The Australian politics thread

[duffer]

Just read that Bolt piece and some of his backlog of articles. Heh, what's the issue, what person would actually take this bitter little fella seriously? Better to ingore him, quite enjoyed that I din't know he even existed before this afternoon. Hopefully I'll forget who he is by tomorrow morning or something.

[Spark]

Some of Bolt's arguments are so fatally logically flawed it's not even worthwhile arguing with them.

[howardj]

He's no worse than the journalists on the left, and even some of those in the mainstream media who masquerade as impartial - Oaks, Grattan, Hartcher.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by howardj

He's no worse than the journalists on the left, and even some of those in the mainstream media who masquerade as impartial - Oaks, Grattan, Hartcher.

Yeah, Bolt's stance on things is as even-handed as Oakes (who outed the Evans-Kernot relationship - really helped Labor); Grattan (who has pretty much lost a lot of influence these days) and Hartcher, who has written about 15 OpEd pieces in the last 12 months bagging various aspects of the federal government.

Spare me, please.

[Ausage]

Originally Posted by howardj

He's no worse than the journalists on the left, and even some of those in the mainstream media who masquerade as impartial - Oaks, Grattan, Hartcher.

Sorry, but this is moving past bias into rubbish. Doesn't sound like you read much of Hartchers pieces.

[Son Of Coco]

Originally Posted by Dasa

He's worse than a bit of a tool, the man is a liar who engages in race baiting and is highly offensive. Hardly the type of person I'd think should be anyones hero.

Although this'll probably be decried as lefty, biased, etc etc. - Andrew Bolt – Pure Poison

Would agree with you there, I was just trying to put it mildly rather than saying I think he's a ****wit.

[howardj]

Maybe Hartcher was an over-reach.

I stand by Grattan and Oaks though - they are rottenly biased, and do far more damage than Bolt as:

(a) they are far more widely read/viewed
(b) they are much more subtle and therefore effective than Bolt
(c) they are presented as impartial whereas most even casual observers know that Bolt is not impartial.

Don't take everything so literally. By worse, I mean more effective and pernicious - not worse as more blatant.

[Son Of Coco]

Originally Posted by howardj

Maybe Hartcher was an over-reach.

I stand by Grattan and Oaks though - they are rottenly biased, and do far more damage than Bolt as:

(a) they are far more widely read/viewed
(b) they are much more subtle and therefore effective than Bolt
(c) they are presented as impartial whereas most even casual observers know that Bolt is not impartial.

Don't take everything so literally. By worse, I mean more effective and pernicious - not worse as more blatant.

I'm not so sure, Bolt seems to have a habit of selectively quoting parts of a study or some research to mislead his readers into believing whatever it is he says is the truth, safe in the knowledge they'll probably never bother to actually read the full article to find out the context.

I guess who is more damaging to a party's cause depends on who you support. Bolt would never be caught dead saying something complementary to the other side of politics.

[duffer]

My think about Bolt is that even when he does make valid points, he's so bitter and intentionally inflammatory that I can't take him seriously at all. Hope I never have to run into him, seems as whiskey tango as they get.

[Dasa]

Originally Posted by duffer

My think about Bolt is that even when he does make valid points, he's so bitter and intentionally inflammatory that I can't take him seriously at all. Hope I never have to run into him, seems as whiskey tango as they get.

Haha I've had the displeasure to have met and spoken to him a few years ago when he came to speak at school. His method of argument consists of spouting lies, and when people call him on it, to speak over them to shut them up.

[LongHopCassidy]

Bolty? Don't mind the bloke. At least we now know that Piers Akerman's dad is a sperm donor.

[Jono]

Had to respond to a piece of Bolt's writings in Year 12. Half the class were douche bags so just swore at him in their emails, which meant those that properly responded didn't receive replies. That was the answer he gave me anyway when I emailed him a few weeks later calling him out for not responding.

"Your classmates were rude"

Man up.

[Matt79]

lol at Oakes being biased. The only loyalty he has/had was Kerry and the buffet...

[James90]

The only people comparable to people like Bolt on the left in terms of bias are people who blog for sites like Crikey and Larvatus Prodeo which is read by nobody who isn't a rusted on political hack (...apart from maybe Catherine Deveny *shudder*)

Difference is they (especially at LP) have reasoned detailed analysis, rather than make outlandish statements which take a remotely relevant piece of information on a tangent, whilst ignoring everything else in the debate and blindly blaming the left for everything that goes wrong (okay so sometimes Crikey does that with the conservatives).

To compare Bolt to Oakes and Hartcher is laughable.

[Burgey]

Phillip Adams maybe. Token leftie at the Opposition Orifice.