Keeping abreast of Melbourne's ever changing skyline

I was wandering around the city today and noticed this wonderful new addition to the Melbourne skyline. I thought I'd share it with you all...

The Crocs are a Burning!

So, since my rant about Crocs I have discovered that the trend for wearing these spastic shoes is not just confined to Australia but is spreading its evil across the globe.

But there is hope. A crack team of sane, well dressed, well adjusted people have set up the excellent web site www.ihatecrocs.com I urge you all to go visit and join in on the vitriol being hurled at the makers of Crocs. Maybe buy a T-Shirt or if you can't afford to donate any money towards the good fight then sit back, relax and watch this video of the dudes behind ihatecrocs burning a Croc down to a smouldering heap. Enjoy!

Adblock

Adblock

Adblock

Enough is Enough

RIGHT! It's time to take a stand. It's time to say enough is enough. No more. There has to be a better way.

What am I talking about? The war in Iraq? Nope. The Liberal Party's new media laws? Nope. Global Warming? Afraid not. Global Poverty? Nope, it's far more serious than that.

No, it's time for all right minded, sane people to stand up and be counted because this madness has to be stopped.

I am, of course, talking about the crime against fashion, commonsense and humanity that is the Croc shoe:
























Lovely aren't they? I don't know if they've spread their evil outside of Australia yet (please god let this only be a local trend) but I can't take it anymore. Why on Earth are people wearing these monstrosities? Thongs/Flip Flops are cool - they look good, they keep your feet cool in the summer, they go with lots of clothes.

Crocs look like the type of shoe that would be dished out to a busload of mental psychotics to wear on their annual day trip outside of the asylum. After being strapped securely to a patient's foot the wearer can't then use their toenails to stab an innocent passerby to death and the rubber casing means that self harm via shoewear is also negated.

I mean seriously. Come on people! Do you honestly think these look remotely good?? You look like a twat! Stop it. Have some dignity and go and burn them as quickly as you can. Someone is getting rich because you think its cool to wear these on your feet.

If any of my readers wear these then please go into the comments section and leave an explanation of why. I need reasons goddamit. I have already excluded 'because they look good' (simply not possible) 'because they keep my feet cool in the summer' (no, plastic makes your feet sweat), because they are like, you know, really right on and hippy-ish (well apart from the fact they are made from a fossil fuel). So come on, someone come on here and justify their existence! I am all ears.

Faith Schools

If you can be bothered then I would highly recommend reading pieces today from Martin Samuel of The Times and Polly Toynbee of The Guardian. They are both about the increasing number of publicly funded faith schools in the UK. In these times of a yearning for a more inclusive, integrated society it is complete madness to increase religious segregation amongst children.

Faith schools should not receive ANY public money and any that are currently dependent on such revenue should either be taken over by the education department or turned into private schools. How can the Government possibly justify funding a school that teaches creationism? Or that gives girls a different education from boys?

England!

After my big rant about the new media legislation yesterday I was hoping to write a more light hearted piece today but I'm afraid I am going to have to have another rant. It's not my fault though, if England had managed to beat the team that the football giant Australia kicked out of the world cup last night then I'd have nothing to rant about (well, I clearly would but that's not the point!)

England, bloody England. Yet another dark day in the life of an England football fan is upon us. After meekly drawing 0-0 with football heavyweights Macedonia on Saturday, England lost 2-0 to Croatia last night in Zagreb. What looked like an easy qualifying group for Euro 2008 is now in danger of turning into a Graham Taylor-esque disaster.

And who is to blame? The FA. That's who.

It's become very fashionable of late for football writers and commentators to start espousing the opinion that maybe the England players aren't actually good enough to win anything and that the fans should just accept this fact of life. Bollocks to that I say. The fact is, is that they are good enough to win a major tournament but their talent has been squandered through those uber cunts at the FA making appalling decisions regarding who to give the job of being England manager.

