Fantastic Friday 24/05/2013

ROLL UP ROLL UP PATRONS TO THE LATEST INSTALMENT OF FRIDAY NIGHT RAFFLES.

SEE SOME AMAZING SIGHTS.Cat-Holding-Up-an-Elephant-in-Circus--70984

LISTEN TO MUSIC FROM THE AGES

lvb_adelaide02

MARVEL AT THE SKILL OF THE STAFF


BE AMAZED AT THE ALLURING ATMOSPHERE

4work by emailandthings

WITNESS THE WITTY WHIMSICAL WONDERING WORDSMITHS

DRINK ANY DEVIL’S DRINK YOU DESIRE

147347080_9c7b64bcae

FLIRT WITH THE FELINES

4276444165_d5c539ca34_b

BE BEMUSED BY BUSHFIREBILL

JOKE WITH JOE6

DOGhobo

MOST IMPORTANTLY HAVE A GOOD NIGHT AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATRONAGE OF

” THE PUB”

CHEERS

 

P.S. And remember…

 

Courteous Bar staff

Advertisements

580 thoughts on “Fantastic Friday 24/05/2013

  1. Aguirre

    Abbott was careful enough. But he had his sycophants saying it was the straw that broke the camels back etc.

  2. We were watching a downloaded movie off my laptop onto The Big Cinemascope Projection Screen last night that had a combination of English, Italian and German being spoken in it.

    I had downloaded a version with only Dutch sub-titles.

    HI got antsy at not being able to understand exactly what was going on. It was fun trying to work it out – hearing a word here and there that we could translate and get the rough jist – but not THAT much fun.

    In the end I said, “I can probably download the sub-titles from the net. Want me to try?”

    HI (sceptically) said “OK, as long as it doesn’t take too long.”

    So I stopped the movie, went to the lap top, googled the name of the movie + “sub-titles”, found the file, checked it was “Non-English parts only” (i.e. the just English translations of the German and Italian dialogue), downloaded the 500 kilobyte file in less than ten seconds, went to the player software and instructed it to use the downloaded file as its source of sub-titles, and we were back watching the movie, perfectly synchronized, in under 90 seconds.

    The internet is a wonderful thing.

  3. Apparently the family name of the 13 year old racial vilifier from the AFL game the other day is “Looney”.

    HI says that explains it.

    After a lifetime of being called loonies, they finally found someone they thought was lower even than them.

  4. Bushfire,
    Did you get a response, any response, let alone an intelligent and coherent one, from Compact Crank?

    Let me guess, the answer starts with an ‘N’. 🙂

  5. Re. Compact Crank…

    Yeah, got some kind of response that confirmed he was using likely voting intentions based on The Polls to indicate political acumen and success.

    Apparently the bits that go on in our national discourse in-between polls are just diversions from the main game of winning elections.

    You know, minor matters like government, legislation, debate, doing good, helping constituents, ensuring fairness, managing international relations, and so on.

    According to Compact Crank it’s not even winning elections that is the measure of political success. It’s looking like you might win an election that is the sole determinant.

    The Right has been obsessed with winning elections for the entire three long years of the Gillard government.

    The journalistic Right spout theories, make predictions, influence the few per cent who change opinions during the life of a government, and who then respond accordingly to pollsters when they call, and who finally provide the pundits with laundered metrics, dried and pressed, ready to be trotted out a “proof” they were right all along.

    As Mike Seccombe (I think it was) pointed out this morning on Insiders, literally every week has seen speculation on the subject of the imminent demise of the Gillard government, without that demise actually, er, occurring.

    He said this jokingly, having a bit of a dig at his colleagues and at the Coalition, not realising he was putting himself squarely in the frame.

    But to the media, the media is always something “over there”, never themselves. If you looked hard enough you’d find some junior reporter in the Gallery, fresh from a Uni journalism course, working for a regional radio station, or perhaps a local rag who was “The Media”. This is the media’s model of itself… when it goes wrong.

    The trouble is to get them to admit they’re wrong.

    It’s never the senior journalists who get it wrong… interviewing each other on panel shows, matching giggle for giggle and quip for quip with each other, going over “What the papers say” as if what the papers said meant anything other than “What the papers wanted the panel shows to say about what the papers were saying”.

