christian right want to start playing the victim. Whenever I hear the term, it suggests a couple of things. I get the impression that they want to avoid simply saying “Christian,” since that might make them seem intolerant of others, so while they want everyone to be Christian, they don’t mind the Jews quite so much as some of the others. There’s also a patronising undertone. There’s an implication that Jews are considered Christians who haven’t quite made it yet. Certain people on the lunatic fringe of the right wing (read: Ann Coulter) have come out and said as much. It’s an insult to both faiths.

Judaism, Christianity and Islam all share a common root. Islam considers Jesus to be one of the most important Prophets of God – just not quite as important as Mohammad by their reading. Yet nobody talks about Christo-Muslims. Nobody talks of Christo-Islamic values. Typically, Christians do not observe Jewish festivals such as Passover, Yom Kippur or Hanukkah, even though they are just as relevant to the Christian faith as they are to Judaism. So long as people practise either one or the other, don’t talk to me about Judeo-Christian traditions because I don’t believe there is any such thing. I’m cool with just about any faith, but I am bothered by misrepresentations of faith and misuse of language.

Good evening. Here is the news:

2011-08-16T00:01:00.001+10:00

Tonight, we ask what has driven the youth of a nation to act so violently in the seemingly relentless pursuit of material gain, regardless of the consequences to society.

But first, a word from our sponsors…

What Twitter Bio Are You?

2011-08-14T13:21:00.000+10:00

Twitter generously gives you 20 extra characters with which to describe yourself to the world but very often, Twitter bios can be broken down into several types. Some of these types include,

The disclaimer
Favoured of journalists, publicists, public servants and anyone who thinks (or would like to think) that their tweets might be misinterpreted as being endorsed by their employer. Insists their tweets are personal but still wants you to know who they work for.

The false modesty
A favourite of politicians. Attempts to look awfully ordinary and down-to-earth but comes clean in the last line.

The business operator
Lists fabulous achievements, then asks you to hire them to design your website.

The in-your-face
Lists all their less-likable qualities. Usually among the more honest Twitter bios.

The reverse psychology
Not unlike the in-your-face, but pushes it to the next level in faint hope of being contradicted.

The follower-whore
Doesn’t care who you are, just wants bigger numbers. Follows more than 16,000 people. Offers to follow you like that’s something desirable.

The troll
Exposes their troll nature by proclaiming qualities that would be self evident if they had them. Always spells “you’re” as “your.”

Another troll tactic is to attempt to soften their image with a half-joke:

The hashtagger
Like a cross between the troll and the follower-whore. In lieu of actually listing interests, fills bio with controversial hashtags.

The fake verified account
Thinks they’re clever putting a ✓ after their name. Not fooling anyone but themselves.

The issues tweeter
Uses twitter exclusively to bang on about pet issues and RT similar obsessives. Only engages with others when trolling those of opposing views.

The geek
Probably is a geek but anyone can be a geek about anything these days.

The joker
Moderately self-deprecating space-filler.

Captain Obvious
For want of anything better, chooses to go with the things that apply to everyone.

It’s worth pointing out that the often predictable nature of Twitter bios is not necessarily a reflection on the individuality, wit and general appeal of the tweeter themselves.
Feel free to add your own.

Monsters

2011-08-05T22:00:00.003+10:00

Although I have never been diagnosed, I’ve been certain for years that I have some kind of depressive condition. The reasons I’ve never sought a diagnosis, or “got help” as so many glibly say as if it means anything useful, are several. Part of the reason is that getting help for depression is a bit like washing your summer clothes; the best time to do it is the best time not to do it. The best day to do some washing is when it’s warm and sunny, which is when you’d rather be wearing your summer clothes than washing them. When you’re not wearing your summer gear, it’s not such a good washing day and what do you need it for anyway? Depression effects different people in different ways. When I’m in a down phase, I just want to hide and the last thing I want to do is be a burden to anyone or have people fussing over me. In fact, when I’m on a downer, it actually annoys me when people try to help me in any way. And when I’m not on a downer, then why would I go to a doctor to say, “I’m feeling good now, but I’ve been depressed in the past,” - especially when there will be people in the waiting room with more immediate, more definable ailments?

The other reason I’ve never sought medical intervention is the old guy-thing of possibly not wanting to know the answer. I’ve no idea what level my condition is - or if I even have one at all - but I have seen people who I know are on anti-depressants and they are so messed up by the medication that it prompted me to say to my dearest, “Whatever happens, please don’t let them do that to me.” Having said that, I also know people who say their medication has been the best thing that ever happened to them. But everyone’s experiences are different.

