Posts Tagged ‘Tim Blair’

RealClimate has a guest post by David Karoly looking at the climate factors that contributed to the severity of the recent bushfires, and examining the evidence (or lack thereof) that global warming is a contributing factor in producing such conditions. Data, evidence, argument – the way an examination of causal mechanisms should be done.

On the other hand, Al Gore is fat!


Read Full Post »


tim says, “the war is over and coalition forces have won.”


No war should be forgotten.

Read Full Post »

The Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme White Paper will be released tomorrow, and the cynicism is palpable. Michelle Grattan discusses the political tensions pointing the Rudd Government toward a low target for 2020 emissions reductions. Peter Wood has a cartoon that illustrates the problem with that “sensible centrist” approach. And Robert Merkel notes a pre-announcement that seems to be aimed at reducing the outrage that might be anticipated if tomorrow’s announcement does include a soft target.

Meanwhile, the Bananas in Pyjamas of the Australian commentariat are covering the big issues with their typical enthusiasm and scientific rigor. For instance, it’s cold and snowing in Poznan, Poland during December – obviously, that must be because Al Gore is fat (and nothing to do with an average maximum temperature of 3° and 17 days of precipitation). Meanwhile, I don’t think the word “may” means what Andrew Bolt thinks it means. While looking it up in the dictionary, he might also want to see whether he can find “shivvers”.

Read Full Post »

People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw winged monkeys

tim describing A-Loew:

for an audience eager to skim shallow views on fashionable issues.

Read Full Post »

What a difference a continent makes

tim in the US of A.

tim upon his return home.

And here is the superlative post-election column that made the whole trip worthwhile.

Meanwhile, I hear Rupert is looking to reduce costs. Oops.

Read Full Post »


The most obvious question for me about this 2008 election – did News Ltd. contribute to the cost of Tim Blair flying to Chicago to produce this shit?

Read Full Post »


Timmeh cuts, pastes and mocks satirises:

David Warren on constant changer Barack Obama:

A man who, should he win the election and serve one term, will have been President of the United States longer than he has held any steady job.

Until he gets bored and quits to sign up for macramé classes. Full column here.

A simple fact-check on Wikipedia:

The Illinois Senate career of Barack Obama stretched from 1996 to 2004, when Barack Obama was elected to the United States Senate. Starting in 1993 and throughout his state senate career, Obama also taught constitutional law part-time at the University of Chicago Law School, as a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996 and as a Senior Lecturer from 1996-2004, when he was elected to the U.S. Senate.

So that, in fact, is two jobs held concurrently that ran for around a decade.

Mark Steyn attempts to respond by denigrating service in the State Senate as not being a real job:

In my own state, the senate sits from January to June and senators receive an annual salary of $100. Which is as it should be. I assume in Illinois the position is more attractive financially, even before it’s bulked up by Chicago machine perks. But in no sense is it any kind of “job”. And I’d hope the Reason boys would agree on that.

More attractive financially – Check:

Legislators must be US citizens, at least 21 years old, and residents of their district for at least two years prior to election. The legislative salary was $55,788 in 2002.

In no sense is it a “job”? Well, it might be far from full-time (some data that I found on days in session suggests it averages to a little over one day per week). But, as any Australian politician would point out, sitting in legislative sessions is not the only part of the job. But considering that Obama was also teaching law at the same time, it seems a bit strange to suggest that he wasn’t working for that entire period.

What’s more, doesn’t Obama’s career trajectory capture what is becoming more common in the workforce? Job mobility, openness to change in career path, and not nailing oneself to a full-time position for the rest of one’s life is what most employees are doing – whether by choice or through the forces at work in the labour market. What’s so wrong about having an elected representative who is actually representative?

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »