Comments on: Have a writ sandwich, Hairshirt Hamilton

By: Matt Canavan

Matt Canavan — Wed, 07 Feb 2007 12:50:10 +0000

SL, the PC is looking at Pt V but not Pt IV (also looking at, among other things, Pt IVA, unconcsiable conduct). Terms of Reference.

By: skepticlawyer

skepticlawyer — Wed, 07 Feb 2007 05:01:23 +0000

Looks like you’ve found the right spot for it, John. And I’ll keep it here too because it’s a valid point in the context of Hamilton’s faux monasticism.

By: John Greenfield

John Greenfield — Wed, 07 Feb 2007 04:44:05 +0000

skeptic

Shit, you’re right. What a silly tit, I am. Are you able to pop it where it should go?

By: skepticlawyer

skepticlawyer — Wed, 07 Feb 2007 04:29:57 +0000

Are you sure this is the right thread John? It’s a great comment, and germane, but I think it may be orphaned from its original post

By: John Greenfield

John Greenfield — Wed, 07 Feb 2007 04:19:03 +0000

Anna

There is a terrible snobbery and anger towards working class people working their way out of materially-bereft existences. The venom with which the luvvies treat “the aspirationals” is a real worry.

Do the luvvies really think they can build a large enough coalition to govern on their own, or for their own values and bigotry to triumph? When we consider that the intellectual horse-power of the luvvies is centred on such bourgeois abominations and snobs as the 3 Davids (Williamson, Marr, and Stratton) you are painting yourselves into a very lonely corner.

Oh, for the ALP of old where, as Neville Wran said with such perspicacity, “the best thing about the working class is climbing out of it!”

I think the luvvies are anxious that the Westies might be persuaded by political ideas generated from sources the luvvies can’t control; so the luvvies in a spasm of self-preservation try to cut off any avenues the Westies might mozey along. And this is why the plasma TV has become so iconic in Luvvie-land.

Latham had some very profound insights into how a strong liberal political economy could be married with genuine working class aspirations. Unfortunately, he was a nutcase, and too pussy-whipped by the teacher’s unions.

I don’t think Kevin and Julia will make the same mistake. But they really should limit the influence of the luvvies to Maxine McKew. And for god’s sake under no circumstance ever take a call from Bob Ellis, Phillip Adams, or the 3 Davids!!

By: skepticlawyer

skepticlawyer — Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:14:10 +0000

Similar cases have come before the courts before, interestingly. The RSPCA got itself into hot water in this matter, although wriggled out from under the s 52 claim as the statements had not been made ‘in trade or commerce’. They were made on a radio and TV interview. It will be interesting to see what effect the AustInst’s sale of its research will have on the trade or commerce requirement.

By: skepticlawyer

skepticlawyer — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 11:42:40 +0000

Truth in labelling, that is what this law is about.

That’s true, although it’s a pity it’s come to this.

By: rog

rog — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 08:51:01 +0000

Truth in labelling, that is what this law is about.

By: rog

rog — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 08:48:59 +0000

Breaches of the Trade Practices Act can be remedied by a series of full page full colour public ads saying “sorry, I told a lie” and undergoing a course on “how to not tell lies”. Plus ensuing publicity about court case.

I know of one clown who went thru this process, well and truly took the wind out of his sails, havent heard a peep since.

bring.it.on DJ

By: skepticlawyer

skepticlawyer — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 06:53:02 +0000

I’ve seen the same thing, RL, so I think we’re talking about the same study! I’m really torn on this one. On one hand it’s a great opportunity to get to the bottom of a particular intellectual conundrum; on the other it represents abuse of the court system in order to solve social questions we should be able to consider without calling in the lawyers.