Hard News: The Secret Code
91 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last
-
I'm definitely on the same wavelength, RB.
I did idly wonder though whether HC might have moved to put Cullen out to pasture at the last Cabinet shake-up, and instituted Goff as Deputy and Minister of Finance, whether Labour's fortunes might be flying a bit higher.
Sooner or later Goff will lead the Labour Party (even if Labour wins I can see HC stepping down after a year or so), and he will do a bloody good job of it too I think.
But in the meantime I wish the hysterics in the media would STFU.
-
These things are as much a construction of the media themselves than of politics, a fact that journalists are duty-bound to ignore. Hence, Tracy Watkins intones this morning that the comments are "likely to spark damaging leadership speculation." But where? Oh, right: in the news media.
Too right. This fits in as yet another example of what I've been ranting about a bit here recently: The nedia effectively making up their stories - in politics, especially.
Also, is it any wonder that politicians are usually evasive (as John Key was this morning on Breakfast) when dealing with most of the MSM?
-
But in the meantime I wish the hysterics in the media would STFU.
And go back to chasing Lockwood Smith down a hallway while squealing 'do you believe in climate change', and lurking around outside the toilets so Brian Connell can tell you to piss off one more time. Which, of course, leads to days of speculation about 'flip-flops' and 'secret agendas' and... whatever the fuck passes for news judgement nowadays.
-
Heh. I like my typo: "nedia". They can be needy for stories...
-
Heh. I like my typo: "nedia". They can be needy for stories.
And I thought your new word was well thought out.Will look forward to adopting it if you don't mind?
-
Also, is it any wonder that politicians are usually evasive (as John Key was this morning on Breakfast) when dealing with most of the MSM?
Probably not, but I'd rather Key have the occasional incontinent burst of candor because, you know something, 'secret agenda', 'flip-flop' and 'baby-eating rich prick' sneer lines aren't going away any time soon. He might as well treat the rest of us like grown-ups who don't suffer from ADHD while he's at it.
-
But one more thing: just as there is an implicit "prospect" of any party losing a general election, so there is a "prospect" of Goff losing a leadership vote amongst his colleagues. It would be rather cruel if, like Hillary Clinton, he turned up with his impeccable credentials to discover that his time had passed.
I like the way you insert your own sort-of-secret-code suggesting you'd rather see a rabid jackal head up the Labour Party than Goff.
-
I like the way you insert your own sort-of-secret-code suggesting you'd rather see a rabid jackal head up the Labour Party than Goff.
Er, no. I'd be fine with it. I just wonder if it's a racing certainty.
-
Er, no. I'd be fine with it.
Brown Backs Away From Anti-Goff Gaffe!
-
__Er, no. I'd be fine with it.__
Brown Backs Away From Anti-Goff Gaffe!
LOL.
-
you'd rather see a rabid jackal head up the Labour Party than Goff.
Where can I sign up for the Rabid Jackal?
I find Phil Goff's track record in Justice of readiness to toss my civil liberties aside quite worrying. He strikes me as a classic authoritarian. Goff's pandering stance (terror!) was a major factor in my not voting Labour in the last two elections and if he were to lead Labour I can't see myself coming back to the fold.
-
The key part of the interview is here on YouTube. One does tend to wonder at the fuss...
-
I suspect that under Key (for the first term at least) the political mood of the country will move to the right and Goff will be the only chance Labour has to come back in 2011. Russell is right though, while I think Goff is a very attractive leader in the eyes of the general public he doesn't look so good to many of his fellow Labour Party members.
-
Does anyone remember the Kahui twins? How about the Muliaga/Mercury tragedy? Or the deaths of teenagers at a Christchurch party?
You might recall that each of them dominated our news coverage for days, each one giving rise to What Have We Become national navel-gazing. They were huger than huge.
All three had a sequel in various courts yesterday. The stories continue, and in public. Now you might think that stories which were so important then, would still be worth our attention now. But none mattered more than Goff's comments, according to the 6pm bulletins on TV One and Three.
