Privacy in a glass house

Re: 'Petulant' Conroy accuses Google of 'single greatest privacy breach'.

Seriously, does he think he's doing himself any favours trying to draw a comparison between the Facebook and Google privacy breaches and the state-sanctioned internet-wide filter he intends to introduce?

Beyond the fact that Facebook is participatory (even the extent of the details you disclose, with a few exceptions where there have been actual breaches), while the 'clean-feed' is mandatory... and, what? Wait a second.. isn't the clean-feed about restricting what you can view?

What the hell does it have to do with privacy breaches by Google and Facebook?

I mean, beyond the fact the black-list will be kept private from the public, and the fact you won't have the right to look at material you would be allowed to own in book, film or picture form in the privacy of your own home?

When is this guy losing his job, again?

Incidentally, if you're wondering about the a-cup thing, it pays to know what the classification board now thinks constitutes paedophilia.

Would you believe my dog ate it?

The past week has been an exercise in "how to destroy a burgeoning lead" for the Coalition.

Abbott's admission that he'll happily say whatever it takes to win an argument (just don't expect him to actually act on it) whilst on a difficult holiday in 7:30-Report-Land and Hockey's massive media management screw up when launching the Opposition's budget response have pretty much made it a sure bet that the polls will not be anywhere as favourable for Abbott next week.

But I could be wrong. There seems to be some crazy, clearly apolitical thing going on where the more critical the media gets of Abbott, the more the polls love him. Shine a light, and we'll happily vote for the shadow.

In the stretch coming up to the election, however, surely the Hockey bungle cannot bode well. It's probably not a good idea to try and play the media (ie. by not providing them with figures, therefor dodging the hard questions in front of the cameras) so obviously. If that wasn't what he was doing, then that's an even worse omen. It's either media manipulation for dummies or just plain dumb... and it's pretty much symptomatic of the Opposition at the moment.

I yams not what I yams

* Uploaded with ImageShack.us. Because Photobucket is being a pile of shit.

Re: This magnificent 7:30 Report interview. Seriously, what were you thinking, Abbott?

Don't trust me when I say something that sounds crazy. That's just me being crazy!

So we should let you tell us when to to listen and when not to?

But seriously, if you think Abbott's fair enough to mouth off whenever he feels and then fob it off as "the heat of the moment" or today, as his being "fair dinkum", here's something for you.

Blistering Barnacles! Rogering Gerbils!

So, has anyone been else been a little stunned by the complete lack of response from Fairfax re: Miranda Devine's homophobic twitter insult, given Deveny's sacking last week?

I don't think Devine should be fired (at least not for this), but I think it's a little bit rich to not touch her at all after the Deveny debacle.

I think this blog post at An Onymous Lefty sums up my own views quite well. I do find it oddly worrying that most people think implying Gays = "sex obsessed perverts who get it however they can" is better than pointing out the sexualisation of Bindi Irwin as a child star (albeit haphazardly) or making poor taste joke about someone's dead wife.

But then again, the Deveny bashing and eventual sacking was a dickhead frenzy of escalating outrage of the highest order. The outrage machine churneth.

Mr Kettle

Re: Burqa theft prompts Abbott to echo Howard's concerns.

But seriously, are we having this debate again? Has Howard been pulling some marionette strings so that Abbott and his cohorts race bait and play the asylum seeker/queue jumper word shuffle to win votes on fear?

This is poor politics. "There is understandable concern in the community about what former prime minister John Howard called a confronting form of attire,'' says Abbott, ie. "I'm basically saying I agree with the xenophobes in the audience, but I'll only imply it so that I can't get in trouble." Quoting Howard also beckons to the same voters who long for the days of the "Pacific Solution" - ie. the "don't let those people near my suburb regardless of their risk of death where they came from" brigade.

Everybody Loves Rudd

Sorry for the delay. As you know, I'm in New York. I'm in a tiny room doing this on the side of the bed, as there's no chair in this room and Lily (my wife) is asleep on the other side of the aforementioned bed.

I considered doing today's comic re: this, but there's nothing funny about Abbott's comments; he's a dick.

I think we've all gone over the fact that it's not unlawful to enter a country to seek asylum. If someone is processed and found not to be a refugee (as around only 10% of asylum seeker are), then (and only then) you get to make the decision about whether to send them home or not. No heading them off at the pass, drawing lines about country of origin, mode of entry etc... it's international law.

If you haven't got that yet, well maybe you should be granted temporary residency. If you have got it, and you're milking public ignorance for votes - like Abbott - then your boat should be towed far, far away.