    No sir, not them.

    They ask themselves the searching questions… “Did we get it wrong? Was Gillard’s early announcement of an election a clever bit of politics?”. They examine their consciences, rack their brains and, with pious looks on their faces and a wry smile on their dials, come up with the answer: “No, because we’re never wrong.”

    The truth is the pundits got it hopelessly, irreversibly, totally, egregiously, laughably and pathetically wrong every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

    And they are STILL pushing the line they have made no mistakes and are the best judges and context-providers around the joint.

    They think that, finally, the stopped clock will tell the right time and that this will erase all their stupid and hopeless errors of the past.

    We are either being set up for an almighty fall, a crumbling of the “Omniscient Pundit” model, or they’re right: Labor’s done like a dinner.

    If you were a betting man, given their useless record as prophets, you’d have to have a few quid against the Pundits, wouldn’t you?

  6. Who would have thought- Their ABC couldn’t mamge live coverage of the Julia Gillard/Stephne Conroy presser because they had ‘problems with the link’. Yeah, sure. They have ‘problems’ every day when it comes to PMJG’s pressers. Surely they have some sort of techie person who is capable of working out what the problem is and fixing it. Too much to hope for? Fixing bias might not be within that techie’s job description.

    ABC News 24 ‏@ABCNews24 Coming Up: PM @JuliaGillard and Stephen Conroy news conference approx 12:30pm AEST, expected to discuss live odds on TV ban

    margo kingston margo kingston ‏@margokingston@ABCNews24 I can’t see Gillard news conference @juliagillard

    ABC News 24 ABC News 24 ‏@ABCNews24
    @margokingston1 Hi Margo, problems with the link meant we couldn’t get it live. Apologies. Will be replayed when we get it.

  7. Someone has to pay for Brynne Edelsten’s wardrobe, it was so nice of her wedding guests to chip in and help her out.

  8. The Sports Betting Advertising issue is turning into just another Reality TV spectacular.

    ————-

    * The Public (allegedly) wants to bet on pokies, put their weekly wages into one-armed bandits.

    Measures to stop this are denounced as threatening our “Licence to punt”. Government attempts to curtail this are condemned as “over-reaction”. Even The Salvation Army joins in the badgering of Gillard, after they realize that they can win fat “counselling” contracts from sleazy clubs looking to make it look like they’re doing something about problem gambling.

    * Annoying, leering, wealthy, mummy’s boy Tom Waterhouse pays Channel 9 to be his friends, gives everyone the shits, plus the excuse to weep crocodile tears over what’s happening to their children.

    Government attempts to look at the issue rationally, in a co-ordinated approach, recognizing the right of betting corporations to legally advertise, are condemned as “Gutless inaction.”

    ————-

    Does anyone see the humour in this?

    Tom Waterhouse is unpopular. That is his main problem. He has become the object of heckling, humour and antipathy out there in the public. The public’s derision is no different from their reaction to an annoying survivor of the Block, The Island, The Voice or The Biggest Loser.

    Tom has become, in that public pillory sort of way, the man everyone loves to hate.

    The government not instantly picking up on this and acting executively to just ban the bastard from our TV screens is seen as craven cowardism. They are afraid of the political ramifications.

    The political ramifications, of course, are EXACTLY what the public dishes out when the object in question is NOT hated across the country, but is protected by vested interests, big business, their employees and shills, and the mugs in the public who naively believe they’re “having fun” losing their salaries every week.

    I’m actually starting to feel sorry for Tom Waterhouse. Seriously!

    He’s just trying to make a buck, but (and I know he’s brought it on himself to some extent, perhaps a large extent), he’s being unfairly treated.

    His industry is legal. He is being innovative. But he is giving his competitors (besides the viewers) the shits.

    The competitors know there isn’t room for more than one spruiker of odds on any individual television show. So they collude to get rid of him, by calling on the government – previously condemned for acting too precipitately on pokies – to just ban him out of hand. No committees, no reports. “Everyone” hates Tom. Just piss him off.

    One has to believe that if Woolworths had a stake in NRL, they would not be so silent on TV gambling. They own pubs, and you couldn’t shut them up over pokies (which prop the pub industry up and which are the reason why Woolies got into them in the first place).

    Ditto for the Clubs Industry. The clubs bear only a passing relationship to the football teams they have licensed their names from.

    Tom Waterhouse is in the stocks, being pelted with rotten fruit, in part because he is a convenient tool for bashing the government over yet another confected public outrage.

    You can bet your bottom dollar on a dead cert here: as soon as Waterhouse is banned from TV, the media will uncover another class of whingers who love him, and eagerly put their weekly wages on who’ll kick the first goal or score the last try.

    It’s the Yin and Yang of what is laughingly called our “National Discourse” nowadays: whatever Labor does is wrong in the eyes of the Goldilocks of the media. It is either too hot or too cold. Never just right.

    Murdoch has led the charge (with a weak Fairfax following) of turning our society into the moral equivalent of a roving lynch mob, torches and pitchforks in hand, looking for the next Gillard outrage.

    Nothing is good enough. There are no victories, only losses for Labor. They NEVER get it right, according to our media, and in particular our Murdoch media.

  9. leonetwo,

    Someone, GeekRulz I think it was, or it may have even been you ( 🙂 ) counted up the number of breakdowns in transmission of PMJG Press Conferences and Announcements, cf Abbott, and, as expected, there were way more for PMJG than Abbott, even taking into consideration that the PM may be on air more than the LOTO. Although, Abbott has made sure he’s there in the public eye at least as much. So I would think the figures are broadly comparable.

    I make the further point that, even though the ABC may replay the link when they get it, as outlined in their response to Margo above, it’s not the same as playing it when they should have because people will not know when that replay will occur and won’t likely hang around waiting for it. So less eyeballs end up seeing it in the end.

  10. BB

    CC is annoying on one level, but TT takes the prize. His intermittent reminders of a landslide to the tories shits me to no end

  11. This is a win for Tony Abbott, apparently:

    Under Labor’s demands – which came several weeks after Opposition Leader Tony Abbott flagged a Coalition government would take action against televised betting – all promotion of betting odds on broadcast media would be banned during games.

    But some, including the Greens and independent Senator for South Australia, Nick Xenophon, say the government’s proposed restrictions do not go far enough.

    Senator Xenophon on Sunday questioned why the government wouldn’t go further to address the issue ”rather than stopping a third of the way”.

    Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/gillard-moves-to-ban-live-odds-restrict-gambling-ads-during-games-20130526-2n4tc.html#ixzz2UMvCUUd2

  12. Rodriguez new of people like loto in the 70’s

    For those that can’t see the lyrics:

    And you measure for wealth by the things you can hold
    And you measure for love by the sweet things you’re told
    And you live in the past or a dream that you’re in
    And your selfishness is your cardinal sin

    And you want to be held with highest regard
    Its delights you so much if he’s trying so hard
    And you try to conceal our ordinary way
    With a smile or a shrug or some stolen cliche

    ‘Cos emotionally you’re the same basic trip
    And you know that I know of the times that you slip
    So don’t try to impress me, you’re just pins and paint
    And don’t try to charm me with things that you ain’t

    And ton’t try to enchant me with your manner of dress
    ‘Cos a monkey in silk is a monkey no less 😉
    So measure for measure reflect on my said
    And when I won’t see you then measure it dead

    ‘Cos don’t you understand, and don’t you look about
    I’m trying to take nothing from you
    So why should you act so put out,
    And sit there in wonder and doubt for me?

  13. Rummel, from over the road…

    Your strength lies in a alternative reality where facts and evidence are mear annoying insects on the path to Labor glory.

    Brush off yesterdays facts and continue on Baghdad Bob, your predictions gives strength to the few Gillard faithful left on that lonely path…. oh and i love them as well.

    You have to love Rummel.

    People congratulate him on his new baby. They even allowed him to post cutesy pix of the newborn. They pat him on the back over his volunteer firey work. They donate money to his favourite charities or his dying mate’s fun-run.

    Then he writes vicious crap like the above.

    It’s not reasoned. It’s not argued. It’s just saying “You’re a bunch of sentimental mugs, and I’m having a lend of you.”.

