old man emu

Jobs for the boys. No security checks, just campaign contribution cheques.

No. To qualify the misuse would have to be for humerus effect.

There's an accountant for that.

And OME has been caught by the Grammar Police red handed in a spelling violation. "Insolvable" is the correct word. Def'n: If a problem, difficulty, or mystery is insolvable, it is not possible to find a solution to it or the cause of it. :

I didn't realise that the Jesus bolt was an actual thing. I thought it was simply a general term for something that if it failed, Jesus Christ!

My sister just got scammed in the purchase of hay for her horses. Went onto a website that claimed the feed was good for curing founder (a condition of the hooves resulting from too rich a diet). She paid the money and even spoke to someone about delivery. When it didn't come she phoned back and got all sort of runarounds. Luckily she was only buying a few bales, but the loss was pretty hard on a pensioner. She contacted her bank to report it, but didn't get any satisfaction. I think that she also contacted the police, but it would go into the insoluble cases file.

That's where the Asians have it over us. Their cultures see the benefit of working for the benefit of their descendants. This week the ALP did show a bit of the backbone that we would like to see. In the UN, Australia turned awau from the USA and its rulers, the Isrealis, and voted for Palistinian soveriegnty. That's something the lap dog LNP would not do. The Yanks will probably make something of the way Australia voted, but probably not much, as they probably think they have us under their thumb. It's about time the Auusie larriknism shone through and we told the Yanks what drongos they are. We should tell them that we are sick of their pushing their debased culture onto us. They have never done anything to really benefit Australia. They simply see Australia as a base for their military operations.

The "Cost of Living Crisis" thing, while I don't deny it's being a fact, has become a football in the political games within many countries' borders. Those who we call The Opposition in governments are blaming the mob in Government for fumbling in the goal mouth. The truth is that it is not within the ability of any government to effectively control the marketplace where the crisi is playing out. The lawmakers don't even have the ability to control interest rates. This applies not only to Australia, but everywhere. Look at the factors causing the crisis. The world is still recovering from the effects of COVID. International maritime transport is being stalled by environmental effect as in the drying of the Panama Canal, or by militant action around the Suez Canal and Persian Gulf. Then we have the various wars that prevent trade. Dutton and Co can try to blame Albo and his mob for what is happening in order to sway the voting public into replacing the government, but from Day 1 Dutton will be faced with the exact same conditions and the same hopelessness to fix it. Keep your eye on what happens in the USA over the next three months. Trump's first term was cursed by COVID. His second will be marked by a collapse of the world economy, and he can't be wholly blamed for that. I'm not being pessimistic. I hope for my kids' sake I am wrong, but if you see storm clouds on the horizon, and the wind is blowing from their direction, one should make sure one has a raincoat handy.

That is a hard fact for those born before 1970 to come to terms with. But a fact it is. Sure, we seem to have lost the Bronzed ANZAC image, but the Nation hasn't disintegrated.

The rats are deserting the sinking ship.

Was that conclusion obtained from the results of a Gallup poll?

I need martial music to get myself moving.

Which variety? Unfortunately I can only get ABC on my radio. It's either ABC Classical of ABC RN or ABC Local. The latter two are all talk, usually about uninteresting topics.

How about truth in journalism to hobble Murdoch? I am reading a story about the Australian Light Horse in WWI. There was a reference to Keith Murdoch, comparing him the Charles Bean, the appointed war historian. The refrence simply said that Murdoch was not interested in reporting the actions, but was seeking power by sidling up to the Prime Minister and Ministers.

I wonder how long it will be before the MAGA mob realises that it has been conned big time and turns its anger on Trump and his mates.

I have my radio tuned to ABC Classical mainly for background noise, but the presenters don't talk crap when they speak. Unfortunately, their playlist seems to concentrate on the Baroque period when stringed instruments ruled and wind instruments were not as developed or varied as they are now. I really dislike the screechiness of stringed instruments, including the harpsichord and piano. I also dislike choral music and opera. What's the point of people singing if you can't understand the language or the pitch is too high for your aged ears? As for sopranos, I always think that they have just been given a prod in the bum with the tip of the Third Spear Carrier from the Left's spear.

I was created by a splinter group of car designers.

Stood down due to being caught intoxicated by a variety of recreational substances.

I'm not a person who understands the meaning of Installation Art, if that was what it was, but after having read the title of the work, I actually got a message from it. Two mates, out on the piss and one has passed out. It's a memory of the "good times" they had together, and how those good times ended up. I think that works such as these really need a title or explanatory note so that viewers can understand what the artist is trying to communicate.

The other TV production from around that time was My Brother, Jack. The book, by writer George Johnston, was serialised for ABC in 1965 by Charmian Clift, who was Johnston's wife. It featured actors Ed Devereaux, Nick Tate and Richard Meikle. The only scene I remember from You Can't See Around Corners has Shorter and Rowena Wallace having a bit of a snog in a park or similar and his hand going up under her skirt. So much for the portrayal of Aussie literature to impressionable teenage boys.

At the relative speed the bike was travelling, it is quite possible that it was not in the sight of the driver of the lane-changer, possibly obscured by the car from which the video was being taken. When enforcing the law you have to take into account all the circumstances and apply common sense. It can't be Justice if one acts like an AI powered machine.

A few days ago I watched a video listed things like being a convicted felon, a bankrupt etc as being bars to holding the office of President, but I can't find it in my History. The ironic thing was that the person reading the list was from Trump's party, but I think the content was made may years ago

Didn't they decide that such absolution only applied to acts done or not done that related to the actual functions of the presidency, and that the hush money matter was a function of a private citizen, even though it sought to affect the outcome of an election?

One wonders where the expertise lies in either the Senate or Congress. Say what you will about our pollies, but at least they learn them jobs and play as a team.

It is not apparent from the video at what speed the 4-wheeled vehicles were travelling. All one can say is that the bike was travelling appreciably faster. What I saw was that the vehicle in front of the vehicle the bike ran into had its brake lights on, and that the lane ahead was not clear. From that, I deduce that the bike rider had not read the situation in the lane. The bike rider clearly saw the indicator of the car changing lanes and the bike rider altered course to avoid a collision with it. With attention focused on that manoeuvre, the bike rider failed to see the situation in the lane he moved into. It's hard to decide on the offence the rider committed. "Driving at a speed dangerous to the public" might be stretching it in these circumstances since the "public" were at low risk from a collision with the bike. "Travel too close to avoid a collision" doesn't seem to fit because the essence of that offence involves travelling close over an appreciable difference. I know I'd be having a blue with my Traffic Sergeant, but honestly, I'd be telling the bike rider he was an f-wit and to sort things out with the other bloke's insurance company. But then, I used my common sense when deciding whether to prosecute or not. I feel that if I had put this before a Court, it would have been dismissed.