Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: That Buzzing Sound

757 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 16 17 18 19 20 31 Newer→ Last

  • ScottY,

    Man, is there some kind of sinister Dancing with the Stars conspiracy afoot in this country, or what?

    And Jason Gunn's the ringleader. Call the militia out! Democracy is under attack!

    West • Since Feb 2009 • 794 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    Well, Scotty, I've heard some very tasty gossip about the circumstances of Trevor Mallard's divorce -- you know, the guy who (somewhat hypocritically) thought Don Brash's alleged sex-capades were a matter of public interest.

    When people discussed the issue of Brash's privacy at the time, the point was often (and correctly) made that he hadn't personally tub-thumped on "family values".

    When you've spent the past few years professionally attracting the attention of the media with hardline messages about fidelity and family values and how, in her boss's words, we don't "have the right as adults to pursue any relationships we like" -- and when you've made a point of casting aspersions on other people -- I think you you have a bit less of a case if the media then runs a story about your affair with your friend's husband.

    Scott may be right that both papers went too far, but my sympathy is limited in the same way it would be for the public homophobe who is caught seeing rent boys.

    I realise that's probably not a popular view on the thread, and it may not even be a reasonable one, but it's my honest opinion about it.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22850 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso,

    I realise that's probably not a popular view on the thread, and it may not even be a reasonable one, but it's my honest opinion about it.

    My sympathy for Rankin is zilch, but the obliteration of the right to privacy of the McAuley family for the sake of airing this particular story is inexcusable. They came over, they took her back to Ireland, now this. It's disgusting, and I really don't see a matter of public interest that remotely justifies it.

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7473 posts Report Reply

  • Rich of Observationz,

    Although those in the media no doubt had known all along that Rankin had got it together with someone elses husband, who shortly afterwards committed suicide, I wasn't aware of this until the papers told me this morning.

    I'm quite pleased they did. It just shows that apart from ruining peoples lives in her public career, she's also done so in her personal life. Good pick, Mr Key.

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 5550 posts Report Reply

  • Caleb D'Anvers,

    Dude! I never trusted that little bugger. And now there's a whole generation out there who've been remotely programmed by Gunn and his shadowy, control-freak cabal to do their evil bidding. That's why Gen Y is so shiny and glassy-eyed. The Bilderbergs, The Son of a Gunn Show , mind control, and the Pleiadies, man: it's all related . Like, totally. Dude.

    London SE16 • Since Mar 2008 • 482 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca,

    but it's my honest opinion about it.

    Which is always the best one to have, which is my honest opinion about it.
    Hell I could say trashy paper prints trashy story 'bout trashy woman. can't be bothered. I 'll just listen to some dub sessions instead eh? As you were :)

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    Craig, Rankin has made a career in recent years of telling others how they should live their lives.

    And nobody has to take a blind bit of notice of her. I could be really bitchy and note that a good number of the legislators who've decided (one may or the other) that I'm not fit to enter into a civil marriage with my same sex partner of 14 years, aren't exactly poster children for matrimony. I'd rather stick to the legitimate and important matter of public policy, than pantie-sniffing schadenfreude.

    Scott may be right that both papers went too far, but my sympathy is limited in the same way it would be for the public homophobe who is caught seeing rent boys.

    And the innocent third parties are just acceptable collateral damage for those who want to sell newspapers or have some political agenda or personal vendetta to prosecute, right? Oy, I guess the only place left to go without saying some shit we're both going to regret in the morning is "we're just going to have to agree to disgaree here." I just wouldn't wish this on a dog, let alone anyone I actually know or care about.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    I'm quite pleased they did. It just shows that apart from ruining peoples lives in her public career, she's also done so in her personal life. Good pick, Mr Key.

    That's right, Rich. That dirty home-wrecking succubus bitch deserves every bit of sanctimonious, leering hypocritical cant we can muster.

    Here's my honest opinion: What goes around comes around, and there are some folks I'd like to see get it hard.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso,

    What goes around comes around

    Except it doesn't - when does the media ever cop it? Give or take the odd celebrity journalist, I mean.

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7473 posts Report Reply

  • Kerry Weston,

    Isn't the most pertinent question one of 'were those who recommended and appointed Ms Rankin aware of her recent circumstances?' And if they were, why did they continue to see her appointment as appropriate? Why favour Rankin when there are so many other worthy candidates? How could they possibly think this wouldn't blow up?

