Larry Pickering

[dan c]

Does anyone here know what ad hominem means? Seems not, you all revel in it.

Depends what you think is a fact, and what is an opinion.

Examining Larry's opinions based on his prior writings is perfectly legitimate.

 

[Ideo]

So you are not interested in finding out about your PM's very shady past?

Be an adult and get over your fear of the truth.

If you dislike Pickering so much, read what Michael Smith has to say. He is the exact opposite: Precise and never commits, or allow others to commit to rumours. He has no corporate backing [sacked on the PM's insistence], so if he is committing libel, why doesn't Julia have him closed down again?

You don't like the form or the messenger. Diddums.

News tried once to air this and were threatened with a senate inquiry into phone tapping and draconian media laws. They had to sack a journalist and apologise without cause.

Michael Smith was sacked from his radio station. He is an ex-copper and super-careful re the law and he has plenty of evidence. They both do.

Does anyone here know what ad hominem means? Seems not, you all revel in it.

I left Pascoe behind twenty years ago. He is a bitter old man who has not kept up.

Play the ball not the man.

The only possible offence against you, as an individual, is referring to some of the comments on the website as being from nutcases. But if you haven't made any nutty comments you are fine.

Criticising the language used by Pickering, or his prior financial dealings which are on public record is clearly sticking with the approach of critiquing the actions of the man. Not attacking posters because you disagree with them.