Shame.
-
you'd rather see a rabid jackal head up the Labour Party than Goff.
Where can I sign up for the Rabid Jackal?
It being morning, I initially read this as a rabid jackal head, which was up the Labour Party.
-
I find Phil Goff's track record in Justice of readiness to toss my civil liberties aside quite worrying. He strikes me as a classic authoritarian.
If it's any reassurance, he was once dragged off the stage at a Labour Party conference screaming 'socialism forever!'.
Um, I hear.
-
I suspect that under Key (for the first term at least) the political mood of the country will move to the right and Goff will be the only chance Labour has to come back in 2011.
Another scenario is that Key proves to be hopelessly underdone, the media narrative turns to speculation about conflict between him and English and the public reacts poorly to spending cuts and remembers that it never like Tony Ryall in the first place.
I guess you might still want Goff in the leadership, but who would you put next to him? And could you decently promote the new talent quickly enough to show a fresh team?
I do think that if Labour doesn't gold-plate the list prospects of the likes of Grant Robertson, Phil Twyford, Moana Mackey etc, this year they're nuts.
-
It being morning, I initially read this as a rabid jackal head, which was up the Labour Party.
It's like a Dad4Justice quote ...
-
There is no fuss!
John Key was rather smug in parliament yesterday when he advised Helen to watch the 6pm news, already aware that is was about to blow up.
I'd have to dig through my audio archives from my RDU days but I'm pretty sure I've got John Key on record saying something along the lines of "I'm not interested in taking the leadership from Don Brash right now but if that opportunity came up and Don decided to step down..."
Which is exactly what Goff was saying. No fuss back then because John was only stating the obvious. Don't we want our politicians to be bleeding honest and to stop side-stepping questions? I'd expect now we can expect more fancy footwork when they answer questions in the lead-up to the election. Making the the job for the very journalists who blew this way out of proportion yesterday that much harder.
-
I find Phil Goff's track record in Justice of readiness to toss my civil liberties aside quite worrying. He strikes me as a classic authoritarian.
Agreed. And a sneaky populist to boot. Give me a from-the-rooftops populist any day: at least you know where you stand.
-
And, to the surprise of no one at all, Phil Goff will seek to convince his colleagues that he is the best choice for the vacant party leadership.
Yawn. Surely an important element of "news" is that it is, um, new? Is it equally a scoop that English would seek to succeed Key if he fails to win later this year?
Russell is right though, while I think Goff is a very attractive leader in the eyes of the general public he doesn't look so good to many of his fellow Labour Party members.
Well, I'm not currently a member but have been and if Clark were to step down into her fourth term or after an election defeat, I'd think Goff was one of the best candidates (for whatever the opinion of a former staffer/party member is worth). Others simply don't have the experience or, alternatively, the ambition to be around long. Perhaps if there had been more renewal a little earlier?
-
I do think that if Labour doesn't gold-plate the list prospects of the likes of Grant Robertson, Phil Twyford, Moana Mackey etc, this year they're nuts.
You're making the foolish assumption that politics is the art of the rational. Perhaps it's the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, but Labour did itself no favours three years back with a list being so heavily weighted towards incumbent insurance -- and dare I say it, one or two whose departure wouldn't have been any great loss to anyone. (Which, to be fair, is something National is far too prone too -- and which came back to bite in 2002.) But as far as I can tell, the process that list formation process makes the Democratic primaries look straightforward and genteel.
-
Labour did itself no favours three years back with a list being so heavily weighted towards incumbent insurance
My oath.
-
Craig, I think they tried and tried in more than a token manner. They did exit some lightweights and hangers-on but I agree that a few more could have done the right thing for the party and simply didn't.
-
Goff is an outstanding politician of the 1990's response to the assault of the extreme right - the so-called "third way" , but for many on the left this "third way" was tolerated only so long as it was about the art of the possible and holding the line in the face of the all-out class war from a rampant right in the 1980's and 1990's. But many on the left are growing tired of supporting pastel pink so as not to get deep blue.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.