<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Biased poll respondents on biased journalists</title>
	<atom:link href="http://andrewnorton.info/2007/08/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://andrewnorton.info/2007/08/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/</link>
	<description>Observations from Carlton's Lone Classical Liberal</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:40:51 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Paris Hilton Sex Tape Video 2 - Paris Hilton Exposed *HOT*</title>
		<link>http://andrewnorton.info/2007/08/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/#comment-8993</link>
		<dc:creator>Paris Hilton Sex Tape Video 2 - Paris Hilton Exposed *HOT*</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 18:01:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://andrewnorton.info/blog/2007/08/16/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/#comment-8993</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;naked paris hilton xxx sex tape video...&lt;/strong&gt;

Recently leaked footage of the new Paris Hilton sex tape...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>naked paris hilton xxx sex tape video&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>Recently leaked footage of the new Paris Hilton sex tape&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew</title>
		<link>http://andrewnorton.info/2007/08/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/#comment-8990</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 10:00:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://andrewnorton.info/blog/2007/08/16/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/#comment-8990</guid>
		<description>Hi Andrew,

I've started at blog at federalelection.com.au, a new site that will be dealing with election matters.  It's a non-partisan independant site.  I've linked to you and wonder if you might like to include me on your blog roll?

Cheers,

Matthew</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Andrew,</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve started at blog at federalelection.com.au, a new site that will be dealing with election matters.  It&#8217;s a non-partisan independant site.  I&#8217;ve linked to you and wonder if you might like to include me on your blog roll?</p>
<p>Cheers,</p>
<p>Matthew</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jaye Newland</title>
		<link>http://andrewnorton.info/2007/08/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/#comment-8987</link>
		<dc:creator>Jaye Newland</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Aug 2007 22:12:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://andrewnorton.info/blog/2007/08/16/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/#comment-8987</guid>
		<description>It is my personal opinion that left and right are only wedges, which blunt truthful conversation.
The ABC has been hijacked by Howard, the staff are only allowed to criticise the opposition, due to the  removal of their right to free speech. Phillip Adams is the only one with  courage to call Howard's bluff. Fear is a very strong weapon used in today,s climate, to manipulate and control staff who do not enjoy job security anyway.
Re: Russell's comment relating to cannabis and mental illness, are you  qualified to make any judgment?.  I would be interested to know.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is my personal opinion that left and right are only wedges, which blunt truthful conversation.<br />
The ABC has been hijacked by Howard, the staff are only allowed to criticise the opposition, due to the  removal of their right to free speech. Phillip Adams is the only one with  courage to call Howard&#8217;s bluff. Fear is a very strong weapon used in today,s climate, to manipulate and control staff who do not enjoy job security anyway.<br />
Re: Russell&#8217;s comment relating to cannabis and mental illness, are you  qualified to make any judgment?.  I would be interested to know.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Russell</title>
		<link>http://andrewnorton.info/2007/08/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/#comment-8985</link>
		<dc:creator>Russell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Aug 2007 12:37:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://andrewnorton.info/blog/2007/08/16/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/#comment-8985</guid>
		<description>That's true. I was probably doing what you warn of in your post (stereotyping) and thinking "That AN is right wing so what he's saying is .... "</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s true. I was probably doing what you warn of in your post (stereotyping) and thinking &#8220;That AN is right wing so what he&#8217;s saying is &#8230;. &#8220;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Norton</title>
		<link>http://andrewnorton.info/2007/08/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/#comment-8983</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Norton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Aug 2007 11:54:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://andrewnorton.info/blog/2007/08/16/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/#comment-8983</guid>
		<description>Russell - I have never in my life supported the criminalisation of any sexual activity between consenting adults, and in fact strongly oppose it; and while I would not automatically sign up to the libertarian view on recreational drugs I have, so far as I can recall, avoided the issue while being aware of what others advocate. In this case, I was neither supporting conservative positions nor playing devil's advocate. Many of my posts describe or analyse without advocacy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Russell - I have never in my life supported the criminalisation of any sexual activity between consenting adults, and in fact strongly oppose it; and while I would not automatically sign up to the libertarian view on recreational drugs I have, so far as I can recall, avoided the issue while being aware of what others advocate. In this case, I was neither supporting conservative positions nor playing devil&#8217;s advocate. Many of my posts describe or analyse without advocacy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Russell</title>
		<link>http://andrewnorton.info/2007/08/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/#comment-8984</link>
		<dc:creator>Russell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Aug 2007 09:50:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://andrewnorton.info/blog/2007/08/16/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/#comment-8984</guid>
		<description>Not quite Andrew ... you didn't write "conservatives would argue..." but "In fact it would be logical for a conservative to argue that prostitution ..."

