Posts by Damian Christie
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Cracker: Spotted, in reply to DCBCauchi,
everyone has something of value to contribute. If you let them.
I'm pretty sure Winston has had more than his fair share of taxpayer funded opportunities to contribute. About 30 years worth of opportunities, give or take. And what is his legacy? Free Burger King fries and ferry rides for the oldies.
I want my money back.
-
I just realised I find it very hard to find any difference between someone sticking up for Winston Peters, and trolling.
-
He speaks for the old because he knows they're the most likely to go for his racist populism and matinee idol looks. He goes for racist populism because it's the easiest way to get votes, from said old people.
And yes, I've spoken to the man face to face on many occasions. On one such occasion I interviewed him and questioned his statement, in Parliament that week, that "half the refugees coming into this country have AIDS, and that's a fact". It wasn't anything close to a fact, of course, it was completely untrue, but it got traction.
"I never said that", he said.
"Yes you did", I said, and played him the tape of said statement. That should be that, I thought.
What followed was 15 minutes of wasted time, denials, arguments about grammar and so forth, all because the guy is a lying prick, and a complete waste of space.
-
@DCBC - I disagree with most of what you say. I've had to deal with Winston many a time over the years. Try and ask him a straight question, he'll dodge it. Ask him why he said what he said, he'll deny saying it. Show him the quote, he'll say it wasn't him. etc ad naseum. The media ain't perfect, that's for sure, but the guy's an arsehole who learnt everything about media relations from his mentor Rob Muldoon.
Sure, some unimaginative members of the press might miss having him and his time-wasting antics around, but this member don't need him, not one bit.
-
And grand coalition? Never. Entrenched hatred - even I'm surprised talking to MP friends from both sides how much they loathe the opposition. Some more than others of course, but it'd never work. And I think those who voted for either side would somehow feel cheated...
Right, that's me out. Baby to attend to. Soon.
-
@Islander - I don't know if you've ever seen my show 'Hindsight' (it's on demand, if you do such things down there), I did an episode about Pest Control and discussed how stoats etc were brought in to get rid of rabbits, and likened it to the old lady who swallowed the fly. I then played a clip I discovered from the 70s, where they were talking about introducing into the wild, I kid you not, the Mountain Lion, to help with the deer problem. Check it out if you're interested:
http://tvnz.co.nz/hindsight/s2-e9-video-4374281
At the hospital now by the way. Things are progressing slowly.
-
I'm sorry, was I not sufficiently facetious in suggesting we sell off the kakapo to Messers Fay & Richwhite etc?
My point, in case people did genuinely miss it, was that list of issues people found important don't necessarily point to a voting preference, it's their solutions to those issues that matter.
Surely many Nat/Labour/Green/Act voters alike care about high petrol prices, the cost of fruit and veges, even people in poverty. But the Nats supporters would say we need to build the economy, that'll help the poor. The Act voters would say give the rich more money and watch it trickle down, that'll help the poor (and somehow still genuinely believe it). Hone would say how bout we feed the kids, that'll help the poor..., and so on.
-
Cracker: On the trail, pt 1., in reply to George Darroch,
voters ranked their first five issues; environment, food prices, schools (2nd equal), hospital care, petrol prices, and people in poverty. These are all issues which the Greens and Labour absolutely own
Well... that depends on what people think the answers to those issues are, doesn't it? Arguably (very arguably), I could put the environment first, but think the best thing we could do it privatise the whole damn thing so the people take better care of the kakapo they just bought.
Less arguably, a lot of parents might (and probably do) agree with National Standards, and therefore not Labour's opposition to them. Petrol prices, well, which party wants to ramp up the ETS etc...
I'm not saying I disagree, but just pointing out that people could theoretically care about most of those things and still happily vote National. And many (at least a plurality) will.
-
Cracker: Spotted, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
Won’t stop the media’s “get a room and fuck already” bad bromance with Peters
Actually from what I've seen, I think all Mr Peters' years of hating out at the media have finally come home to roost. He's been denied entry to the two minor leaders' debates on TVNZ because NZF doesn't meet the criteria. And no, that criteria is not "Party must not be led by a fucktard douche", but it's close enough. Point is, I don't see anyone hurrying to bend the rules for him.
-
Cracker: On the trail, pt 1., in reply to Patrick Reynolds,
Interesting you say this Patrick, I was asked by my hairdresser this morning what I thought would happen. And thinking somewhat on the spot, I came to the same conclusion. Nats won't get over 50%, they never do, and unless the Greens give them confidence and supply, which is - in their own words - highly unlikely (and likely to destroy the Greens forever if they did), I don't quite know what might happen.
Arguably Maori/Mana/United/Greens could go with Labour, whatever that would mean.
I've spoken to a few commentators about Auckland Central, if I were giving odds I'd say its more likely to stay with the incumbent. And I agree about Epsom, unless Key tells them to do otherwise.