Hard News: Back in the mainstream
140 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
@julian. apparently one of vanstone's favourite japes, upon arriving at the office was to pick a junior staff member an watch them squirm as she asked, "what can you do to make me look good today?"
Hum... would I choose to work for Vanstone or or these arrogant and paranoid creeps?
-
is that a trick question?
-
Political blandness seems to be a growing trend. I don't know if it's a good thing. Seems to be a gradual consequence of the professionalism that is slowly taking over politics, that you get leaders who have all the animation of someone working at their computer.
On one hand it seems like a good thing, perhaps it's saying that politics is a dull professional job being handled by dull professionals in a dull professional way.
On the other it seems dangerous in a democracy when people start to feel that making choices about the direction of their own society is something which is a professional job and everyone else who has anything to say is just an irrelevant hack, a witch doctor, or a trouble maker.
Also, if it really is boring, then it seems unlikely to attract talented people. Again, not sure if that's a bad thing.
-
Also, if it really is boring, then it seems unlikely to attract talented people. Again, not sure if that's a bad thing.
Like all the untalented accountants and auditors and clerical workers and computer programmers and <insert subjectively boring job here>...
-
is that a trick question?
Not really: I've worked with my share of charmless egomaniacs, and maipulative, paranoid rat bastards. While the preferable option is 'none of the above'. if I had to make up my mind Vanstone seems a much better option than the cesspool that appears to be the Environment Minister nowadays.
Political blandness seems to be a growing trend. I don't know if it's a good thing.
Yeah, I go back and forth on that myself. I guess it all depends on what you mean by 'blandness' - on one level, I firmly believe that in politics as in life, when you try to be all things to all people, you ultimately end up meaning nothing to nobody. But there's a happy medium where holding a firm point of view doesn't mean you're closed to the possibility that you're wrong, or the 'other side' might just have a point.
I also utterly reject the idea that poitics is a 'trade' or a 'profession'; because that just turns politicians into a secular priesthood, and the rest of us are unfit to approach the altar. Not so sure a representative democracy can really work like that, and it's sure not healthy when we have MPs whose (to use some ghastly psychobabble) life experience is limited to scaling the greasy pole. No disrespect intended to folks like Simon Upton or Darren Hughes, but isn't there something a little sad about folks who enter Parliament in their 20's and don't seem to have had any other passion or experience in their lives that getting into politics?
-
Like all the untalented accountants and auditors and clerical workers and computer programmers and <insert subjectively boring job here>...
Is being the Prime Minister like being an accountant/auditor/clerical worker/computer programmer? If so, then it's not a problem. But that is my question. People who master the use of a small domain (or even fail to master it but try) are the best people to ask about that domain. But when the domain is having enormous power and control over the lives of an entire nation of people? Is that something 'well understood' like accounting? Is it something where you could demonstrate your knowledge in a simple unambiguous test?
I don't claim to know the answer to that question, but at this point I don't think so. I think it's a different kind of job.
Or are you saying that something being boring is no guarantee of it failing to attract talent? If so, agreed. That point was not well thought out.
-
it's sure not healthy when we have MPs whose (to use some ghastly psychobabble) life experience is limited to scaling the greasy pole.
Yes, I feel similarly nervous. It seems to me that 'scaling the greasy pole' could really be the narrow domain in which these people achieve mastery, and it's hard to see how that is really a credible claim to having ultimate power, and the best interests of the nation at heart.
OTOH, what other method would work better? I don't have any answer to that. Years in system building have shown me that you can never engineer systems that stop people with bad intentions doing bad stuff. Especially if the engineers were the bad people. Also, if there are mostly good intentions, then even bad systems can work quite well in practice. That's part of the reason I don't think NZ's failing to have a constitution is that serious. It seems to me that a constitution is no real protection from bad people in power, nor is failing to have one any guarantee that power will be abused.
-
My point was that it takes all sorts: I can't imagine anyone wanting to make a profession out of being an accountant, to me it looks like the most deadly boring job imaginable. But there's all sorts of people out there doing it, even some relatives of mine. Some people take a perverse kind of pleasure in getting huge columns of numbers to add up.
