 |
 |
 |
 |
|
The
Dog's Tits Premium
core Girls,
Girlz, Grrrlz Beautifully
Wicked Anti-suckage Aussies
Up Your Arse
|
|
Live
Whacking Permalink Archive 8 August 2003
I just
hope the current Queensland government can think of a creative way to
send Sir Joh into financial ruin and misery. Him and his cunt
wife. Well, well, well. It seems our brave little Asshole-For-Allah isn't as keen on martyrdom as he made out:
I'm sure there's lots
of readers at The Age willing to provide character references.
Wind
Rider asks an important
question. Niall is getting even more confused in his responses defending the ABC. He offers this howler:
*choke*splutter* Niall then supports his argument by offering a link which shows SBS had a whopping 5.5% audience share. How impressive. That's means only 94.5% of the audience who are paying for SBS are not watching it. If 5.5% doesn't rate as "not popular", then Niall uses a different system of maths from the rest of us. Here we have an entire network which is very unpopular, yet it has not died as Niall has promised. It has received taxpayer dollars despite these terrible ratings for over two decades. It is immune to the forces of the market. It doesn't have to perform or satisfy. And the ABC plunged to a 16% share in 2001. They survived too.
Yep, you showed links proving my point - almost noone watches it, yet it continues to get money. Guess you should have got your argument straight first eh?
Well, I'd figured that part out thanks to, you know, all those commercials it shows. And that still makes no difference: they are still using my money to broadcast a product I don't want.
So commercial stations can attract advertising revenue through popular programs.
No stupid, I said I don't want the government using my money to fund the network. If other people want to subscribe to it, good luck to them.
Their "inalienable right" to use my money for a service they want? These are the sort of "rights" that are popular in North Korea. The only "inalienable right" of the ABC viewer is to use their money to pay for it if they want.
Duh. That's what I getting at you klutz. The leftie elitist attitude that popular shows are there to amuse the stupid masses. Because when it comes down to it, lefties don't like popular opinion. The Great Unwashed tend to vote for the wrong politicians, watch the wrong TV shows, go to the wrong movies and basically don't know what's good for them. Rather than respecting people's choices and rights to choose, Niall - the big baby - calls them all "brainless".
Except you're wrong already. I don't have access to quite a few of Foxtel's channels. Go find me a place where I complained about that. (...sound of crickets....) It's because I couldn't care less that I don't have access to them, because I have chosen not to pay for them thanks to my total lack of interest in them. If I wanted them, I wouldn't complain that I didn't have it, or start whining about my ""inalienable right" to have other people buy a subscription for me. I'd just go ahead, find the money and subscribe to it. Simple, no? I can't stand blue heelers, or Neighbours, but I don't complain much about these, because noone is forcing me to pay for it. This is, after all, my point that Niall has completely failed to address: that there is no justification for anyone to use my money to fund the ABC. Freedom
of choice, the will of the market, paying your way. Such simple concepts,
yet they so confuse and frighten the ideologically righteous ones.
|
Motorcycles Guns
Support Brave Multinationals!!!
|
Joh
Bjelke-Petersen - who presided over the most corrupt government in Australia's
history - is 
