Williams please give Mark Webber a car that can last!

Following yet another frustrating retirement for Mark Webber while in a promising position in a Grand Prix, I offer the following:

Dear Frank Williams

I know you're a great Formula One 'stalwart' (if I may use such a term), but please, when will Mark Webber be given a car that is worthy of his potential?

Mark has proven, beyond doubt of many, that a successful car beneath him will lead him, inevitably, to a position atop the podium. Mark has led several laps of two GP's this past year. Firstly the Australian GP, where he retired whilst leading. Secondly, the Monaco GP, where he was leading before his first stop once Kimi and Fernando had pitted. Given a chance to do a few more laps on his then fuel load, may well have resurfaced from the stop in the lead. His third in Monaco last year shows he is capable of scoring points, even on the most difficult racetrack in the world.

I have been a Williams fan for some time, since the Nigel Mansell era. I've seen Coulthard, Hill, Senna, and Villeneuve all succeed in winning races and championships with your brilliant cars beneath them. And even before that, Nelson Piquet and Alan Jones took your cars to championships. Can we please add one more?

Sincerely

The Great White Hype


Insert tagline here...

Blindness has a name...

It is Matt Cecchin.

In the name of all things Blue I call you blind, Matt Cecchin! Your report that Danny Buderus had lashed out at a faceless Queenslander (they all look the same to me) for no reason nearly cost NSW the game in Origin I.

I'm glad Brett Finch saved you.

Bring on Origin II.

Insert tagline here...

Jim Anchower school of thought

Hola Amigos!

I know its been a long time since I rapped at ya, but I've been kinda bummed out with work and all.

Aside from the fact that the whole country's been going nuts with talkback of one kind or other, nothing has stood out enough to earn rage this past week.

Maybe next week we'll see some action.

Much love to Jim Anchower and Herbert Kornfeld.

Insert tagline here...

What is a police officers life worth?

Apparently, according to Chief Justice Jim Spigelman, if killed whilst doing their duty, as much as anyone else.

Read here.

I find this grossly unfair and offensive.

Police are the upholders of law in the community. To be killed whilst doing their job is a travesty that should not be taken lightly. Naturally, police acknowledge that they are targets for violence and hate, but none expect to be in the situation that David Carty and Glen McEnally were in.

David Carty: beaten to death outside a pub by a group of men, one of whom he'd reprimanded that day for offensive language.

Glen McEnally: shot whilst confronting a group of men in a stolen car.

Someone I know carried Glen McEnally's coffin.

Maybe His Honour is right, and compulsory sentencing is not the answer. How about this, Your Honour? Place offender in locked room with three of the officers work colleagues for thirty minutes. Fists, feet and fury may accomplish the rest.

You have nothing to fear from police if you are doing no wrong.

Insert tagline here...

Idiotic Scheme #3749

Why do people feel so enriched by assisting others to break the law?

Read.

I wonder what ethical conundrum this will bring if someone evades a breath test, then happens to hit a pedestrian or another vehicle and seriously injure or kill somebody? I'd like to see them stand up in court and say "Road Spy was my accomplice!"

Then see how fast they hide.

Insert tagline here...

The unwritten TV content warnings

The television ratings in Australia consist of written and verbal warnings before programs that contain the following subjects:

• Language
• Violence
• Sex
• Drug Use
• Other, including:
• Adult Themes
• Medical Procedures
• Supernatural Themes
• Horror
• Nudity

Fair that you should warn people when these things are coming up. But where is the warning for the more mundane, and potentially subversive subjects? Content such as:

• Religious Agendas
• Political Agendas
• Paid comments
• Paid product placement

Perhaps it is the stations who are free to view such issues as 'free speech' if they so desire, and decide to broadcast them or not. It's easy enough to tell if something is an infomercial parading as a legitimate broadcast, but what of the easily offended christians, catholics, anglicans, buddhists, and islamics who can so simply and easily be inflamed by religious comment that is at odds to their own, be it wrong or right? Or the staunch republican who sits seething silently in their home after seeing a political interview that covers items of monarchy and mother country? Or the pro-choicer that switches on their television to hear an anti-abortionist spouting their own views without equal rebuttal?

I'm glad I dont have a television at the moment.

Insert tagline here...

Interest rates go up

The RBA has raised rates 0.25%.

I'd love to be a real estate agent about now.

Insert tagline here...

Things to do before I die

A radio interview this morning regarding lists of things to do before you die got me thinking.

Mine is quite short.

1. Meet Winona Ryder
2. Meet Scarlett Johansson
3. Suggest possible tryst with myself and aforementioned ladies

Insert tagline here...

The Caltex Scab Grab

I filled my car with fuel yesterday. Not a task thats very out of the ordinary. Aside from the little sign I noticed at the pump whilst filling up. It stated that anyone paying with a credit card would be subject to a 1.50% surcharge on the cost. This rose to 3.0% depending on your card type.

What the hell? This from Caltex, a company that posted a 2005 RCOP of $414 million? They rake in a huge profit (2.2 cents per litre of fuel served in 2005) and feel compelled to pass on a minor charge such as this? Although, this is only at the Caltex franchises, and not the Caltex Woolworths stations. Doubtless they will bleat that they "absorbed the charge for the whole of last year before finally passing it to customers". Yet their profit rose by $64 million.

To be fair, Caltex gave their shareholders $84 million of this as dividends (31 cents per share). I guess the rest went to R&D. Although Caltex states that their Australian operation has "no crude oil or gas exploration or production interests". Maybe R&D stands for Rulers & Directors.

My information was gathered here.

I note that Caltex does not provide a 'customer feedback' section on their website, only a phone number. Nothing like a little venting from consumers to crash servers.

Insert tagline here...