September got off to a good start. Launching from the short-lived Border Farce, there was plenty of well-deserved ridicule and abuse of the Abbott government from the liberal media.

Tony Wright, national affairs editor of the Age, noted on 1 September, “Peter Dutton … has accused Fairfax Media of conducting a jihad against the current regime” – for reporting their stuff-ups.

Along similar lines, Mark Kenny, Fairfax Media’s chief political correspondent, on 4 September bemoaned the Abbott government’s inability to enter the same century as the rest of us regarding equal marriage rights (and a range of other policies) because of their “search of the praise of a withering rump of right-wing barrackers”.

But then the war (sorry, “jihad”) they were apparently waging against the government came to an abrupt end.

By 7 September, the second anniversary of Abbott’s election (and, incidentally, Threatened Species Day) it was Tony Wright who warned us, “Some days seem too easy for sideline commentators”. On 9 September, his admonition was, “Cynics might consider taking a rest day”.

Why? Because, in Wright’s words, “Tony Abbott grants 12,000 Syrians new lives”.

How easily satisfied these liberal commentators are.

Forget the paltry numbers. Forget prioritising Christians to pander to Islamophobia. Forget the 1500 refugees currently languishing in Australian detention centres. Forget the bombing of Syria announced at the same time. Hallelujah, Abbott “has acted as a prime minister”.

Along similar lines, Mark Kenny sings the praises of “Abbott in a new and unfamiliar role: that of Prime Minister of Australia”. And it was all done using “proper decision-making processes”. This is perhaps not so surprising when you notice that the nice Mr Kenny regards Labor’s recent embrace of turning back refugee boats as part of “a more compassionate policy overall”.

This says a lot about the weakness of the liberal media’s opposition to Abbott. Yes, they find his stuff ups cringeworthy. No doubt they see him as an embarrassment on the international stage most of the time. But when he doesn’t carry out his appalling policies in a totally cack-handed way, their opposition melts away.

In fact, they become his boosters. Just as they helped Abbott (and Shorten) to promote the idea that there was something humane, some concern for refugees’ lives, in turning back their boats, the same liberal commentators are now promoting Abbott’s pretence of caring about 12,000 “deserving” Syrians to ignore continued detention and torture of those already in Australia’s prison camps.

Much preferable are the arguments in the Guardian of John-Paul Sanggaran, a medical officer who worked at Christmas Island detention centre and organiser of the open letter against the Border Force Act. Sanggaran is an opponent of mandatory detention.

“The paltry offer of 12,000 places for Syrian refugees leaves me incredulous. Commentators praise the government … What a sad reflection of the state of affairs, especially when considered in conjunction with the eager rush to join a bombing campaign. All our draconian boats policy has succeeded in is having people drown in other oceans, conveniently out of sight.”