Thursday, April 26, 2007

Hall, the True Englishman

Whilst on the subject of other blogs, there is one that really is unmissable.

Sir Iain Hall, notorious tsunami-pranker and fast-food employee, is also a proud Englishman.
This is most obvious from his superior command of the English language, evidenced in a headline such as "No Where near good enough".

Like a true Englishman, Iain loathes light beer, just as he loathes the ALP.
Sir Iain also advocates that homosexuals be denied access to medication.
Proclaiming a lack of English television programming available in Australia, Sir Iain is incensed over the special non-English programming on the Special Broadcasting Service.

And, most telling of all, he continues an old Etonian tradition of rhetorical questions, such as
What is it with the left? Are they all entirely mad?

Hats off.

UPDATE:
" Wow four links to my blog in one post and you misrepresent my position with every one. That must be some sort of record.
Can't you cut it arguing on the issues?
From the look of this post I think not." steams Iain.

I should clarify. He doesn't loathe light beer so much as he loathes urination without reward.

He only thinks some homosexuals should be denied access to medication.
I fail to see the logic here, since his position is also that the spread of HIV needs to be contained; does he think that someone denied medical treatment is less likely to want to infect other people?
There's also the ethical consideration involved in denying medical access to prisoners; it seems rather similar to capital punishment from the discourse of utility.

I also fail to see why a SPECIAL BROADCASTING SERVICE should be subject to the broad statistics of an entire demographic when it is aimed at a select demographic. I don't think it was ever the intention of SBS to cater to whining Poms, so he's constructed somewhat of a strawman here.

And I may be just a descendant of a convict, but I'm pretty sure 'nowhere' is not usually written as "No Where".

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Wow four links to my blog in one post and you misrepresent my position with every one. That must be some sort of record.
Can't you cut it arguing on the issues?
From the look of this post I think not.