Posts by larryq
-
The fact that his pseudonym is a euphemism for bombastic makes it surprising that he was ever on the programme. He'll no doubt regard his non invite as a badge of honour. I prefer my politics to have at least a veneer of rationality, something that Bomber doesn't bother with. I love The Panel and will listen avidly to the likes of Brain Edwards for my dose of left wing urbanity.
-
I’m uncertain about how I fell about all of this. I would prefer a deal was done to have Tuhoe vest the National Park back to the Crown as per other agreements. I don't think Tuhoe are so different to other dispossessed groups to get a significantly different deal.
I get a very uneasy feeliing listening to Tamati Kruger on every media possible. What does he really want?
-
Mike Hosking had a most amazing rant this morning. Having interviewed his colleague in Chch, where there was much talk about the punch and how reasonable the judge had been, Hoskings then went on to read his pre-prepared statement about how stupid the anti-smacking law was. It's like he didn't even consider his own interview.
I agree wholeheartedly with your blog Russell. It's interesting that David Farrar has said nothing about the conviction yet. He's generally quick to comment when the argument's going Family First way, a client of his company. I guess he'll come out with a different slant than hard news?
-
I love living in Wellington but it's hard to disagree that the place is more deluded and self important that it could be. Kim Hill's programme is a reflection of this, especially since she got Mark Cubey on board as poducer. I guess that Kim Hill is a liberal, and no guessing is required about Cubey's left leaning views, but I don't really care. When I listen to the programme I filter what's said. It's a great programme. I'd rather listen to opinionated people because it's entertaining. What I don't like is the soporific Sunday Morning programme. It's needs some humour and energy. It's way too Wellington.
-
Very good summary of Radio NZ Russell. I agree with most of it. Kim Hill is supurb, but I preferred Chris Bourke. General comment - the station needs way more humour. Get Radar on for a couple of hours every morning, replace tired old Chris Laidlaw, he's had his day and hes banging on constantly about his hobby horses.
-
Eh!? You're saying there was no wedge politics in National's campaign last time? "Mainstream"? Iwi/Kiwi? Race-based policies? One law for all?
Come on Russell, do you expect elections to be lovey dovey. They are nasty, ego driven affairs, and we can both expect our liberal sensibilities to be hurt. We will all vote accordingly. But this stuff about thenats advisers is BS. Are the SST trying the balance out the Herald?
-
I'm not sure what the rest of your rant means.
Unclear, yes, a rant no. What I was trying to say was that the Sunday Star Times, and I think you to Russell, are attempting to say that because the National Party have employed Crosby/Textor (a company who have done one or two questionable things in the past), for the up coming campaign, then there is a high probability that Nationals election campaign will use some dodgy techniques in NZ this year. What all of this ignores is that National have used them for years, and the evidence of past NZ national party campaigns suggests that this will not happen. I would go further and suggest that National will lose votes if they try some John Howard style stunt. I reckon that the Brethren thing lost National votes last time. John Howard was desperate when he used the baby overboard lie, so on that basis we can expect Helen Clark to try some tricks.
I'm equally annoyed by David Farrar towing the party line and backing the very silly suggestion by Key that the recent Hagar emails had been obtained by someone hacking into the Parliamentary Services email system. It's pretty obvious an insider is being very sneaky.
-
I didn't find Jennifer Lees-Marshment the slightest bit insightful, more like stating the bleeding obvious. The left wing bloggers and fellow travellers such as Hagar & Laugeson take from the employment of the Tories Aussie advisers that they are going to go negative, but the fact that the party has used them for so long and not really done so surely indicates the exact opposite! I thought you were all trained journalists - please take off the blinkers and make some sort of effort at being objective. I don't blame Labour for attempting to blacken John Key, they've got nothing to lose, but I can't understand intelligent observers falling for such obviously desperate spin.
-
I think Bassett is a bit of a dick head to, but I'll be reading his book because he was there, done the research and has written other interesting books. This is an insiders book so you have to bear that in mind. It should be much more interesting than any other insider book because of the notes he took.
I know that he is a traitor to so many of you on the left, but don't you think an open mind would be a better position that just pathetic visceral
hatred. -
Have you read the book first Russell. I take it, given Bassett's well known political views, you have just assumed he's talking shite. Pathetic. In spite of what you think of him, Bassett has produced some pretty decent NZ political history (the Fraser book is first class), which makes him the opposite of Wishart. The thing about this book is that Bassett took detailed private notes throughout his time, which makes this book a must read (with a necessary level of skepticism given the fact that he was a participant). The interesting thing will be how many people who worked in the Beehive during the Lange years will be brave enough to back Bassett up on the Pope thesis. People I know who worked there find the suggestion that Pope was a defining influence on Lange as a given, not a thesis. Please attempt to be fair Russell.