Posts by Craig Ranapia
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Why we thought what we thought, in reply to izogi,
Cunliffe was on FirstLine this morning, complaining that Key was making stuff up about Labour’s CGT policy and he had to give Key the benefit of the doubt on the night without being able to check.
Obvious response: Cunliffe should actually have known his own policy (and one IIRC he developed while finance spokesman before the last election) well enough to zing Key right back. As I've said repeatedly, I don't mark politicians down for saying "I don't know" or "I'll have to check that out". But you don't get to have it both ways, because I'm damn certain that if the shoe was on the other food Cunliffe would have been finding various polite ways to suggest the Prime Minister harden the fuck up and do his prep instead of whining. Or if you're taking it to the next level, artlessly muse about what secret agenda National doesn't want to talk about. That's always fun.
Key seemed to have morphed into Muldoon. Not drunk, surely? Hyped himself up to win over the audience with his famed sense of humour?
OK, so he's either "tired and bitter" or drunk? I know Key doesn't have many fans around here, but the innuendo along those lines is pretty distasteful no matter who it's directed at.
-
Hard News: Why we thought what we thought, in reply to Alfie,
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think O’Connor would be doing anything illegal if he had leaked Police video evidence to Slater, even if the motivation and morality involved is questionable. It’s certainly not a good look for the cops to be cosying up to a vile blogger to discredit the victims of the Urewera raids after charges against them had been dropped. But it’s much worse for the Minister of Police to be actively encouraging that sort of behaviour.
I'd actually disagree with you there, Alfie. O'Connor is the head of the Police union, and a reliable go-to for the media. He also has a pretty nasty habit of attacking any criticism of the Police (however mild) as hoddie-hugging from brainless cop-haters who wouldn't give a shit if police officers were slaughtered on a daily basis. Which I actually find rather offensive.
I'm sure many around here would strenuously disagree, but Greg O'Connor trades on the mana his members have (and for the most part deserve, IMO). At the very least, police officers -- and the taxpayers they're supposed to be working for -- should be asking some very hard and very public questions about how their union is representing them.
-
Hard News: Why we thought what we thought, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
Don’t forget The Press Leaders Debate is
Live on the web tonight from 7pmDid anyone actually watch the thing? Gave up after five minutes of Key and Cunliffe shouting over each other, which I'm sure was enormously entertaining if you were in the room but somewhat... unenlightening through not-great speakers on an elderly laptop. But there must have been something substantive in there. Yes? No? Maybe?
-
Hard News: Dirty Politics, in reply to Steve Barnes,
A while back I was concerned that if National were to win a third term many people would suspect that the election was somehow rigged. In light of recent events I believe any doubt would now be unlikely.
Weirdly enough, the last time I heard this tune was in 2005 after Labour narrowly secured a third term. Was the Don Brash impersonation intentional, Steve?
-
Hard News: Why we thought what we thought, in reply to David Hood,
I am ignorant of the law, but I would have thought that if there was anyone with the resources and legal authority to require the logs from the third party in this (Facebook) for a conversation at a known time and date, it would be the Inspector General of the SIS investigating the leaking of classified documents. In fact, if everyone denies everything, I would say this is a logical step in a thorough investigation.
Good God, David, are you taking the piss? These are strange days indeed, but Public Address is the last place on Earth I expected to read that. Be very careful what you wish for...
-
Hard News: Why we thought what we thought, in reply to A C Young,
If there is one thing that comes out of this that is positive I am hoping that no journalist will take anything that Cameron Slater says at face value.
I'd like to think no journalist takes anyone at face value -- not because they glibly assume everyone lies, but because it's quite reasonable to assume nobody ever talks to the media without some object in view.
-
Hard News: Earning Confidence, in reply to Russell Brown,
I thought the structure was odd: they seemed to spend an inordinate amount of time circling around land/immigration/investment.
I thought that was a bit odd too, because Winston's usual Yellow Peril dog-whistle bullshit aside is it really that big an issue for anyone? Still, I think Cunliffe (to his credit) managed to avoid getting that stink all over him, though I still think someone needs to nut up and call bullshit on the not-that-subtly coded race-baiting behind chuntering about "foreign ownership." I mentally turn down the volume a notch every time China gets mentioned to the exclusion of everywhere else.
-
Hard News: Earning Confidence, in reply to Dismal Soyanz,
Hosking’s inability to stop them talking over each other so much and the short time available per answer gave little incentive to dwell on specifics.
Fair point -- I really don't know how politicians think talking over each other reads but it bugs the hell out of me. It all comes down to whether you take these things seriously, or view them as infotainment; I wonder if Hosking was just told to let them go at each other, and pray they'd lose their shit for a quick and easy "political bitch-slap!" lead.
-
Hard News: Earning Confidence, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,
The detail he didn’t have on housing would require actually being in Government.
Nah, that dog’s not going to hunt. You just don’t get to have it both ways, Sofie – perhaps I’m naive, but I expect party leaders to be able to clearly articulate the details of their own policy especially when (let’s be honest) they’re hardly missing an opportunity to call the other bastards liars who couldn’t organize the proverbial piss-up in a brewery. I’m certainly not saying it reached the level of throwing serious doubt on Cunliffe or Key’s credibility, but they might want to watch that. IIRC, there’s one more debate on One in the final week. That’s not when you want the media focused on asking whether you’re just clueless about your own big ticket policies or deliberately being *cough* strategically ambiguous.
-
Hard News: Earning Confidence, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
I thought Cunliffe kept his cool and Key looked bitter and drained.
Meh, might be a bit of projection going on there? I really don’t want to harsh the holiday buzz by looking at the usual suspects, but I’m sure plenty of folks are going on about Cunliffe looking desperate and shrill. Didn’t seem to me either was true.
Saw bits and pieces, while sitting around with our hosts and the television on the background. Seems to me both Key and Cunliffe should be reasonably happy about how it turned out – nobody came up with a soundbite gaffe that will haunt them for the rest of the campaign. Key wasn’t goofy, and Cunliffe did a pretty good job of avoiding that slightly patronizing tone he can slip into to.
That said: There were patches when they both seemed rather… vague on the details of their own policies. Really not an option, guys.