Thursday, April 10, 2008
It Shouldn't Happen to a Guardian Journalist
Poor Michael White. He writes an unassuming piece about the eponymous Ed Balls and sees his words flamed by his readers. Just read the comments - as far as I can see, not a single Guardian reader thinks much of Mr Balls. And believe me, by CommentIsFree standards, these comments are polite. If ever I feel some of my comment threads are being hijacked by deranged nutters a quick visit to CommentIsFree demonstrates that my readers are the sweet voice of reason by comparison.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
24 comments:
What? Don't chalk this one up so easy as bearded sandal-eating muesli-wearers loathing Balls. The CiF threads seem to get dominated by the same clientele as yours very quickly.
The biggest swivel-eyed loon there is a swivel-eyed loon because he thinks the NHS should be destroyed and there should be no benefits to anyone, at all, ever. Not quite the Graun's standard reader.
Someone should highlight to them what happens when someone becomes unemployed through no fault of their own or if the poor become ill - sadly I don't actually believe they give a shiny shite.
Never mind guardian readers, does anyone think much of the eponymous Mr Balls?
Now that was funny! My favourite was
"Balls is a cretin of the highest order, just the sort of malignant trash that swooped towards New Labour in 1997 [...] He is a privileged twit, and rather than a saviour of the poor and working classes, is their oppressor.
His pinch-faced, short-tempered wife is no better.
..."
I think the people who comment here are by far more balanced ...
I use comment is free .
'my readers are the sweet voice of reason by comparison.'
Why thankyou , I might wonder why ,on not less than four occassions , you have deleted my sweetly reasonable comments.Balls is already thinking of post Brown and positioning himself on the left.
The Labour Party can clearly see that whatever the election result this is a fag end and it will not serve young guns to be little brownies.
Do you have any "derranged nutters" in particular to mind?
Big Andy
Can anyone tell me why Federal Express just delivered a mosquito net to my home ?
The only note says 'From the United kingdom's Super Minister for schools to the grateful people of Africa. Because where you are it's SO HOT'
Does anyone know how Ball's rose to such heights at the FT? Not a place one associates with mediocrity.
Does anyone know how on earth he has come to the conclusion he could win the Labour leadership?
Surely the same answer for both? Surely an interesting one!
Big Andy
WOW - don't think he's very popular Ian - wonder why!?!
Comment Is Free are a bunch of knobs. They banned me for speaking the truth about the Shite Online cult. It seems only the likes of MrPikeBishop are tolerated by that regime.
The best response is from Lady White herself, dated April 11, 2008 7:23 AM!
"Don't chalk this one up so easy as bearded sandal-eating muesli-wearers loathing Balls. The CiF threads seem to get dominated by the same clientele as yours very quickly."
You mean, they are open to eveyone and therefore not dominated by one sole political opinion? You make it sound as if there's something wrong with that...
"The biggest swivel-eyed loon there is a swivel-eyed loon because he thinks the NHS should be destroyed and there should be no benefits to anyone, at all, ever. Not quite the Graun's standard reader."
Not quite their standard reader..?
'My deah, you should see the absolutely frightful people who claim to have opinions these days. One really wishes it wasn't allowed. Next thing one knows, they will want the vote...'
And hey, at least at the 'Guardian', everyone's managed to think of a username instead of just 'anonymous'....
Hee hee. This is strange Iain. After all it was only last week when you yourself were saying you were quite impressed with him. And twisting his favourite Brown anecdote beyond recognition.
"my readers are the sweet voice of reason by comparison."
And don't you forget it.
Mind you, the quote provided by Matthew pain is entirely correct. And they banned asquith, so clearly there is something to be said for them.
I would have thought the total silence of Guardian readers in Ball's support was the most telling thing in the comments to the article.
There was an excellent article about Balls by Nick Cohen in last night's Evening Standard.
Like Cohen, I do wish that these ambitious public schools boys (of both parties but Balls in particular) could be kept away from the state education system. They have little understanding of the aspirations of the working and middle classes for their childern's education and use the education system as a stepping stone for the further political careers. Their influence is far from helpful.
And Balls actually thinks he has a chance of succeeding Gordon when the "Supreme Leader" crashes to oblivion at the 2010 election ?
The resulting fight should be quite entertaining
'Guardian', 'Journalist'.
Some sort of oxymoron, surely?
And as for that sweaty old White Queen supporting Balls like some sort of pontificating jockstrap, well, what would anyone expect?
In his latest book, Peter Oborne remarks on how many front bench politicians - including the Ballses - seem to have read PPE at Oxford. This course was created for people who wished to pursue a career in politics or public administration and its most celebrated exponent of the last century was Harold Wilson.
The fruition of a class comparable to the Enarques in France is, to put it mildly, not a development that we should welcome - not for reasons so sentimental as the English cult of the amateur but on account of the fraudulent bogosity of PPE as an academic subject.
Modern History is comparatively respectable. As (I think) Noel Malcolm once said, history cannot justify policy arguments but it can at least refute half-baked policy based on false historical comparisons. PPE seems to have little empirical content at all. The style of argument employed by its practitioners seems to find its closest relation in theology - it is in the nature of their claims that they cannot be satisfactorily tested.
This is quite a sizeable can of worms but I hope I have given the drift of my unease. The last time I looked, quite a few of the Chinese Politburo seemed to have read Engineering, which may signify something although I am not sure what.
R Tube MSc
There's nothing wrong with doing PPE at Oxford that several pints in the Turl won't sort out.
Did the Ballses get honours degrees or ordinary?
I'm no fan of CiF. Some time ago I suggested the reason some young black men went about London stabbing and shooting other young black men was 'because they're stupid.' This was deemed a racist remark and I got banned.
"Comment Is Free" is a fairly witty exercise in irony by Guardian standards, seeing as most of us seem to have been banned from it at one point or another, suggesting in fact that a better choice of name might have been "Comment Is Incredibly Heavily Censored, Especially If Anyone Dares To Be Nasty To One Of Our Precious Little Hacks Or Hackettes". Next to the annoyance value of CiF, Balls hardly registers.
@ Trumpeter Lanfried
"I'm no fan of CiF...I got banned."
Ah, a singular badge of honour. You should wear it with considerable pride.
I thought the critical comments were pretty realistic and my opinion of Guardian readers rose.
The obnoxious Ed Balls/Yvette Cooper duo are amongst many reasons for never voting Labour. As someone suggested, did they get their ministerial posts straight from school?
The problem is, unsworth, most bannings are wholly unjustified. Basically the moderators have a bad conscience about all the rubbish they put up, so they'll clamp down ruthlessly on whoever points this out to them. My own banning occured after an especially fatuous piece by Nathalie Rothschild. I asked some uncomfortable questions about why the Shite Online network gets so much publicity from them.
Post a Comment