Another thing I don’t want to do is look like I’m using depression as an excuse for anything. While I fully accept that there are hidden diseases like Asperger’s or chronic fatigue syndrome that are every bit as serious as conditions that are obvious, like a stroke or a missing limb, we have to be honest and recognise that some of these conditions are easier to imitate as well. A few years ago, I taught a course where we had to interview all the enrollees to check that they were eligible and appropriate for the course. There was one who said right at the beginning, “You might have some trouble with me because I’ve got depression.” I don’t doubt for a moment that she had the condition and I may be doing her a grave injustice here, but to announce that in your opening statement suggests to me that she might have been using it as a bit of an excuse. Again, that may be an extremely unfair and unworthy observation, but what I know is that I don’t want to come across like that. In a way, I’m a closet depressive. I’m not ashamed or embarrassed. I just don’t want people making allowances for it. I don’t want it factored into the way people talk to me or deal with me. I don’t want people being careful around me.

So I haven’t been diagnosed, but I know how I feel. I saw a documentary on depression once that talked about how to possibly identify it. They suggested that if you think you might have depression then you probably do. I don’t know if I believe that. There are some people who read a medical book and catch the index - I sometimes feel that way with psychology. However, when I hear people who have been diagnosed describe their conditions, depression is the one I can relate to the most, in the same way as I could when I first realised I needed glasses as a teenager. Equally, I’m wary of it becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. At high school, I used to joke about being a manic depressive just because it seemed like a cool and artistic thing to be. The Peanuts character I related to the most was Charlie Brown. Neil was always my favourite of The Young Ones. I think it’s an open question as to which of these is cause and which is effect. For all that, it’s only in the last few years that I’ve begun to think it’s an actual condition, rather than just my personality or what’s going on around me.

While depression is something that must be recognised as a real and serious condition, it should also be recognised that depression can also be a perfectly natural and normal feeling depending on the circumstances. I’ve spent most of the last 25 years or so trying to work out which is which. I have a friend who was recovering from a very serious operation and a marriage breakup at the same time and asked her doctor to give her something for the depression she was feeling at the time. He refused. His reply was, “You’ve had a brain tumour and your husband has just left you. Of course you’re depressed. I would be too.” He was a smart doctor. In a similar way, I always felt I had pretty good grounds for my depression in the past. Whether it was loneliness, isolation, unemployment or a relationship breakup, I thought - and still think - that these were things worth being depressed about. It wasn’t until a big crash in 2008 that I seriously began to wonder if my depression was some kind of condition rather than a natural and appropriate reaction to the world around me.

At this time, life was good. I had a good job which I enjoyed and I had the love of an amazing person. The absence of these two things - especially the latter - was the most common cause of mood crashes before. Although I wasn’t unhappy, I could barely lift my head when I didn’t have to. Even my father began to notice. This is significant because I usually try to hide how I’m feeling from those closest to me. Actually, “hide” is the wrong word. I want to spare them from it - I don’t want to drag them along. It’s not a universal truth that misery loves company. For me, it’s a measure of the crash when I don’t even have the energy to spare my parents from what’s happening. And at that time, I really didn’t know what was happening because this time, there was not a good reason for it. It actually came as something of a relief when I realised several weeks into it that I must be depressed. It went some way to explaining the lack of energy, the thoughts of death, the anxiety and panic attacks, and the return of a nervous twitch when I’m stressed.

I’m not entirely sure I’ve recovered from that phase. For a couple of years prior to that, I was relatively content and although wonderful things have happened since, most of the time it feels like the monsters are still just around the corner.

I should explain that expression:
A lot of people describe depression by quoting Churchill’s description of it as the black dog. I choose not to. I like black dogs. My description comes from the song by Something For Kate. I have no idea if this is what Paul Dempsey was referring to when he wrote this song, but it describes perfectly what a depressive phase feels like to me:

And I don’t want to slide into apathy
And I don’t want to die in captivity
But these monsters follow me around
Hunting me down, try to wipe me out.

Yep. That’s how it feels.