You would have thought that after England's insipid, bland, dull, mediocre, dire, uninspiring performance at this year's world cup that the FA would seek a break from the Sven Yawn Ericcsson era. But no! What do they do? They appoint Sven's 'mastermind' Steve Cunting McClaren. A man whose achievements in club football include winning the league cup for Middlesborough and erm...mmm...err...losing 4-0 to Seville in the UEFA cup final, also with Middlesborough. Yes, he's just the man for the job! A known protagonist of boring, route one, defensive football - just what the England team needs!

This of course came about after the FA's utterly farcical attempt to recruit Scolari before the World Cup. Scolari clearly realised he was dealing with a bunch of utter retards and so rightly told them to fuck off.

So this is how we have ended up where we are today. Nothing has changed since Sven - oh, apart from dropping our best free kick taker out of the squad. In fact, I think it's actually going to get worse.

Let's face it, at least with Sven we qualified for tournaments, comfortably and we usually scraped through to the QFs. But with McClaren even these small victories seem as likely as Peter Crouch suddenly morphing into a player of international quality.

What a fucking shambles. Thanks FA! Thanks for destroying any dreams England fans have of winning anything in the near future.

CUNTS.

Australia's Media Laws

The Howard crusade to stamp out any dissent in Australian public life continues at apace. First, he got rid of those annoying leftwing types at Australian unions by abolishing VSU fees, then he started to stack the ABC board with extreme anti-ABC conservatives like Keith Windschuttle and Janet Albrechtsen. Now he has turned his attention to the commercial media sector. Now what does he see before him? A country whose media is completely and utterly dominated by PBL and News Ltd - both big supporters of the Liberal party. But hang on, what's this?! Two widely read papers exist in Melbourne (The Age) and Sydney (The Sydney Morning Herald) that don't churn out Liberal propaganda on a day to day basis - they must be crushed!! That's clearly too much diversity and opposition for our John - TWO broadsheet papers not toeing the line in a country of 20 million.

And so this is how we have got to today's media laws which are being rammed through the senate with Barnaby Joyce meekly capitulating as usual and deciding to vote with the government.

The current laws, introduced by Keating, do not allow one media owner to control more than one medium ('mediums' in this instance being free to air TV, free to air Radio and newspapers) in a particular marketplace. So Murdoch can only own a newspaper in Sydney and Melbourne but not a free to air TV channel or a radio station. Packer can own magazines and a TV channel in Perth but not a newspaper as well. These restrictions ensure a diversity in the local media marketplace and more importantly ensure a diversity of opinion. Why the hell is there any public interest imperative in relaxing these restrictions so that media conglomerates can own 2 out of 3 mediums in one market?

Well, it's obvious. When the leash is taken off, the Packers will be making a beeline for Fairfax, owner of The Age & SMH, and suddenly the only mainstream voices in the Australia media that offer any serious criticism of the Liberal government will be gutted and transformed into yet more Conservative rags.

Who exactly has demanded these changes? The Australian public? I don't think giving yet more power and money to the Murdochs and Packers was on top of most people's national priorities. I can't see many people thinking 'Well I know the public education system is a mess, interest rate rises are crippling me, Iraq is a disaster and my job security has disintegrated since the IR laws BUT my number one priority is that that nice Mr Murdoch and that lovely Mr Packer be given more control over the information I receive. I mean the other things are kind of important but I would rather parliament use it's precious time to help those two fellows out...'

I have written before about the scandal that is media law in Australia and this is more proof of the pudding. It's clear that the consumer is utterly irrelevant in media regulations and that the laws are shaped purely for the benefit of the Liberal Party and its media mogul chums and benefactors.

It's nothing less than a scandal and I would like to hear a single reason given by the government as to why these new laws are in the public interest. You won't hear a simple reason given and any spin trotted out by Coonan and her bunch of cunts will be vacuous nonsense banged out simply to deceive and fool the Australian public into thinking that the government is acting in their interest.

Pffft.

Hypocrisy

What an utter fucking disgrace the Liberal Government in this country is. Howard and Costello never shirk from demonising Muslims and demanding they conform to 'Australian Values'. Even though the proportion of Muslims that don't embrace the Australian mainstream are tiny in number.