    Manawatu • Since Jan 2008 • 494 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca,

    Except it doesn't - when does the media ever cop it?

    Advertising and Sales? I tell people I think they are shite and I don't buy them.

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Caleb D'Anvers,

    Isn't the most pertinent question one of 'were those who recommended and appointed Ms Rankin aware of her recent circumstances?' And if they were, why did they continue to see her appointment as appropriate? Why favour Rankin when there are so many other worthy candidates? How could they possibly think this wouldn't blow up?

    Yes. Both here and in Foreign Affairs there's the sense of advice and professional expertise within the public service being ignored or disregarded in favour of what seem like blatantly political appointees. Which is not good in a supposedly independent public service.

    I sometimes get the sense that some on the Right simply don't 'get' the concept of a neutral, professionalized bureaucracy. It's almost like they're living in a pre-modern world, where these kinds of offices are merely 'places' and sinecures to be filled with friends, family, and political allies.

    London SE16 • Since Mar 2008 • 482 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca,

    How could they possibly think this wouldn't blow up?

    You are assuming these guys are clever Kerry :)

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    My sympathy for Rankin is zilch, but the obliteration of the right to privacy of the McAuley family for the sake of airing this particular story is inexcusable. They came over, they took her back to Ireland, now this. It's disgusting, and I really don't see a matter of public interest that remotely justifies it.

    I'm not sure it's safe to assume her family members' response either way. They might be very hurt by it, or they might be pleased to see the story emerge. After all, the hurt and lack of compassion was seen in a different way by her former close friend and boss when he spoke to the HoS:

    "Surely, surely anyone with a little bit of compassion for family, for work colleagues for anybody - I cannot believe that someone who is going to be [a senior member] of a thing called the Families Commission could make such a poor judgment call on families."

    Is it not possible that he and the other friends of the deceased who willingly spoke to reporters are actually close to the views of her family? They seem to have been very angry.

    I'm still not comfortable trying to argue sensibly on what I freely admit is a personal feeling, but I'm not going to let you and Craig get away with seeing it as a slam-dunk that the family is unhappy to see this story published.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22850 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    That's right, Rich. That dirty home-wrecking succubus bitch deserves every bit of sanctimonious, leering hypocritical cant we can muster.

    Damn! I should have known that your counter-move in a debate about hypocrisy would have been to play the hypocrisy card ...

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22850 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    but I'm not going to let you and Craig get away with seeing it as a slam-dunk that the family is unhappy to see this story published.

    And I'm not going to let you get away with putting anything in my mouth. I don't give a damn if there's rejoicing and dancing in the streets, it was a vile story. Shouldn't have seen print. Period. That's my personal view, and I don't care if you agree with me or not -- or are in any state to "argue sensibly" -- I expect you to state my opinions fairly and accurately. Fair 'nuff?

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso,

    Gallagher said members of McAuley's family, who travelled from Ireland for the funeral, told him they were unhappy with the way their daughter's marriage to MacIntyre had ended.

    This is as close as the feelings of the McAuley as we get. And it may be true, but we also know they didn't make noise at the time (the gushing and lengthy obituary in the DomPost made no mention of the fact she had committed suicide) and they took their daughter back to Ireland without pursuing the matter further. Since it's safe to assume that they were contacted by the paper over the past week, to interpret their complete silence as going along with the disclosure seems charitable in the extreme.

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7473 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    Is it possible that the one place a family shouldn't be rinsing out their emotional dirty laundry is in the pages of a newspaper that (IMHO) doesn't give a damn about the consequences?

    But hey, we all get to point and cackle at that evil bitch Rankin, some rags move off the news stand, so who cares! Right? Then the next week, we can tut-tut at the next unhappy fucked-up family dished up as info-tainment.

    That actually pisses me off beyond reason, Russell, and you know something: I'm past the point where I can, or want to, try "reasonably" discussing something I find deeply loathesome.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    And I'm not going to let you get away with putting anything in my mouth.

    Like, say, "dirty home-wrecking succubus bitch"?

    I don't give a damn if there's rejoicing and dancing in the streets, it was a vile story. Shouldn't have seen print. Period.

