Wednesday, August 30, 2017

Good


10 comments:

  1. Why is that.

    It is good for nine. Uhlmann is high quality

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well, it's not that I think he shouldn't have a job as a journo. It's just that he was sullying the Left-ish purity of the ABC. :)

    I have explained many times: he was always a soft interview for Abbott, but in any event I think he is pretty dull as an interviewer or commentator. And, I do not trust him on climate change. I think he still carries a smug attitude of false balance on the topic.

    ReplyDelete
  3. so he isn't perfect. so what Overall he iso ne of the best. It is a great coup for Nine

    ReplyDelete
  4. I rarely watch Nine. Look, he continues to make a quid, keep his Canberra connections and is seen less by me and lots of other sensible people who get most of their news from the ABC or SBS. It is a good outcome.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous9:31 am

    Paxton,

    How the hell would you know what quality is after the Skanke Ho embarrassment.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The embarrassment was on your part in not knowing how the Urban dictionary works.
    obviously people were wondering how you could even spell the words!

    ReplyDelete
  7. still blaming it on urban dictionary Homer?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous5:51 pm

    LOl.. The urban dictionary made him do it. His dimness isn't responsible, it was the Urban Dictionary.

    Stepford, if you're complaining about Catallaxy commenters, it's more than hypocritical of you to be keeping Paxton here. Ban him before it's too late.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Why would I ban him?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Because he's a total idiot.

    ReplyDelete