The final confirming source that leads me to now believe I have some kind of condition is the fact that I have spoken to others who have been diagnosed and they get it. And they recognise that I get it when they speak about their experiences. There’s no point in telling someone who is depressed that things are going to be alright. That doesn’t compute in the place where they are. Don’t try to cheer them up. You may get them to crack a smile but it’s not going to last. Don’t bother complimenting them. They won’t believe you. And don’t give us that RUOK-Day nonsense. If you’re asking because of an awareness campaign, a depressed person will see through that in a second. But do understand that they’re not rejecting your efforts; it’s just a symptom of the condition. There have been times when I have said, in all seriousness, “Don’t lie!” when someone has said they missed me or was thinking about me. It’s a terrible thing to say to someone showing me friendship. As I’ve come to recognise my condition a bit more, I’ve been able to manage it just a little bit better.

What follows should not in any way be considered advice. It’s simply a description of my own experiences.

I am incredibly lucky to live with someone who understands and who I don’t have to hide my madness from. I knew she was the one when, on a visit in 2009, I had a complete emotional meltdown, and she didn’t miss a beat. Actually, I knew she was the one before that, but this helped confirm it. Even so, I tell her not to indulge me too much. I don’t hide things from her because she deserves to know the worst of me. Beyond that, I can be a good actor. A lot of people are under the impression that I’m a pretty smiley, happy person. It wouldn’t help anyone, including me, for them to know what can go on in my head. Despite the aversion to medication I mentioned earlier, I am in no way against anti-depressants, properly used. However, treatment for any physical ailment includes exercise. In a way, I’ve had to practise putting on a front for people who wouldn’t understand. I don’t know if that has made things better or worse for myself. While I would love it if more people understood, it wouldn’t help things if I were indulged to the point of not having to try to be... well... I hate to use this word, but... normal. The fact that I have survived without any diagnosis or treatment might suggest I’m overstating my depression. I allow for the possibility that I might be. Truthfully though, I’ve survived because I didn’t know what else to do.

As wonderful and understanding as my dearest is, it’s frustrating for her too. I really can talk to her about how I’m feeling – which is to say that I have the opportunity to, but even then, sometimes I can’t. There are times when the thoughts are going through my head so fast that it’s impossible to describe them. Then there are times when I want to shake those thoughts and talking about them would only keep them in there. This can sometimes lead her to think that I’m not talking to her, but if I don’t tell her what’s going on in my mind, it’s because I can’t. Not in the same way that I can’t talk to my parents about it, but in the way that it’s impossible to put it into coherent sentences and if I could, it would only make the monsters stronger. Sometimes though, it doesn’t even get that far. Sometimes, I’ll be curled up in a weeping mess, feeling all the sadness of the world and the only honest answer I can give to the question of what’s wrong is, “I don’t know.”

I had been planning to write this piece for a couple of years now. Like the getting help or the summer laundry, it was all a question of getting the timing just right. Talking about depression runs the risk of feeding it. So does talking about happiness in my case. When I was feeling well, I chose not to write about depression because it might trigger some for me. When I’ve been in the darkest depths, I wouldn’t do anything so self indulgent. Today seemed the right day. I had a mood-swing last night. I’m a bit better today, but I think it’s going to take a couple more days to dig myself out of it. Since I’m mostly functional, it seemed like a good time to write.

My only reason in writing this is to try and explain from one person’s point of view, how depression feels. I don’t speak for anyone else. I have no advice to offer. This is usually the part where you’re supposed to post links to places that can help. Since I’ve never availed myself of such services, I’m in no position to comment, although I’m sure they do wonderful work. What I can do is recommend a couple of excellent posts by Mike Stuchbery and Ben Pobjie describing their experiences.

Hold it in your head.

Good evening. Here is the news:

2011-07-23T22:55:00.002+10:00

Something happened.

We don't know anything about what happened other than that it happened.

However, we do know about something else that happened earlier, so it's probably similar to that.

Assuming it is similar to that other thing that happened, then this is what's happening.

Somebody get me a job as a reporter. Any idiot can do this.

Strawberry Fields Radio - Episode 77

2011-07-16T16:55:00.000+10:00

The Beatles in Their Own Music, Part 2

The Rules: Don’t be a Dickhead

2011-07-15T10:09:00.002+10:00

It really ought to go without saying, but it seems there are a lot of people out there who need to be reminded.

One of them is Declan Stephenson, a former Liberal staffer who followed and harassed a Greens member who attended a Liberal-organised forum against the carbon tax. While it’s one thing to expect shouting and jeering within the forum when challenging the majority view in the room, everyone is entitled to feel safe on a public street and you don’t do your cause any good by following someone around after they’ve left the forum.

