Was it only yesterday
Andrew Bolt had this to say.
”I have inside information
On Victoria’s conflagration!
A woman has been named
And she should be ashamed.
She was seen at that location
In a state of jubilation.
In a story just released.
I hear that the police
Have received damning affirmations
From a member of her congregation
Supported by their parson
That she’s confessed to him of arson.
There are growing expectations
Of more dramatic revelations
Which show the woman is a liar
And exactly how she lit that fire.
These are no idle speculations.
For even more elaborations,
With my very strong opinions on this case,
Just watch this space!”
Now there’s editorial comment
On that provocative content
“Because of threatened legal action
We publish now an interim retraction.
We will explain in good time why
There is this need to clarify.
That story from the congregation
Came from a private conversation
With a lady from that church.
It needs just a little more research.
We are innocent of defamation
And we are making no allegation
That the woman who seen was fat,
Or wearing an official looking braided hat.
Please trust Andrew’s honest motivation.
In our considered estimation,
Like us, he strives with all his skill to fight
For any cause he sees as Right.”
Kezza2, 26/11/11, Still catching up
Bemused, 26/11/11, One thing’s for sure. Newspapers were used, or involved somehow in fuelling the Victorian bush fire story, weren’t they?
Kezz2, 26/11/11, Oh, how very well done, PatriciaWA!
I’d already well and truly given up on Bolt prior to the 2009 Vic bushfires, so must have missed his crappery re Nixon. And most surprised to see an apology issued by News Ltd.
But how perfectly you have encapsulated the moment. Fantastic rhyming too.
I love words and am always amazed at the gift to make words that aren’t exactly the same sound as if they are when spoken aloud. If you get my drift. Congratulations.