Bolt is a troll

[ShanDog]

Surprised with what you have found or not found, as there were a number of examples, more recently his comments on Whitlam. I think that you are not looking too hard. You admit you sometimes agree with him. Enough said.

Yep, they were the two posts I am talking about. Nothing else came close to actually critiquing what he has said on any topics.

And you have done EXACTLY what I am talking about by immediately generalising / stereotyping me. Ironic.

 

[Floor Pie]

Yep, they were the two posts I am talking about. Nothing else came close to actually critiquing what he has said on any topics.

And you have done EXACTLY what I am talking about by immediately generalising / stereotyping me. Ironic.

Ok, have a look into two of his previous articles. Headlined with "It's so hip to be black" and "White fellas in the black".

You might find some genuine criticisms about those articles.


Also, would you like to tell us what articles you agree with, that are factual?

 

[ShanDog]

Ok, have a look into two of his previous articles. Headlined with "It's so hip to be black" and "White fellas in the black".

You might find some genuine criticisms about those articles.


Also, would you like to tell us what articles you agree with, that are factual?

I am not going to go into it, but I do disagree with a lot of what was said in those articles. Rather, I would like to see someone actually make a thoughful case based on the thread title - "Bolt is a troll" rather than have the onus on me to prove a negative.

 

[Floor Pie]

I am not going to go into it, but I do disagree with a lot of what was said in those articles. Rather, I would like to see someone actually make a thoughful case based on the thread title - "Bolt is a troll" rather than have the onus on me to prove a negative.

But there is evidence of him deliberately writing articles for a reactionary response.

You can't say it doesn't count, if not enough posters on a forum give a concise critique of his articles, with an explanation that is enough to satisfy you.

Nothing to do with proving a negative.

 

[ShanDog]

But there is evidence of him deliberately writing articles for a reactionary response.

You can't say it doesn't count, if not enough posters on a forum give a concise critique of his articles, with an explanation that is enough to satisfy you.

Nothing to do with proving a negative.

For starters, he is an opinion columnist - his sole purpose is to write things to get a reaction and therefore interest.

I didn't think it was going to be so difficult to get people to actually argue their cases! I thought that is what these forums were about—discussing things. Even the HTB has people arguing their opinions with shitloads of references to legal documents, codes and all sorts of other things lol. But hey, if this thread is just a "I hate Bolt coz he is racist" wank-fest, that's fine. I know that now...

 

[Floor Pie]

For starters, he is an opinion columnist - his sole purpose is to write things to get a reaction and therefore interest.

I didn't think it was going to be so difficult to get people to actually argue their cases! I thought that is what these forums were about—discussing things. Even the HTB has people arguing their opinions with shitloads of references to legal documents, codes and all sorts of other things lol. But hey, if this thread is just a "I hate Bolt coz he is racist" wank-fest, that's fine. I know that now...

I've tried to be logical and open in a discussion with you.

 

[ShanDog]

I've tried to be logical and open in a discussion with you.

By avoiding my question (for people to post evidence or quotes from Bolt and provide an argument) and trying to turn it back on me?

 

[Maggie5]

By avoiding my question (for people to post evidence or quotes from Bolt and provide an argument) and trying to turn it back on me?

I've tried to be logical and open in a discussion with you.

Don't bother with him, troll.

 

[ShanDog]

Don't bother with him, troll.

Now you are annoying me. How is asking for people to PRESENT EVIDENCE to support the claim (i.e. thread title) that Bolt is a troll? Are you so bigoted that you can't even be moved to present your opinion with some evidence?

What next? Start a thread called "Education is overrated" and then show NOTHING to back that up?

 

[ShanDog]

Actually just forget it. There appears to be no point.

Oh, and how very trollish of me to just give up instead of baiting and flaming...

 

[Lebbo73]

By avoiding my question (for people to post evidence or quotes from Bolt and provide an argument) and trying to turn it back on me?