But Greens can be dickheads too. Yesterday, Greenpeace took the unilateral decision to break into a CSIRO experiment and destroy a crop of genetically modified wheat. Now I have concerns about GM as well (although I also understand that it’s been going on in one form or another since the beginning of agriculture) but you don’t express that concern by destroying science. Destroying an experiment is as anti-science as any kind of climate-change denial and can only make you wonder if and why Greenpeace is afraid of the results.

Just as the Liberal party needs to make it clear that they won’t tolerate dickheads, the Greens must also now distance themselves from the dickhead element on their side if they are to be taken seriously.

Honestly people, even the organisers of the Melbourne Zombie Shuffle have a strict policy of “No Dickheads.” If you can’t show more class than people who like to dress up and pretend to be zombies, then it’s time to get the hell out of the debate, whatever your cause may be.

BobEllisHasGoneMad BobEllisHasGoneMad

2011-07-06T21:48:00.000+10:00

Bob Ellis has gone completely mad!

Now he’s giving away free excuses for sleazebags, rapists, even paedophiles!

It doesn’t matter if you’ve had a secret child with your mistress, or drugged a 13yo for sex! Come on down to Bob Ellis’s and let Bob do the rationalising for you!

No defence? No worries!
If you’re male, notionally left wing and have done one good thing in your life, then Bob Ellis will have you turned into a victim of radical feminism in no time!

But hurry, before they take him away!

Bob Ellis Has Gone Mad! by Billablog

(You probably have to be of a certain age and from Victoria to get the reference. For anyone who isn't, see below)

Who elected these three?

2011-06-30T19:50:00.002+10:00

I really shouldn’t be surprised when my intelligence is insulted any more, but being the naïve young thing that I am, I still take it to heart every time is happens.

Today’s example comes from business leaders, Gerry Harvey, John Singleton and John Symond. The three of them have called for a fresh election to “restore confidence.” Symond said, “We've got a government in limbo, dictated to by minor factions.”
Wow, do you think he means the mining industry?

Predictably enough, Tony Abbott agrees with them. So can we assume that if he had been successful in securing the support of the independents last year, that he would have called another election less than twelve months into its term? Place your bets!

It bothers me that people who are so powerful are so ignorant about how the Australian government works. As I wrote last week, we don’t elect a government, we elect a parliament and that parliament is the government. The Australian people, in their collective wisdom, chose a hung parliament and if that displeases a small group of millionaires, then they can cry all the way to the bank. We have elections when it is constitutionally mandated, not when a few minor factions decide they want a do-over.

There is also the enormous conceit in the assumption that a new election would return a clear majority. Who says it would? While it’s fair to say that nobody expected this result, this election is really no different to any other. Every electorate voted in their representative, and there are a lot more voices being heard in this parliament than there would have been under either a Labor or a Coalition majority.

If Harvey, Singo and Symonds don’t like that, then their vote is worth just as much as the next person’s. And doesn’t that piss them off.

How does enterprise bargaining feel now, Peter?

2011-06-29T11:21:00.001+10:00

After being defeated in his bid to replace Alan Stockdale as Liberal party president, Peter Reith has said he is no longer bound to be silent about his feelings on the Party’s Industrial Relations policies. He has also alleged that Tony Abbott asked him to run for party president, but then voted for Alan Stockdale. Reith has further suggested that Tony Abbott conspicuously showing his vote to Alan Stockdale tipped the balance in Mr Stockdale’s favour because it showed the rest of the party what the leader expected. Alan Stockdale won the ballot by one vote.

It’s already fairly clear that Reith and his proposals were rejected not so much on the grounds of bad policy but on the ground that it was electoral suicide the last time they tried it, and doing it again would hand a massive free kick to Labor. Don’t let anyone say the Liberal party is completely out of touch.

To those whose memory stretches back more than one parliamentary term, there is a delicious irony in Peter Reith – the man who brought us the waterfront dispute, WorkChoices, Australian Workplace Agreements and the removal of unfair dismissal protection – feeling hard done by for having management gang up on him and unfairly dismiss his individually negotiated workplace agreement.
If only he had a union to stick up for him.

