Sunday, May 31, 2009


Jeremy justifies his Bolt-Blair obsession:
We only write about tim and Andy’s published work because they’re columnists whose vicious efforts to poison public discussion in this country are sufficiently prominent – in the tabloids, on, on the television – that they really need some kind of public response.
Ironically, the above is in an update to a post noting Blair viciously poisoning public discussion in making fun of spelling errors by assorted Crikey bloggers.

What Jeremy's really after is recognition: he wants Bolt and Blair -- but especially Bolt -- to legitimise his obsession by engaging in debate. Exactly how this should happens is unclear; Jeremy presumably wants Bolt to post responses to Pure Poison's critiques.

Perhaps Jeremy, whose public writings show he pretty much regards Bolt as journalistic scum, should get on the phone -- “it’s Jeremy from Crikey” -- to explain to Bolt he's doing the wrong thing in avoiding debate. In any event, Jeremy shouldn't complain; he's reaching a mass audience via his popular Crikey site.

Update: On questioning Pure Poison's deviation from its stated goal -- “exposing intellectual dishonesty in the mainstream media” -- commenter Pedro is called a troll and told to piss off with his discussion derailing comments. An earlier totally irrelevant comment from PP-pal John Surname drew no reaction from PP moderators, however. Imagine Bolt trying to "debate" these clowns.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Perhaps Jeremy, whose public writings show he pretty much regards Bolt as journalistic scumJournalistic scum? Bolt is no journalist.

6:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No journalist? What is he then? A vet? A chef? Maybe he's a nurse? Or a publican? Perhaps a miner? I could go on but I'll stop.

7:40 PM  
Anonymous J F Beck said...

All the links appear to work, now. Since I'm a computer dolt I have no idea what's going on but assembling posts in compose mode seems to screw things up.

8:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does Pure Poison count as a "public response"? That term to me conjures up images of something that is actually read by the public. And the great legal mind of Jeremy Sear apparently doesn't regard some of his own blogging efforts as "public," because apparently linking to the more exhibitionist posts of him and his friends counts as "stalking."

1:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anyone who disagrees with them is tolerated for a little while, just so that they can claim they are being fair, but then banned. Problem is that they are on crikey now. If I was pedro, I'd write to the editor and explain how they are behaving. If crikey are an honest publication, they'd have to rein the ppers in.

6:27 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

AR, that post on PP has a comment by someone called AR. Is that you?

9:12 AM  
Anonymous daddy dave said...

If I were Pedro or Shabs, I'd just pull out and leave the Leftards to their circle-jerk. That's what I've done, belatedly.

10:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

These guys are proof of Blair's Law.

4:52 PM  
Anonymous J F Beck said...

I was putting together the post while you guys were commenting.

5:13 PM  
Anonymous AR said...

What does that even mean?

5:44 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You'd know Anon 9:07.

8:34 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home