and

"As the links between cannabis use and mental illness become clearer, I would think the conservative case against decriminalisation would become stronger"

So even though you then say "Just to be clear, I am not advocating conservative positions, just explaining ..." it seemed to me that you really were supporting the conservative positions. But maybe not, if you were just playing devil's advocate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not quite Andrew &#8230; you didn&#8217;t write &#8220;conservatives would argue&#8230;&#8221; but &#8220;In fact it would be logical for a conservative to argue that prostitution &#8230;&#8221;</p>
<p>and</p>
<p>&#8220;As the links between cannabis use and mental illness become clearer, I would think the conservative case against decriminalisation would become stronger&#8221;</p>
<p>So even though you then say &#8220;Just to be clear, I am not advocating conservative positions, just explaining &#8230;&#8221; it seemed to me that you really were supporting the conservative positions. But maybe not, if you were just playing devil&#8217;s advocate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Norton</title>
		<link>http://andrewnorton.info/2007/08/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/#comment-8982</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Norton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Aug 2007 22:23:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://andrewnorton.info/blog/2007/08/16/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/#comment-8982</guid>
		<description>Russell - refer to comment 14.

Ken - you were right.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Russell - refer to comment 14.</p>
<p>Ken - you were right.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Russell</title>
		<link>http://andrewnorton.info/2007/08/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/#comment-8986</link>
		<dc:creator>Russell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Aug 2007 12:12:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://andrewnorton.info/blog/2007/08/16/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/#comment-8986</guid>
		<description>"In fact it would be logical for a conservative to argue that prostitution should be illegal, to take temptation out of the way."
That same conservative logic that says making abortion illegal means that women won't have abortions? I retract my guess that most conservatives regard turning the clock back on abortion laws as a lost cause - I think most conservatives probably want the laws left as they are now, ie they've changed positions. Creatures like Tony Abbott surely aren't all that representative of conservatives.
Keeping prostitution illegal involves allowing the police to decide who will be prosecuted and who won't ... and we know where that leads.
"Criminalisation to them could be argued to set a moral standard or to signal society’s stance on an issue. It’s like the various apologies lefties favour, which will not necessarily have any practical effect."
That's an odd thing to argue - criminalisation has very practical consequences, one of the most self-defeating of which is to introduce your petty drug user to a much nastier type of criminal (if they go to jail). There are more constructive and cheaper ways for society to signal its stance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;In fact it would be logical for a conservative to argue that prostitution should be illegal, to take temptation out of the way.&#8221;<br />
That same conservative logic that says making abortion illegal means that women won&#8217;t have abortions? I retract my guess that most conservatives regard turning the clock back on abortion laws as a lost cause - I think most conservatives probably want the laws left as they are now, ie they&#8217;ve changed positions. Creatures like Tony Abbott surely aren&#8217;t all that representative of conservatives.<br />
Keeping prostitution illegal involves allowing the police to decide who will be prosecuted and who won&#8217;t &#8230; and we know where that leads.<br />
&#8220;Criminalisation to them could be argued to set a moral standard or to signal society’s stance on an issue. It’s like the various apologies lefties favour, which will not necessarily have any practical effect.&#8221;<br />
That&#8217;s an odd thing to argue - criminalisation has very practical consequences, one of the most self-defeating of which is to introduce your petty drug user to a much nastier type of criminal (if they go to jail). There are more constructive and cheaper ways for society to signal its stance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken Lovell</title>
		<link>http://andrewnorton.info/2007/08/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/#comment-8981</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken Lovell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Aug 2007 10:03:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://andrewnorton.info/blog/2007/08/16/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/#comment-8981</guid>
		<description>LOL Andrew you must know by now that for some people, explaining a point of view automatically means that you agree with it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>LOL Andrew you must know by now that for some people, explaining a point of view automatically means that you agree with it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Norton</title>
		<link>http://andrewnorton.info/2007/08/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/#comment-8971</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Norton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2007 06:55:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://andrewnorton.info/blog/2007/08/16/biased-poll-respondents-on-biased-journalists/#comment-8971</guid>
		<description>Just to be clear, I am not advocating conservative positions, just explaining what they could say and rating their political prospects.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just to be clear, I am not advocating conservative positions, just explaining what they could say and rating their political prospects.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