Some Nuggets from my 45s Collection

2011-06-26T20:36:00.002+10:00

At the risk of sounding like a miserable old fart, I feel a little bit sorry for generations for whom there is no ritual to playing music. Whether it’s actually playing an instrument and singing, or setting up a piano roll, putting a vinyl record on, slipping a cassette into a ghetto-blaster, or even selecting a CD, there has always been some kind of physical act involved with playing music until recently. I can’t help but wonder if the ability to just dial up a track and have it play without any real tactile interaction with the recording is making people value music a little less.

I’m not a vinyl purist by any stretch, but I confess that I sometimes miss the ritual of putting a record on and seeing it being played as I hear the music. I think the fact that all software media players have glorified screen-savers called visualisations is confirmation that people want something visible to focus on while they listen. Every once in a while, I set up my old turntable and plug it into the computer to digitise a few more records. I’ve been enjoying the trend on YouTube towards showing the record playing and thought I’d post a few myself. The video quality is a bit crappy but the audio is good. I’ve taken care to post only music that is rare, out of print or by people who don’t need the money, but I accept that this is a grey area of copyright and repeat here what I said on all the uploads: If you enjoy the music, please support the artists. Don’t steal music!

Here are a few nuggets from the more eccentric corners of my 45s collection:

Redgum: The Drover’s Dog

I bought this before I even had a turntable of my own. Redgum are best known for I Was Only Nineteen. This was released a few years later and tells the story of Bob Hawke’s political career a capella to the tune of Gilbert & Sullivan’s When I was a lad, from HMS Pinafore. The title refers to a comment from Bill Hayden, who Bob Hawke replaced as ALP leader shortly before the 1983 election, that the drover’s dog could beat the incumbent Fraser government.

Wings: Give Ireland Back to the Irish
This record belonged to my dear departed Godmother. I have never seen another copy of it anywhere. Early Paul McCartney 45s are really very easy to come by, even though they’ll probably be scratched to buggery and missing the original covers. Look in any second-hand record store, charity shop, antique dealers or junk shop, and you’re probably more likely to find a few copies of Another Day and Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey than not, but Give Ireland Back to the Irish seems pretty rare.

John Lennon also wrote a song about ‘the troubles’ - The Luck of the Irish - and it illustrates the two different approaches of Lennon and McCartney. While John’s is direct and confrontational, (“If you had the luck or the Irish, you’d be sorry and wish you were dead,”) Paul adopts the more-flies-with-honey-than-vinegar approach. The opening verse starts, “Great Britain, you are tremendous / Nobody knows like me,” which sounds like a bit of sucking up but it gives context to the following lines, “But really, what are you doing in the land across the sea?” It pre-empts any accusations of being anti-British before appealing to people’s sense of fairness: “Tell me, how would you like it?”

Wings: Mary Had a Little Lamb
Paul said he did it for his kids, but it’s also been suggested that this was a sly protest at the BBC’s refusal to play Giver Ireland Back to the Irish. We report, you decide. I can’t remember where I got this copy. I’ve had a copy with generic Capitol label for years and I bought this copy because it had an original custom label.

Barry Humphries: Wild Life in Suburbia

This also came from my Godmother. As far as I can work out, The Migrant Hostess is the first appearance of the Edna Everage character. I can’t quite work out if this is devastatingly subtle satire or if she wasn’t very funny back then either. One thing is does show is that educated hipsters taking the piss out of working class suburbanites is nothing new.

Side 1: The Migrant Hostess

Side 2:Sandy Stone

Skies, Lufthansa Theme by Klaus Doldinger with Passport
I found this in a second-hand shop some time in the mid-80s and bought it purely out of curiosity. Dated 1973, it seems to be either an advertising or corporate theme. If so, it’s certainly successful in conveying the mood of travel. It reminds me a little of Mason Williams’ One Minute Commercial.

Lonnie Donegan: Does Your Chewing Gum Lose its Flavour (on the Bedpost Overnight?)
I bought this two years ago at a very cool little second-hand place in Healesville. Lonnie Donegan and the short-lived skiffle trend was quite an influence on the Beatles in the early days and that’s reason enough to have at least one example of his work.

Louis Armstrong: St Louis Blues
Can’t remember where I bought this, but I got it mainly because I was intrigued by the fact that it came in a generic Myer Emporium cover, which suggests that the records were supplied without covers and the retailers had to provide them. I’ve no idea if that was the case, I just can’t think of any other explanation.