    Lovely chap.

  14. Rummel is your cookie-cutter Tory Bully Boy.

    They have forgotten the meaning of, and see as a sign of weakness in neon lights, concepts such as ‘the fair go’, care and concern for the weak, indigent and disabled

    Yet, just like their heroin(e), Ayn Rand, they come running to the Nanny State as soon as they themselves end up in a spot of bother and need help.

    Hypocritical pack of laughing hyenas that they are.

    I hope Rummel’s child grows up to lead the revolution against him and his kind.

    I look forward to having the last laugh at that point as he gets the smirk well and truly wiped off his face by the fruit of his own loins.

    That revolution will happen, Rummel, if you are reading this, don’t you worry about that. It always has and always will keep happening. It’s the laws of physics, swings and roundabouts. Science. That last dragon that the Conservatives are trying to slay but will never be able to because no amount of money or propaganda can do it. That’s the beauty of it. That’s why I chose to be a scientist and not a member of the Establishment at the highest levels.

    Don’t ever forget that, Rummel. There are people like me out here who have bred as well. Better and smarter warriors for OUR cause than the best that the Establishment can throw up. Such as your hero, Abbott. And I meant ‘throw up’, as in the best disgorgement from the bowels of the plutocracy money can buy.

    Progressives have more integrity in one cell of our bodies than all of you, in all mankind, have in their collective bodies. And it’s priceless. And we cannot be, and will never be, bought.

    So sneer away, and scoff. It does not diminish us, it only adds fuel to our fire.

  15. I’ve come to the conclusion that watching “Insiders” is like slowly crushing your own finger with your own pair of multi-grips!

  16. I’ve come to the conclusion that watching “Insiders” is like slowly crushing your own finger with your own pair of multi-grips!

    Yes, people say “It was a good Insiders today.” meaning that it was a little less nasty and self-congratulating circle-jerk than usual.

  17. So now the whingers are out in force because Julia Gillard’s betting ban didn’t go far enough. Margo et al are now whining ‘what about the kids?’

    If you don’t want your kids seeing betting ads on TV then the answer is simple – turn the bloody TV off.

  18. Usually I ignore Insiders. i’ve gt better thngs to do on Sunday mornings. If the guest is someone interesting I might watch just the interview. There is no way I’m going to sit through 45 minutes of smirking, snide comments, circle jerking and back-slapping.

    When Abbott loses on 14 September I might watch the next day’s Insiders, just to see the stunned mullet impersonations from the panel. Their boy fell at the last huirdle, how on earth could it all have gone so wrong.

    I’m hoping for a replay that morning of the performances the morning after Latham lost in 2004. There they were, stunned as. I think Fran Kelly was one of them, maybe Crabby was another. They could not believe Howard had won again. Funny that, because the very same people had been throwing truckloads of dirt at Latham for weeks. Apparently that was all just joking, they didn’t mean it, they supported Latham 200%, how could he have lost? In September it will be a bit different. The OM will have been giving Abbott the easiest of rides for three years, but that doesn’t mean he’s guaranteed a win.

  19. leone2…A bit like that episode of “Hogan’s Heros” where Hogan , Klink and Schultz are hovering over the entrails of a huge unexploded bomb and debating which coloured wire to cut before it explodes….Klink emphatically says the red one..Hogan hesitates, then cuts the blue saying that “you (Klink) were sure to pick the wrong one!”….A bit like the OM. perhaps!?

  20. Urgh, unbelievable. Almost all information about the South Australian 2002 election has completely disappeared from the internet.

    They’re not in Antony Green’s archives (he tends to not do state elections that Labor wins for some reason), there’s no newspaper guides, they’re not on Psephos’ website, even the SA electoral commission deleted all results from before 2009.

    I’d expect that for state elections before 1990, but to have all material about one in the 2000’s vanish is very annoying. The only thing I can find is some numbers on the ABC website for the 2006 election. Oh well, I’ll have to do some hunting for them.

  21. Tony,

    I think someone observed yesterday that many of the journalists surveyed refused to reveal their political allegiance. Those who did were mostly Labor or Greens.

Comments are closed.