I feel similarly about being Prime Minister, it also ain't a job I'd covet.I think its fairly obvious that there's no tried and true way of being an ideal PM, or even necessarily a competant one - too many variables I suppose. That doesn't mean you can't look over someone's CV and take a crack at saying whether they have the experience and credentials to have a go at the job. I'd also guess that you could come up with a set of KPIs for the job and hold an annual performace review to assess how the incumbent is doing at acheiving them.
-
Agreed. I also find overly keen young politicians a little repugnant and here was I thinking that was just me.
-
I'd also guess that you could come up with a set of KPIs for the job and hold an annual performace review to assess how the incumbent is doing at acheiving them.
If they're anything like the KPIs that I've had to put up with over the years they're more likely to fuck the country over than anything else. That would just beg for statistics to get fiddled with on a massive scale.
As you say, there's no formula for the right leader. But I think democracy has one good thing going for it - it is capable of dealing peacefully with people who are clearly the wrong leader.
-
But I think democracy has one good thing going for it - it is capable of dealing peacefully with people who are clearly the wrong leader.
It won't happen overnight, but it will happen... Howard, Bush, et al.
-
Yes, although I guess you could argue in those cases that people do still get killed by failures of the system to act a bit quicker.
-
It won't happen overnight, but it will happen... Howard, Bush, et al.
Bush will only be out because of term limits. Under US law you can only be President for two four year terms. Which is why they've ended up with Dynastic Politics. Bush I begat Bush II, Clinton I begets Clinton II. The only upside is that Bush II has well and truly stuffed it up for Bush III (Jeb), and Clinton III (Chelsea) surely can't/won't be old enough for a serious bid? Surely?
-
If Hilary gets 2 terms, then they're out for another 2 terms, she'll be well old enough. I wouldn't write off Jeb just yet either, wait and see what Hilary does. I'd be surprised if she can get them out of Iraq. Then Jeb can stand up and say he's going to finally finish what his Dad started, and his brother escalated. By then Iran's nuclear threat may actually be credible, so the panic buttons will probably be going again. Don't forget Jenna and Barbara for the continuance of the Bush Dynasty after Chelsea wins in 2024. By 2030 they'll be plenty old enough too.
-
Mark,
There seems to be a few comments about Howard's appearance ('rodent", "small"). Does that mean that Public Address is now willing to accept comments about Clark's appearance? It's just that I've got a few choice ones and I need to know.
-
God if this is the direction it takes it'll end up being like the contest between Maccas and Burger King. Worse, the Republican and Democrats brands pushed back even further in preference for Big Mac and the Whopper (I'm unequivocal in my preference for the Whopper).
I've thought that the reason for the relatively colourless pollies is that we don't actually want them too much in our lives anymore? I think Rudd and others understand this well enough to limit their claims or influence on our lives.
-
The Whopper is definitely the far superior burger.
-
No one has any love for the Wendy's Deluxe Cheeseburger?
-
You'd have to live somewhere in cooee of a Wendy's to be able to develop an opinion.
-
There seems to be a few comments about Howard's appearance ('rodent", "small").
Heh - despite what you may have thought, the oft used 'rodent' moniker does not refer to the mans appearance, but his track-record of political behaviour. Stemming from widely held observations of sheer bastardry and 'rat-cunning'.
-
if i remember right, the 'rodent' moniker was actually coined by someone afiliated with the liberal party.
there was some kerfuffle a few years back about howard's lying ways, and someone (i genuinely forget who) referred to him as "a lying rodent".
caused quite a chuckle at the tibby household, let me tell you.
-
Heh - despite what you may have thought, the oft used 'rodent' moniker does not refer to the mans appearance, but his track-record of political behaviour. Stemming from widely held observations of sheer bastardry and 'rat-cunning'.
<crassness> Or rodent as in "rat-fuck"? One of my favourite Australianisms is "rat-fuck" used to denote a betrayal as in "Et tu Brutus, you rat-fuck" or "Cossie was rat-fucked by the rodent"? </crassness>
-
Actually, during the early years of his prime mnistership, John Howard was frequently called Mr Magoo. There definitely was a physical resemblance but Howard for all his faults proved to be less than absent minded and much shrewder than his cartoon counterpart.
BTW - This in the SMH from Rudd: "We will say sorry."
KEVIN Rudd has vowed to act quickly after he is sworn in as prime minister to make a formal apology to Aboriginal Australians on behalf of the nation.
At last!
-
that should be "less absent minded".
-
^^^^Indeed!
Post your response…
This topic is closed.