Losers giving money to losers noted

Good, too, to see that so much effort was put into the design of the ad, which featured about 90% empty space, fellas.

Still, blowing some money on an ad that will clearly have no effect on politicians, but satiate your anger that your think tank's attempt at bullying them into changing a law which the public were actually happy to keep  failed gives you some sense of satisfaction, I presume.   Not the type of satisfaction that people get from donating to a charity that actually helps the sick or the poor, or just anyone other than rich, male, white, bloviating media figures; but a kind of satisfaction nonetheless.

For an actual decent take on why the s.18C amendment went no where, see Gay Alcorn's column in The Guardian about it.  I liked the last bit in particular:

Bolt himself seemed to grasp at least in part that to have him at the centre of a battle for “freedom” was always fatal.

“To associate it with me meant so many people of the left thought that any law that could be used against me must be pretty good, and I think that’s poisoned the debate,” he told radio station 2GB.

Yes Andrew, it did poison the debate. But the “left” didn’t make it all about you. You did, and so did the government.