Clearly this record has done a lot of work but in a way, this is how Louis Armstrong should sound. 5.1 High resolution audio wouldn't be authentic.

Roger Waters and the Bleeding Heart Band featuring Paul Carrack: Money (live)
This was the B-side to Sunset Strip, the second single from the Radio K.A.O.S. album. I don’t doubt that this is a live recording, but it’s pretty clear that the audience noise has been added separately. I don’t know why he felt the need to do this, but it was released at a time when the Pink Floyd breakup was at its most bitter. When this single came out, the remainder of Pink Floyd were just about to release A Momentary Lapse of Reason and launch a world tour, so this may have been Roger’s way of saying, “I’m Pink Floyd too!” It’s an interesting version, but the fakery is unnecessary and undignified.
It’s very good to see that Waters and Gilmour have reconciled their differences now.

Midnight Oil: Instant Karma
Another single (King of the Mountain) bought for the B-side. Yoko gave approval for the Oils to perform this at the Exxon protest in 1990, but it shows why the future minister for education should stick to singing songs written for him.

Frente: Horrible
Released at a time when 7” singles were becoming a novelty, this is possibly the first time the single version of a song was actually longer than the album version, which clocks in at just 2 minutes. Frente were always clever at packaging records. For their first, self-released EP, they could only afford one colour for the cover, so they made it a different colour for each print run. This led to some fans buying one of each colour. With this single, initial copies came with a unique Polaroid of the band.

The B-side is the “acousdelic” version of The Destroyer, which I like much more than the album version. Both these songs are classic Frente. Frente were one of those bands that released an unrepresentative single very early on and sadly had to spend the rest of their career trying to live it down. Far from being the shiny happy people of the Accidently Kelly Street video, Frente’s other output was closer to Neil Finn’s “Leonard and McCartney” method, wrapping slightly dark lyrics around gorgeous pop tunes that often belie the subject matter.

Julian Lennon: Stick Around (extended version)
Ah yes, the 80s 12” single and slapped-together extended mix! But even that can’t wreck this great song. I’ve got a lot of time for Julian Lennon – I think he’s had a raw deal. I’ve no doubt Virgin signed him as a 21yo for his name only, but he’s a real talent in his own right. He’s been criticised for not being as talented as John, which is kind of like being told you’re not as handsome as George Clooney. He’s also copped flak for sounding too much like his father, which is ridiculously unfair. So it’s okay for people like Lenny Kravitz and Liam Gallagher to sound like John Lennon, but it’s not okay for people who were genetically predestined to. And then when Julian went and wrote a song that even his father would be proud of, people just assume it’s John anyway.

I found this 12” at the Camberwell Market about a year ago. It’s stamped as a promotional copy and I’m not sure if this version was ever officially released.

Some Facts about Parliamentary Democracy

2011-06-25T14:29:00.000+10:00

There’s a word that’s been thrown around a lot regarding the proposed carbon tax and that word is “mandate.” The reasoning is that since the policy was not taken to the election, and indeed Julia Gillard said there would be no carbon tax under a government she leads, there is therefore no public mandate for the introduction of such a policy. It may seem like an open-and-shut case on the surface, but there are a few problems with this argument. It all comes down to how the Westminster system of government operates.

John Howard claimed a mandate to introduce the GST after the 1998 election. However, while the Coalition may have won the majority of seats in the House of Representatives, they did not win the majority of the popular primary vote nationally. As with most other systems, the national popular vote is not relevant and I am not specifically arguing that it should be. My point is that while the Coalition may have won a working majority in the lower house and the right to implement their policies, it’s drawing rather a long bow to go claiming a public mandate. Six years and two elections later in 2004, the Coalition won far more soundly, winning the House of Representatives, the irrelevant popular vote and most importantly, control of the Senate in their own right. It was this that led to the introduction WorkChoices. The industrial relations reforms that were enacted during that parliament had always been on the Liberal party’s wish-list but they knew they could never get it through the Senate. No mention was made of the policy during the 2004 election campaign. Howard’s excuse for enacting major reforms that were never mentioned during the campaign was that everyone had always known it was something the Liberals wanted to do. Alternatively, he could have reiterated his comment from 1987 that “The mandate theory of politics from the point of view of proper analysis has always been absolutely phoney.” He was right about that. Mandates have always been an argument of convenience for one side or another.