When asked about the Exclusive Brethren sect, whose members aren't allowed to vote, do not allow their children to go to university and do not allow married women to work both Costello and Howard refused to criticise the weirdos. Yes, they are really part of the Australian 'mainstream' aren't they? Can you imagine the utter hoo ha there would be if this was an Islamic sect? Costello and Howard would be all over it like a cheap fucking suit.

No, of course they aren't racist or prejudiced they just think that white Christian fundamentalists are cool whilst brown Muslims fundamentalists are bad. Nothing racist in that at all. Can you hear that dog whistling?

The day that wanker Howard fucks off the better.

Latte Zero

After the wife made a less than complimentary remark about the quantity of grabbable fat I have round my middrift I have decided that it's time to take a stand and start taking drastic action to curb my increasingly large belly. Sacrifices have to be made.

From today it's low fat milk in coffee for me all the way. Not a big step I grant you but there's no way on Earth I could even countenance the idea of not having my daily chocolate bar or not having my weekly take away or reducing the quantity of beer I drink. So the only room I can see for a less gluttonous life is to reduce the amount of fat I have in my daily cappuccino.

Except there is a problem. And that's the name given by coffee places to their low fat offerings: the 'skinny' latte or 'skinny' cappuccino.

Now, I don't know what it is but I just can't think of that name without images of that skinny bitch Nicole Ritchie coming into my head or some vapid Californian bimbo ordering coffee in some god awful Beverley Hills cafe. It's just so...feminine. How many men do you know order 'Skinny' coffees? It just sounds wrong coming out of male lips. I meekly asked for a low fat cappuccino this morning as I couldn't bare saying the words.

Surely there are lots of men who need to lose a few kilos who'd like to order a coffee without sounding like a presenter of Queer Eye For the Straight Guy?

So I propose a new manly name for low fat coffee - Latte Zero. It worked with Coca Cola, who realised just how feminine Diet Coke was so bought out a butch version instead. Now is the time for the same thing to happen to coffee.

Blair

So the long goodbye has begun.

In my infinite geekiness I decided to stay up last night to watch some political history in action - Blair's last ever address to the Labour Party conference as its leader.

I thought the speech was superb. It was policy lite of course but this speech was always going to be about Blair thanking the party, reminding them of the massive achievements they've secured during the past ten years and warning them not to return to the infighting that kept Labour in opposition for so many years in the Eighties.

No one in the UK can come close to delivering that kind of performance and it reminded me once again what a tragedy it is that his decision to go to war in Iraq has effectively finished his premiership and cast a long dark shadow over his term in office.

However, putting that aside it was great to hear someone passionately articulate why the UK is a much better country now than it was in 1997. People think the advancements of the past 10 years have just happened. Well they haven't. Progressive initiatives and policies like tax credits, gay civil unions, peace in Northern Ireland, devolution to Scotland and Wales, a massive reduction of children living in poverty and an end to the NHS' Winter crises HAVEN'T just happened. They have happened because there has been a Labour government.

He is simply the finest politician of his generation and I wonder how much some Labour MPs and members will now regret their disgraceful behaviour of the past few weeks.

Puke

If you are about to eat then I would advise against reading this piece from the Washington Times as you may well puke straight afterwards. It's about how George Bush feels 'anguish' about the deaths of US soldiers.

I loathe the way all politicians of all parties use soldiers for party political purposes. They don't give a flying fuck about soldiers, they simply view them as cannon fodder to be used in their unnecessary, illegal, corrupt warmongering. George Bush couldn't give a damn whether 2,000 or 20,000 American troops get killed in Iraq - all he cares about is how the deaths will effect his polling figures. If he had any deceny they wouldn't be there in the first place.

Mark Latham astonishing post politics career continues on its downward path. Today he has written a piece in The Age to promote his new book, which is a compendium of quotes and insults. Choice quote:

One of the saddest things I have seen in my lifetime has been the decline in Australian male culture, the loss of our larrikin language and values. This has been squeezed out of society by a number of powerful influences: the crisis in male identity brought about by changes in the workplace and family unit; the rise of left-feminism in the 1970s and 1980s, with its sanitising impact on public culture; and, more recently, the prominence of neo-conservatism and its timid approach to social behaviour and language. Australian mates and good blokes have been replaced by nervous wrecks, metrosexual knobs and toss-bags. I saw so many of them in politics, from all states, parties and factions. It's the revenge of the nerds, John Howard-style.

