Hard News: Dirty Politics
2403 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 17 18 19 20 21 … 97 Newer→ Last
-
Andre Alessi, in reply to
Oh, I don’t doubt that he does enjoy it, but not in a particularly pathological way. He wouldn’t complain about criticism as much as he does if he was genuinely ill (which is an allegation I see tossed around regularly.) Getting attention is definitely a significant part of what he believes he’s doing.
My point was rather A) there’s nothing inherent in his politics that necessitates his behaviour (or vice versa), and B) there’s no reason to assume genuine mental illness as an explanation for his behaviour when his actions are viewed as a means to an end, even if he happens to enjoy distasteful elements of what he does. (That doesn’t mean I approve of his actions or think they’re justified in any way, just that I don’t think writing his behaviour off in those ways is particularly helpful.)
-
william blake, in reply to
There was a bio of Slater in the Listener some whole ago where he talked about his mental health and his diagnosis. It may go someway to explain some of his excesses and certainly raises questions of exploitation by his powerful friends.
-
SteveH, in reply to
Fuck. That’s a traincrash of an interview. What the hell prompted Slater to be part of it? Seems that Gower’s worm has turned somewhat.
What is it about the Right that triggers amnesia? I see Slater has also caught it.
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
Coming from the National right being personally responsible for your own actions is a big part of the ethos, Slater had better get with the program and stop tryin to blame others for hos own mistakes
What? I'm sorry, Paul, but can we just stipulate that death threats just aren't acceptable and leave it there? Of course it's as absurd as it is distasteful to try holding anyone but the perpetrators responsible, but Slater deserves that baseline courtesy as much as Hager.
-
Alfie, in reply to
Here's a profile of him from a few years back: http://www.stuff.co.nz/sunday-star-times/features/2583835/Internet-warrior.</q>
There's a good quote from Russell in that story.
"Says left-leaning journalist and blogger Russell Brown: "He strikes me as an arrested adolescent. I think he's got a real problem with women. Given the apparent degree of his role within the National Party, I wonder if at some point they should be called on that. I don't respect him at all, frankly."
Bingo! I think they've been well and truly called.
-
nzlemming, in reply to
Seems that Gower’s worm has turned somewhat.
Just watched the first couple of minutes again. Gower's body language is fascinating. As was Slater's, later on. I think he was expecting a softball "poor you" interview.
-
-
Paul Campbell, in reply to
What? I’m sorry, Paul, but can we just stipulate that death threats just aren’t acceptable and leave it there? Of course it’s as absurd as it is distasteful to try holding anyone but the perpetrators responsible, but Slater deserves that baseline courtesy as much as Hager
Oh I completely agree - death threats are wrong, always - but I'm talking here about blaming people for inciting them, not the threats themselves.
If Slater's going to blame Hager for 3rd party death threats because he thinks that somehow Hager has incited them he really needs to realise that people are angry at him (Slater) because of his behaviour, not because Hager has pointed out his behaviour - he needs to own the consequences of what he has done, not try and blame others
-
John Armstrong:
Key, meanwhile, is placing himself at considerable risk. It only requires someone connected with one of the incidents in the book to dispute and disprove the Prime Minister's assertion that it all has "nothing to do with National" for Key to be in serious trouble credibility wise.
David Cunliffe: like this? The Labour Party has released documents it says proves its website was hacked by people working for the National Party. (earlier this afternoon)
-
Quite frankly I don't understand the time and energy being wasted on Slater. There are no complex issues motivating him that require de-constructing, interpreting or analysing.
I reckon he is a selfish man who was once a selfish boy. Greed is his only motivation - as evidenced by his charges in the thousands of dollars for merely attaching his nym to piece someone else has written.
e.g. Money comes from a coalition of drug pushers interested in getting more kiwis hooked on nicotine - at least until they die of emphysema coughing out their lungs - hence the need to keep recruiting young Kiwis at the front into the addiction to cover losses due to attrition in older addicts, gotta keep the brand viable eh?.