In this sense, the Gillard government in 2011 has as much mandate for a carbon tax as the Howard government of 2004-2007 ever had for WorkChoices. If anything, they have more. The policy is not a matter of arcane political history as Howard’s IR reforms were. In 2010, everyone really did know that the ALP and quite a few muzzled Liberals wanted a market mechanism for reducing carbon emissions. For sure, Gillard was an idiot to say there would be no carbon tax under a government she leads but then, she doesn’t truly lead the government.

No, I’m not saying she’s controlled by Bob Brown – that would be ridiculous. What is conveniently forgotten by a lot of people who ought to know better is that under our system, we do not elect prime ministers, we do not elect governments, we elect a parliament. Each electorate votes for a representative to go to Canberra and represent the views of that electorate in the parliament. That’s it. It’s the parliament that then decides who does what in the executive. There is absolutely no reason why, in this parliament, we could not have Julia Gillard as prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull as treasurer, Bob Brown as minister for the environment, Andrew Wilkie as minister for defence, Barnaby Joyce as minister for finance and Bob Katter as speaker. The government is the parliament. Parties are merely convention. There’s nothing that says parties have to split off and work against one another. Anyone who talks about the two-party system doesn’t understand the system because the system makes no allowance for parties. It’s simply human nature to form groups.

Equally, there’s nothing to stop the National Party going into coalition with the ALP. I’ve often suggested that they should since Labor policy often reflects the needs of the Nationals’ base more than the Liberals, who seem to take the Nationals for granted as the rural wing of the Liberal Party. It’s telling that the Nationals are the most abandoned party in Australia with three of the four cross-bench independents being former National MPs.

Because most of the time, one party gets an outright majority in the lower house, we end up with what is effectively an elective dictatorship. Legislation is passed on party lines, tempered only by the Senate – and in the case of 2005 to 2007, not even that. This current parliament is different because no party has an outright majority. As such the operation of this parliament is really a lot closer to what was originally intended. Each MP represents their own constituents’ interests, all policy is open to debate and everyone has to show up to divisions. Is that really such a bad thing?

Since the parties refuse to work together in the manner I suggested above, that meant both parties had to negotiate with the non-affiliated MPs to decide who would form government. Greens MP Adam Bandt said from the outset that he would support a Labor government, as is his prerogative. The four independent MPs said they would reserve judgement, as is their prerogative. Nationals MP Tony Crook, despite being part of the LNP Coalition, chose to sit on the cross-benches. As we all know, of the four independents, only Bob Katter sided with the Coalition, while Andrew Wilkie, Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott sided with the ALP but importantly, they only agreed to support an ALP government on money bills and confidence motions. All other legislation is looked at on individual merit, which is how it should always be.

In order to secure these votes, Julia Gillard had to make policy concessions to the Greens and independents that were not mentioned in their election platform. Predictably enough, this has led to accusations that she lied in her policy statements during the election campaign and that she is being controlled by minority interests. It makes for cute politics, but it’s another argument of convenience. We all know Tony Abbott sweet-talked the independents just as much as Julia Gillard did. I’ll take Andrew Wilkie’s claim that Tony Abbott offered him a billion dollars to redevelop the Royal Hobart Hospital with a drop of saline, but the idea that the coalition would not have made policy concessions to the independents and even the Greens to secure their support simply isn’t credible. Labor or Coalition, whoever formed government in this parliament was going to have to make policy concessions and adopt positions they hadn’t taken to the election. Government policy is not about what either party said during the election. Government policy is about what will pass the parliament because the parliament IS the government.

Tony Abbott’s almost daily demands for a redo election are an affront to the electorate. The Australian people in their collective wisdom decided not to trust either party with absolute power. If one really wants to talk about mandates, Australian voters have mandated that all policy is up for debate and no side gets to pass legislation easily. Again, this is much closer to what the system intends than we have been used to.

It also makes it much easier for the Coalition to enact its policy if they wanted to. Remember that any member of parliament can introduce a bill. This has always been the way, but it’s usually stifled by one party having an absolute majority. In this parliament, all the Liberals would have to do is convince a couple of the cross-benchers that their bill is a good idea and it would be passed and Labor would be stuck with it. There is nothing to stop them doing this other than the desire to hang onto the conventions of governments and oppositions.

This hung parliament is an excellent opportunity for the house to work as it was originally intended. No wonder both the major parties think it’s such a drag.