Honestly, where to begin? This man stood for election in 2004 as the leader of the Labor Party. No wonder John Howard got voted back in with an increased majority.

Photos

Two photos took my interest on the web today. The first is of Madonna's brand new hair cut and very nice it is too:

The next photo is slightly more alarming. In order to commemorate her husband's death, Jake Kovco's wife has got a lovely tattoo of him slapped on her arm. Delightful.

A bit harsh to pick on a widow granted. But there is simply no excuse for such bad taste.

10 Most Hated Celebrities

The Age publishes a list of the top ten most hated celebrities on its 'Trash Talk' blog today. Two of my favourite gals were featured in the top ten, Britney and Paris. Boo!

To join in the fun here are mine:

1) Tom Cruise
2) Mel Gibson
3) Pete Doherty
4) Kevin Federline
5) Missy Higgins
6) Kelly Clarkson
7) Sandi Thom
8) H from Steps
9) Geri Halliwell
10) Jeremy Clarkson

Stupid people arging over whose imaginary friend is the best.

Unfortunately, I am not surprised in the slightest by the reaction in the Islamic world to Pope Benedict's speech on Friday in which he quoted some old dude saying that Mohammed was a wrong'un - yes, a slightly dumbed down version for sure. But not nearly as dumb as thousands of people protesting violently in the streets because someone dared to quote someone else saying something derogatory about their idol.

Hell, if someone said Madonna was the root of all evil I'd have a few choice words to say back to them but I wouldn't feel the need to burn effigies or murder a nun in retaliation. It is absolutely ridiculous that people cannot handle their imaginary friends being criticized or slandered. If their faith was so strong then surely words like those uttered by the Pope wouldn't bother them and surely they could handle a few insulting cartoons? It is absolutely pathetic, and dismaying, that this nonsense is still taking place in the year 2006.

A couple of things

The Age 'Daily Truth' blog has more on 'Australian Values'. Worth a read...

My UK readers will no doubt be more than familiar with the work of some fucking bird called Sandi Thom. She has only just hit these shores and I have to say her song 'I wish I was a punk rocker' is one of the most hideous, insipid pieces of shite I have heard since Simply Red released 'Fairground'. It's one of those tunes that in my head is up there with listening to someone scrape their nails down a blackboard or hard house.

Some stupid bint from Australian Idol sang it a few weeks ago and I honestly could not believe just how bad the tune was. It is now being played all the time on Australian radio and apparently it is or has been number one. God help us all.

ARRRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!

What a load of utter bollocks

And so the 'values' debate rumbles on in Australia. In a society that is largely at peace with itself it seems odd to me that the pollies are talking about it as if there are regular riots on the streets and the islamists are about to tear down the liberal institutions that make this country so 'great' and start raping all the women and stoning people to death for committing adultery.

Today when asked to define Australian values both the PM and Beazley nominated 'mateship' as one of them. Beazley actually went further than Howard and said that mateship is 'uniquely Australian.' Is he actually for real? Surely 'mateship' is one of the most common features of any society in any country in the world? I had loads of English friends in England - I called them 'mates', they called me 'mate'. Well fuck me, it seems that I was deluded the whole time and my friendships with them clearly had nothing on the friendships shared between people in Australia. What a load of absolute bollocks this is. It's good to have shared values but this is ridiculous - surely Australians should be over their identity crisis by now?

The Age blog has more.

Britney has a boy!

As I am sure you are all aware, Britney has had a baby boy.

All I could think about was how that once wonderful midrift of hers must be now destroyed by her selfish maternal instincts. I met a cat a few months ago who was once used for breeding and she had a very floppy belly which hung down and brushed along the floor whenever she walked anywhere. I then had the nightmare vision of Britney being afflicted with the same disfigurement. But then I realised in celebrity land they have plastic surgeons who remove all signs of pregnancy from their bodies.