"No worries", says the slug that'll be about six n a half grand a month".Or some other multinational with the ethics of a diseased tapeworm (see murder of coca-cola workers by Latin American hits squads back in the 90's. Those scum had the gall to ask for sufficient wage to put food on the family table - natch they had to die) forms a consortium of like minded greed heads to oppose restrictions on the sale of obesity inducing no-nutritional sugar water to children. Cam is there ready to help - with his hand outstretched of course. Some may say the slug wanted to help the coca-cola gang because he needs everyone else to look like a slob too & that way he won't have so much competition to 'pull the gash' but I don't believe that - I reckon he did it because there was an earner in it and scruples don't fill up the bank account.
Simple stuff by a simple mind unable to comprehend the complexities of leading a fulfilling existence. -
Not that it means much, but I've just unfriended Farrar on Facebook and Twitter. Being able to keep an eye on what he's up to is no longer worth inflating his "friends" numbers. Not that he'll care, but it makes me feel marginally better.
-
Teh lulz, they keep a-comin'...
-
Both TV One and Three seemed very muted on this tonight. Key critisising Cunliffe for not being positive being the gist of TV One and Cam Slater complaining of Death Threats the headline on Three. All about the reaction rather than the actual substance of the allegations themselves. A good result for National I would have thought. Is there any hope Sunday papers might.take a different perspective tomorrow?
-
Mark Easterbrook, in reply to
Bwahahahahaha!
Aaron Gilmore on the revenge trail? Now THAT would be some kind of weird poetic justice.
-
tim,
Someone posted this on FB - its from 2010 but I wonder if it provides some context for Slaters behaviour
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10648347
comments from his wife:
In response, Atkins wrote: "I do not have the power to stop him. It is because he is clinically depressed that he says and does out-there things. He was nothing like this before he became ill.
"He shoots from the hip with no thought of the consequences for himself for others or indeed his family. The very fact that he says hurtful things that show a total lack of empathy is the evidence that he is seriously ill.
"He watches me cry my eyes out again and again and it moves him not one iota. You want me to be upset that he has hurt others? I am too busy dealing with his lack of empathy towards me."
:/
-
It is because he is clinically depressed
I really question that diagnosis.
-
In the interest of fairness and valance, just as the media refer to the alleged claims of Nicky Hager, so then we should refer to the alleged death threats against Cameron Slater.
-
Alfie, in reply to
It is because he is clinically depressed
I really question that diagnosis.Perhaps "odious slug" would be more accurate?
-
stephen clover, in reply to
I can't locate that in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
I can't locate that in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.
Narcissism isn't so much a mental illness as it is an acute character flaw. Like say, greed or arrogance.
-
izogi, in reply to
I really question that diagnosis.
It shouldn’t really be relevant in any case. Cameron Slater might have issues, or he might just be a jerk. Those people exist in all colours and plenty of them post crap on the internet.
The critical stuff that’s come out of this book is that the alleged behaviour of government ministers, parliamentary staff and others in power, in their choices to secretly collude with and support this guy, giving him access to the top levels of government, is both unprofessional and disgusting. Especially considering what’s been known for a long time about who he is, what he’s likely to do, and what sorts of consequences might result.
If “everyone does it”, as the apologists are saying, then it sounds like a perfectly good motivation to fix the system so they can’t, instead of just using the excuse to justify the behaviour as if it should be acceptable from anyone. With that in mind, I’d like to hear some positive things about what policies all parties have towards doing this.
-
Can we leave the psychiatry to professionals please? As someone who does have an at times debilitating mental illness, I find the jokes rather less than funny.
-
Mike Graham, in reply to
+1 - Well said izogi
-
Sorry if I offended you Kracklite. My "odious slug" comment was not intended to be a psychiatric term - just my opinion of Slater.
-
Kracklite, in reply to
Fine.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.