That is what they do.

 

[The Coup]

I feel quite strongly that all News Limited related threads and posts should be placed in Question Time (at best).

 

[Floor Pie]

By avoiding my question (for people to post evidence or quotes from Bolt and provide an argument) and trying to turn it back on me?

No, by responding to your post, and citing evidence to support my stance.

You yourself have stated that his sole job is to write things to get a reaction.

And I didn't put it back on you, I asked if you would like to give us an example of an article you agree with.

You are as bad as what you are claiming of this thread.
You didn't come for a discussion, you came with a view and wanted to state it.

I should not have bothered with you. And I'm done being serious with you.

 

[Floor Pie]

Don't bother with him, troll.

Good call!

 

[Xsess]

Caricature lefties once again attacking sources of information (Bolt/Shandog) they dont want to acknowledge, because of an inability to refute any of the facts as presented. Not one viable example in 10 pages of directionless personally directed hate and bile. Airball after airball after airball.......lol

 

[Floor Pie]

Caricature lefties once again proving its so much easier to attack sources of information you dont want to acknowledge, because you cant refute any of the facts (this time Bolt/Shandog) presents. Not one viable example presented in 10 pages of hate and bile. Airball after airball after airball. . ......lol

I did in the second post on this page...
Even Shandog admitted there were at least two other examples in this thread...


Not like you to be full of shit and rhetoric...

 

[Xsess]

Not like you to be full of shit and rhetoric...

Interesting. I misread this post and accidently went back to the second page where you bait another poster then declare him a racist and bigot. Then, when he disagrees with you and uses the heinous word "idiot" to describe you... you REPORT him to the mods? Really?? You haven't presented a single constructive fact through the whole thread (sorry but Bolts use of the words "Black" and "White" mean sweet FA). You have baited, labelled and abused everyone who has disagreed with you, and gone squealing to the mods when someone called you an idiot. Essentailly your actions PROVE my statement above.

 

[Floor Pie]

Interesting. I misread this post and accidently went back to the second page where you bait another poster then declare him a racist and bigot. Then, when he disagrees with you and uses the heinous word "idiot" to describe you... you REPORT him to the mods? Really?? You haven't presented a single constructive fact through the whole thread (sorry but Bolts use of the words "Black" and "White" mean sweet FA). You have baited, labelled and abused everyone who has disagreed with you, and gone squealing to the mods when someone called you an idiot.

Haha.
Yeah, ask the mods if I actually reported that post. I'm allowed levity on the forums as well.
You've admitted to doing it yourself before.

Earlier in this thread, I used some posters poor arguments against them, by pointing out the flawed logic. I did it in a disrespectful manner, but I'm ok with it, for who I was talking to.

I called dardysigh a racist and a bigot. Not for the first time, and I'm not the only one. I've already demonstrated before how he is racist.


So, in short, nice attempt to crawl through this thread, and pick a few things up to try and paint a picture. But the point is, you lied in your previous post, and you lied in this one.

If you had any idea what I was talking about, when I mentioned the articles, you would realise how stupid you seem when you think I'm just talking about the words "black" and "white".

Google the articles.
Too hard? I'll help you.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q= It's so hip to be black White fellas in the blac

 

[Xsess]

Google the articles.
Too hard? I'll help you.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q= It's so hip to be black White fellas in the blac

Thats better. I actually appreciate reading these. My opinion? Its truly remarkable that Bolt got in the shit for writing them. Nothing racist whatsoever, in fact he's raising the issue of reverse racism so for him to have copped it with a stcik is just a sad reflection of how political correctness is the creeping cancer in our society. Can see why it triggered a bun fight over free speech, for sure.

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

Thats better. I actually appreciate reading these. My opinion? Its truly remarkable that Bolt got in the shit for writing them. Nothing racist whatsoever, in fact he's raising the issue of reverse racism so for him to have copped it with a stcik is just a sad reflection of how political correctness is the creeping cancer in our society. Can see why it triggered a bun fight over free speech, for sure.