Hurrah for plastic surgery!

Bored...

God, I have been very poor with my blogging lately haven't I? I think it's because I am so monumentally bored during the day that my enthusiasm for anything is disappearing more and more as each day passes.

Boredom is one of the most frustrating of all emotions. Your whole day turns into a pursuit of ANYTHING to do but because you are so unstimulated it actually reduces your motivation to do anything. The crushing thing is that this will last for about another 10 months before I can do anything about it.

Advice kids - Debt. It's not big (well actually, it's fucking ginormous in my case) and it's not clever.

Labor's woeful policies

Despite announcing a few policies this year that I championed, it is clear to me that the Labor Party stands as much chance of winning next year's federal election as I do of skipping back in time and assassinating Kevin Ferderline before he boned Britney.

The latest pledge from Labor is so poor, so populist and so badly thought out it should be an embarrassment to all those who thought of it. They propose that all visitors into Australia be made to sign a declaration in which they declare respect for Australian 'values' such as mateship, equal rights for women and the rule of law.

I have a problem with this policy for various reasons:

1) It won't stop terrorism. As if an Al Quedia operative, on his way to blow up the Opera House, is going to sign this statement at customs and then suddenly be full of love and respect for the Australian way of life - so much so that he abandons his plan to murder them.

2) It increases the 'us' and 'them' divide. It insinuates that foreigners don't and can't respect another country's laws and traditions when they visit them.

3) Will Labor politicians be willing to sign a similar declaration if they visited say, Saudi Arabia? I sure as hell wouldn't.

Everyone, yes even those dirty foreigners, knows that when you go to another country you shouldn't break the laws of that country. Is there any evidence to suggest that tourists coming into Australia are running around abusing women? Trying to inject Islam into Schools? Trying to destroy 'mateship'?

It's an absolute loads of bollocks. I am all for a greater emphasis on citizenship and a greater focus on the values and morals that bind us together as a society. But this pledge of Labor's is nothing but meaningless symbolism. If this is the best they have, they may as well give up now. Howard must be pissing himself.

Blair's forced exit

I remember walking down Whitehall on the morning of May 2nd 1997, it was a windy but sunny day and there was a feeling of joy and liberation in the air. Finally, finally, we'd got rid of those bastards and someone with compassion, with understanding, with decency, with integrity was about to move into Number 10. Even Tory voters didn't seem that bothered that the party they had been voting for in the last 20 years had been defeated. I strolled down to the gates of Downing Street and waved Tony Blair into his new home. Genuinely elated.

2001, Tony delivered again. Another landslide majority. Another thumping mandate from the British public for the Labour Party.

2005, a lot closer but still a 66 majority.

Blair is, by far, the most electorally successful Labour prime minister of all time. His parliamentary majorities in 1997 and 2001 were bigger than anything Thatcher ever achieved even when Labour were writing the 'longest suicide note in history' back in 1983.

For these reasons it seems perverse to me that his own party is now moving against him. Yesterday, junior minister Tom Watson and 7 parliamentary private Secretaries resigned and have forced Blair to prepare a timetable for his departure, which he announce later today. This is madness. Blair said before the last election that he would go during this term of office, everyone has understood that he will step down next year. Why was there a need to turn this seemingly orderly process into a bloodbath? Voters don't like divided, navel gazing parties. The PPSs that have resigned say that they fear a catastrophic result for Labour in next May's local elections if Blair doesn't go soon. But do they honestly think that the average voter will care? Seems to me that the real issues people will care about will be health, crime, education, immigration and the economy. They will know that Blair intended to go next year and will now punish the party for being too obsessed with itself and not concentrating enough on administering government policies.

I understand the calls for renewal, I understand the twitchiness of those MPs in marginal constituencies but this infighting was completely unnecessary. Those MPs who were elected in 2001, and who signed the letter asking Blair to go, should remember who put them there in the first place.

I've previously said Mr Blair's time is up and I think it is. But after all he has done for the party he should have been allowed a 'dignified' exit. The only people who will benefit from this are the Tories.