Posts by Craig Ranapia
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Dirty Politics, in reply to stephen clover,
You’re protesting too loud, mate.
And you're tone policing -- cut it out. R.S. Surtees is at least a hundred years out of fashion, but he was onto something when he said the man who is always talking about being a gentleman never is one.
-
Hard News: Dirty Politics, in reply to cindy baxter,
” there was also a considerable amount of very personal information about relationships and other subjects, where the right to privacy outweighs any public interest. This material has not been included in the book and will not be passed to others. The fact that Slater and his associates have made a career of exposing the very private details of other people’s lives does not make it right to do that to them.”
Jesus fucking Christ, is Hagar expecting a medal made out of warm cookie dough? He was perfectly happy to receive "a considerable amount of very personal information" and, sorry, I just don't believe he was the only person who read it. If you're going to shit on people's privacy, just cut the flesh-crawling sanctimony and get on with it.
-
I don't say this enough, but people who know shit I don't are awesome. Keep it up, folks.
-
Hard News: Dirty Politics, in reply to Andre Alessi,
The claims come from “correspondence between Cameron Slater and one of Key’s senior staffers” to quote Danyl’s post.
The claim that somehow someone in the Prime Minister’s Office managed to hack the Labour Party’s membership and donor records?
To be fair, it could be possible that the Labour Party’s data security is so slack some wannabe Neo in the PM's office hacked incredible confidential information. But it strikes me as equally plausible its not only National staffer who can leak like incontinent geriatrics given the right incentives, but Slater sexed up a good old fashioned leak to make him look more of a player than he actually is.
-
Hard News: Dirty Politics, in reply to William Leander,
I think the key part that you appear to have missed is “by the Prime Minister’s office”. I’m pretty sure that if the office of the Labour leader had been implicated in the hacking of Slater or Brash, it would have been a big deal as well.
@William:
Oh, be a dear and shove off. Of course it's an incredibly serious allegation, and I don't give the proverbial rat's rectums who does it to who. But I require slightly more evidence than the burblings of someone like Slater, who I've long considered an incurable fantasist.
-
Hard News: Dirty Politics, in reply to ,
I’ve always been surprised that the Nats have kept Mr Ede on the payroll given the well-known allegations that he is a chronic Class B user.
Can I start another allegation that you're a fuck wit who should go make defamatory claims about third persons on your own blog, and where you're the only person liable for the contents?
-
Hard News: Dirty Politics, in reply to Russell Brown,
But if he got more than he revealed in the post and the PM’s office was involved, it’s not a good look.
Link doesn't work -- but I guess the question someone should be asking Labour is if they've got any evidence anyone actually hacked them because, with all due disrespect, I wouldn't believe Slater if he told me water's wet and fire's hot without independent confirmation. I'm sorry, but I long ago came to the conclusion that Slater is a pathological fantasist who needs to have every word that comes out of his mouth dipped in tequila.
-
Hard News: Dirty Politics, in reply to Russell Brown,
Danyl nominates the hacking of Labour’s computers
It's the big takeaway, and it's the one thing everyone better be hoping actually turns out to be true. Because, sorry to say, there's been an awful lot of credulity extended to hacking allegation here that wasn't extended to Don Brash and it's not as if Slater is any stranger to what can most politely be called big-noting.
OK, folks... save yourself some time and I'll do the standard reply for you. "Oh, of course you'd say that you shameless Tory hack."
-
Hard News: Not doing justice, in reply to Deborah,
Idiots and wind, every time. No need to read anything significant into it, other than hoons will be hoons.
That's a fair point, Deborah, but one reasons I'm not quite so relaxed was a remarkably unpleasant experience when I was in Wellington Central. We had a really nice elderly couple who had a hoarding well inside their property line, that would only have been accessible by climbing over a fence. They were quite understandably terrified and upset that someone was on their property in the middle of the night, quite literally slashing a hoarding to ribbons and damaging the timber framing so severely it was unusable.
At least in my book, that's beyond "hoons being hoons". And unsurprisingly, they never allowed a hoarding to be placed on their property again.
-
Hard News: Not doing justice, in reply to Russell Brown,
What you said was that they needed “dissociate” themselves from it, which implies that there might be a shred of evidence that they are associated with it. Which there isn’t.
And to be perfectly fair, I suspect every party leader who’s been around for more than five minutes could write a thick political memoir entitled ‘With Friends Like This, Who Needs Enemies?’ For what it’s worth, the sledged hoardings in my hood has been pretty evenly distributed – which is nothing to be proud of, but I don’t expect any candidate to disassociate themselves from something I really hope it goes without saying they consider completely unacceptable.