What's "reverse racism"?

I've read enough of Bolt over the years and still duck into his blog maybe once or twice a month and hear enough of him via his TV and radio show to not have to have an opinion based on reading his columns regularly.

Bolt repeatedly talks about their hardly being any examples of people from the Stolen Generations (tip: he used to talk of there not being one, but then someone showed him some...) and so Shandog thinks he's being clever by similarly saying their are no examples in here of Bolt's trollishness (okay, there are some...). Of course the fact the thread was set-up on the back of Bolt's reaction to Whitlam's death, rather than a catch-all for examples of Bolt's poor journalism seems to not be as important as creating a counter-narrative.

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

Actually just forget it. There appears to be no point.

Oh, and how very trollish of me to just give up instead of baiting and flaming...

After what you said, ShanDog I watched The Bolt Report to get some evidence of Bolt's trolling for you.

On the 'shirtfront' thing that the majority of people think was a silly thing to say for a Prime Minister, Bolt and Kroger repeatedly referred to the ABC in their response. This is a close paraphrase of what Kroger said:

KROGER: "Like everything Abbott has done in foreign affairs he has been... superb. The ABC might not like it but he has been superb. ...Here's news for people on the ABC - Abbott wasn't saying he would physically 'shirtfront' Putin, it was a word of 'art'."

BOLT: "MET - A - PHOR. Someone needs to explain that to the ABC given they work with words."

This is clear trolling. The ABC obviously didn't think Abbott would literally shirtfront Putin.

Additionally, why do they refer to the ABC at all when assessing Abbott's foreign affairs? Because then they don't have to say what has actually been good, they just have to say the ABC is wrong and the ABC says Abbott has been bad (therefore Abbott must be good, see!). The conversation then moved on to saying that conservative commentators are not going to go on Q&A anymore, because the ABC is sooo baad. And this whole conversation was after the ABC 7.30 skit had been brought up with our foreign affairs minister Julie Bishop.

And now they've moved on the media segment and he brings up the skit again. Complete with hammy eye-rolling over the not-very-offensive-at-all skit on 7.30.

Another feature of trolling would be constantly picking on one target right? And using the eye-rolling emoji?

And he said Gerard Henderson's blog was "hugely popular". TROLL TROLL TROLL!

And, no, I didn't have to watch very long to find this trolling. That was all in the space of 15mins and I was flicking back to Offsiders in the ads, so I guess I could've missed the bit where Bolt said "hey guys wouldn't it be funny if I pretended to be a troll for 15 minutes just in case a 'lefty' flicks over".

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

Oh, and let's not forget Bolt asked why The Chaser don't mock ISIS.

Why wouldn't the families of the victims of ISIS be "devastated" if someone mocked ISIS?

Such a non-story and Bishop pushes it along... ABC budget cuts are due to be announced in the next few weeks. Coincidence?

 

[pjcrows]

Bolt is consciously abhorrent.

He isn't a denialist, he isn't ignorant, stupid etc. Those titles presume he doesn't have all the information and/or isn't educated.

He is very educated, very informed and very intelligent.

He is just morally bankrupt and does whatever his corporate and personal masters tell him to, and whatever ensures he is controversial. He's a paid troll.

 

[AM]

See the clown from the shallow end of the gene pool has again lost in the courts.

Human rights lawyer George Newhouse has won his defamation case against controversial News Corp blogger Andrew Bolt.

In the NSW Supreme Court on Thursday, Justice Lucy McCallum ordered a verdict for Mr Newhouse and said News Corp was to pay his legal costs.

http://bit.ly/1Hlguqw

 

[NSWCROW]

i notice he just HAD to mention Demetriou was a " Labor sympathizer " in his article today.

Now i'm no Vlad fan but i'll back him any day over the shit on my shoe Bolt