LENNONYC

2011-06-13T00:20:00.012+10:00

While it goes over a lot of ground already covered in numerous other documentaries, LENNONYC has one major advantage. It doesn’t just talk about John the activist, John the iconoclast, John the reformed philanderer and John the family man, but most importantly, John the musician. The film is at its best when focussing on that aspect on John’s life.

Naturally, the film has to deal with stories previously told, such as John’s flirtation with the yippie movement and problems with immigration and the FBI. Also, despite being primarily about John’s love affair with New York, the film gives just as much time to the “lost weekend” period in Los Angeles, much of which has been gone over before.

Many of the usual suspects are interviewed, including Elliot Mintz, May Pang and the ubiquitous Geraldo Rivera but things get interesting when they talk to the musicians who played with John through the 70s. Even when it’s Jim Keltner talking about John’s drinking in LA, or members of Elephant’s Memory talking about having their ’phones tapped too, it brings a perspective that previous films haven’t shown. Producer Jack Douglas and Yoko’s recollections of what they did on the evenings following John’s death is particularly moving.

The film could stand to be about twenty minutes shorter but it does bring a new angle to the story of Lennon in the US, from participants who aren’t usually heard.

Highlight: Recollections from musicians about making the albums and studio banter.
Feature: * * * *
Extras: None
Audio: Dolby 5.1, Dolby Stereo

Why people should still vote for Anthony Weiner

2011-06-12T14:25:00.000+10:00

Yes, I’m going there, because for all the over-reporting of this ridiculous story, there is one small point (stop it!) to be made.

When Anthony Weiner sent a crotch-shot to a Twitter follower, his first excuse was that his account had been hacked and that he did not send that photo. Nobody really questioned this explanation. After all, politicians’ websites and social media accounts are large targets both for everyday hackers and for political opponents specifically. His story fell apart when he said he couldn’t confirm or deny that the photo was of him. The obvious follow-up question was, “You don’t recognise your own underwear?”

Having lied about originally sending the picture, he might as well have lied about the rest. If he’d said, “No, that picture isn’t of me,” who would have been able to disprove it? Who would have asked him to drop ’em and fluff up for a comparison? A good liar would have brazened it out until the story went away.

This tells us something very important about Anthony Weiner. No, not that he has been flirting online. He wouldn’t be the first representative to do that and as far as we know, all of Weiner’s contacts were of age. And he wouldn’t be the first Twitter user to send a ribald picture as a publically visible @reply when they meant to make it a direct message (I’m looking at you, Marieke Hardy). In any case, TwitPic is not private in any way - all your posts are visible to anyone who views your profile. And he’s certainly not the first politician to come a cropper in not realising how unsecure the internet is – witness the allegedly “tech savvy” governor of Alaska who did government business over a Yahoo webmail account.

No, the really important thing it tells us is that Anthony Weiner is a very, very bad liar.

In a political culture where people are usually defined by the nature, nuance and effectiveness of their obfuscation, this is worth knowing. Bill Clinton (in)famously said, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman,” which is technically true depending on how you define sexual relations. Larry Craig used his “wide stance,” as his explanation for being misidentified as trawling for a quickie in an airport bathroom. To give him the benefit of the doubt, his explanation may be completely true, strained though it may seem. He initially said he would resign, but he hasn’t and nor should he, since his neither his oath of office nor his election promises said anything for or against picking up rough trade in public toilets. Since Weiner hasn’t done anything that he could be arrested for, why should he resign when Craig hasn’t? Then there is Newt Gingrich’s excuse that it was his passion for his country that led him to have affairs. Well, there’s another precedent Weiner can cite! But perhaps one of the greatest pieces of weaselling that we’ve seen lately – one that makes Bill Clinton look amateurish – is the justification that came out of Jon Kyl’s office for him completely making up a statistic in a speech on the floor of the Senate. He claimed (although it's now been changed in the official record) that ninety percent of Planned Parenthood’s activities were related to abortion. Predictably enough, people checked this statistic and found the number was more like three percent. In a parliamentary system, misleading the house is a grave offence. The explanation from Kyl’s staff after he was caught out was that it was, “not intended to be a factual statement.” Oh, well that’s alright then.

So while not to defend Weiner’s behaviour, is it not just a little refreshing to have someone who we know is really bad at lying? And when we know and expect everyone to be lying to some extent, in a political climate that accepts, expects and ranks lying, at the same time as demanding an unnatural level of wholesomeness, I say vote for the bad liar. He’ll take you closer to the truth than the good ones.