    Okay. But that wasn't the argument I was responding to. It was the appeal to "innocent third parties", which I took to mean the family, whose feelings I said it would be perilous to assume. Which "innocent third parties" were you referring to?

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22850 posts Report Reply

  • A S,

    Yes. Both here and in Foreign Affairs there's the sense of advice and professional expertise within the public service being ignored or disregarded in favour of what seem like blatantly political appointees. Which is not good in a supposedly independent public service.

    We do all realise here that this was a political appointment, don't we? The decision to appoint would have been made by a Cabinet committee, and confirmed by Cabinet. The input from public servants would have been minimal and restricted largely to getting cv details together of all the various contenders for the role (who are generally put up by various ministers and/or their office staff.

    I sometimes get the sense that some on the Right simply don't 'get' the concept of a neutral, professionalized bureaucracy. It's almost like they're living in a pre-modern world, where these kinds of offices are merely 'places' and sinecures to be filled with friends, family, and political allies.

    I would suggest that this isn't a failing only on the right. It wouldn't be too hard to turn up any number of turkeys put in place as political appointments over the last decade or so in a range of areas.

    The desire to appoint your buddies applies to politicians of every stripe, as is sadly proven time after time.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2007 • 269 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    That actually pisses me off beyond reason, Russell, and you know something: I'm past the point where I can, or want to, try "reasonably" discussing something I find deeply loathesome.

    Okay, I'm sorry if I have upset you. I've tried to put my own view in context, but it is my view. Just that.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22850 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    By the way, it's also nice to see the typically vile Herald on Sunday (and I'm not going to link, find it yourself) leading the great leap backwards...

    The woman questioned Rankin's appointment.

    "How could someone so insensitive be appointed to such a sensitive position? It makes a mockery of the Families Commission and to all those who love Margo."

    That's right, folks. Divorced and remarried? You're not worthy -- hell, are you even part of a real "family"? When the officially permissible period you have to wait before you can remarry? Hell, why don't we shag the moral high horse and make adultery a capital crime?

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Kumara Republic,

    I always suspected McAuley's death was suicide from the very beginning, given her wealth.

    On the one hand, the papers are cynically running headlines to deliver maximum returns to their shareholders, and damning the torpedoes. On the other hand, philandering on its own doesn't destroy reputations in NZ, but philandering mixed with hypocrisy does. Graham Capill, anybody?

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 5446 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    It was the appeal to "innocent third parties", which I took to mean the family, whose feelings I said it would be perilous to assume.

    And I think it would be slightly perilous to assume that there was any consensus among the family either. Sorry, its the "homewrecker Rankin" angle that's getting me pissed off as well. God, did we time-warp back to 1809 or something where the Other Woman is a wicked temptress who leads otherwise virtuous men astray, and drive Little Women to despair? Gag...

    And from the Herald story I linked to, here's a reason why Tommy's won't be getting my business in this lifetime:

    "The simple answer to this Christine Rankin situation is surely, surely the judgment shown has been appalling, hasn't it?" said McAuley's former boss, Tommy Hepinstall of Wellington firm Tommy's Real Estate.

    "If I died tomorrow I would hope my wife would remarry but for someone to marry someone after such a horrific death that Margo had, in such a short period of time... you have to wonder.

    "Surely, surely anyone with a little bit of compassion for family, for work colleagues for anybody - I cannot believe that someone who is going to be [a senior member] of a thing called the Families Commission could make such a poor judgment call on families."

    I have to wonder whether I'd want to put any money in the pocket of a self-important prig who should keep his opinions about the private affairs of him employees and their families to himself.

    OTOH, Heppinstall was at least willing to bloviate on the record for the HoS..

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Christopher Dempsey,

    I could be really bitchy and note that a good number of the legislators who've decided (one may or the other) that I'm not fit to enter into a civil marriage with my same sex partner of 14 years, aren't exactly poster children for matrimony.

    You know Craig, I never thought about this issue like this until you pointed it out. I absolutely agree. The hypocrisy is fucken unbelievable.

    Another thing to add to the pile when I hear people telling me I can't marry my male partner...

    Parnell / Tamaki-Auckland… • Since Sep 2008 • 659 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 16 17 18 19 20 31 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.