Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: Never mind the quality ...

319 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 9 10 11 12 13 Newer→ Last

  • Steve Barnes, in reply to nzlemming,

    I’m guessing it was a Downfall?

    You are correct Sir.
    Puzzled as to why it was removed, uploader threatened by the “Powers that be”?

    Peria • Since Dec 2006 • 5521 posts Report Reply

  • Grant McDougall, in reply to Craig Ranapia,

    Craig, thanks for clarifying that. It amazes me that Slater has kept his grudge for so long and is simply unable to respect a basic democratic process.

    I'd assumed there'd been some sort of major incident between them and / or their friends, but Slater really is being a sore loser if that's what it's all about.

    Dunedin • Since Dec 2006 • 760 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Steve Barnes,

    Puzzled as to why it was removed

    copywrong

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19740 posts Report Reply

  • Michael Savidge, in reply to Ian Dalziel,

    What’s more none of them are looking forward, they are all blindly heading into the future towards something beyond their reach, attention fixed backwards to the lightweight in the stern calling the shots

    Such a flaccid cox...

    Somewhere near Wellington… • Since Nov 2006 • 324 posts Report Reply

  • Moz, in reply to Steve Barnes,

    but meat hooks are S shaped, not C shaped. That cartoon is wrong!

    Sydney, West Island • Since Nov 2006 • 1233 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel, in reply to Michael Savidge,

    Such a flaccid cox…

    well, as I was going for meta-foreplay
    I should have said 'calling the stroke...'
    ;- )

    ...but seriously, I found this photo from the future, it's of National's Rowing Eight (+cox) after Key sold the 'shell' out from under them and left them high and dry...
    ...honest!
    ;- 0

    < Warning: contains deliberately incorrect information for satirical purposes, will settle for a cheap laugh>

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7950 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22848 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to Russell Brown,

    This really interesting: David Fisher

    It is.

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

  • simon g,

    He launched a personal assault with what I believed were threats of violence and created an atmosphere in which I was personally and professionally denigrated. Those who post comments on his website made awful slurs. It is as horrible an online environment as you will find anywhere.

    Among the slurs were claims my behaviour showed I was suffering withdrawal symptoms associated with alcohol and drug addiction.

    The Key/Farrar line (both use the same phrase repeatedly, surely no coincidence) is to describe Slater as "a force of nature". To Radio Live and Newstalk ZB, he is merely a political commentator, a regular guest.

    How did we sink so low?

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1330 posts Report Reply

  • Carol Stewart, in reply to simon g,

    He launched a personal assault with what I believed were threats of violence and created an atmosphere in which I was personally and professionally denigrated

    How is this even legal?

    Wellington • Since Jul 2008 • 828 posts Report Reply

  • Steve Barnes, in reply to Carol Stewart,

    How is this even legal?

    On the legality bit, although totally off the Fisher/Slater debacle.
    Forging a signature on a document, as Collins allegedly did, carries a max 10 year jail term, instant dismissal from Parliament as the jail time is over 2 years.

    Peria • Since Dec 2006 • 5521 posts Report Reply

  • SteveH, in reply to Russell Brown,

    This really interesting: David Fisher on dealing with Slater, then deciding to step outside the tent.

    Very interesting.

    I wonder how much the abuse Fisher and others has received has made other reporters reluctant to report anything negative about Slater. It must have a chilling effect.

    Key's failure to condemn Slater's behavior is very telling. It amounts to tacit approval and I'd like to see more attention paid to that.

    Since Sep 2009 • 444 posts Report Reply

  • Michael Homer, in reply to ,

    You're allowed to be elected after you get out. Your seat automatically becomes vacant upon conviction but you could even run in the by-election if you're not actually imprisoned at the time.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 85 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to ,

    that he was sentenced to two-and-half-years in jail on fire arms charges.

    Nothing to see. He did his time for the disgusting Tuhoe raids with possession of guns unlicensed and consequently he is perfectly able to stand for Parliament. Just as it was nothing to do with KDC that a shareholder of Mega has had assets seized (so far with no charges) .The insinuations were just too good for TV3 though.

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

  • simon g, in reply to Russell Brown,

    Plunket has apologised to Gower on air this morning. Says he "was out of line".

    "I then questioned him about [false claims] live on air without having any evidence whatsoever to support the claims. These claims were based on comments from listeners that I did not check and I have since discovered there is no basis for the claims."

    Talkback listener makes false allegations, which are not checked, but repeated - by a guy who cheerfully slags off Nicky Hager for not providing evidence. Yes, it's pretty clear who has the higher professional standards here.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1330 posts Report Reply

  • Dismal Soyanz,

    Some decent commentary from Anne Salmond.

    They must take urgent steps to clean up politics in New Zealand, and to restore democratic checks and balances to the political process. It must adversely affect the lives of politicians, and make them wonder what happened to their own ideals, and how they became complicit in such a dirty game.

    It would be nice if at every electorate candidate meeting this year, someone asks each candidate if they would promise not to engage in negative attack politics whether by proxy or not.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2010 • 310 posts Report Reply

  • Kumara Republic, in reply to simon g,

    Unfortunately, it's a mere symptom of Plunket selling out some time ago. When he was with Fair Go, he was more like Nicky Hager or Andrea Vance.

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 5441 posts Report Reply

  • izogi, in reply to Dismal Soyanz,

    It would be nice if at every electorate candidate meeting this year, someone asks each candidate if they would promise not to engage in negative attack politics whether by proxy or not.

    Maybe, but I don’t think that’s enough, personally. If they were asked last election or the election before, then everyone would have promised that. Most probably would have been truthful, too, and anyone actually planning to use these types of tactics wouldn’t have been expecting to be found out.

    I’d rather know what candidates intend to do so this can’t happen to the same extent in the future, no matter who’s elected.

    I like the tone of Anne Salmond’s writing, though. An Inquiry or a Royal Commission? Sure, as long as it’s given power to actually investigate what needs investigating without political intervention, and as long as its findings are treated seriously instead of the government of the day just picking and choosing what it likes.

    Sometimes politicians define the terms of reference on these things so that they exclude whichever lines of inquiry might reflect badly on those politicians, even though that seems to be a significant part of the issue here. Even if National’s voted out, you can bet there will be MPs in other parties with a few things they’d prefer weren’t “discovered”.

    This is really a constitutional thing. Ministers and their staff, as a rule, need to have accountability that goes beyond the election cycle and is immune to political conflicts of interest. I get that they need a certain amount of freedom and privacy to do their job effectively, but only being accountable to others with political motives is a recipe for bad judgement and failure to follow the rules and expectations (wherever they even exist) to be encouraged or overlooked, instead of dealt with above board.

    Saying that it’s up the the public to vote them out isn’t enough. The public has so many conflicting issues to consider when choosing who to vote for, plus it’s dependent on a suitable alternative presenting itself as an opposition.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 1141 posts Report Reply

  • Dismal Soyanz, in reply to izogi,

    I’d rather know what candidates intend to do so this can’t happen to the same extent in the future, no matter who’s elected.

    Yes, although from my observations, the more scope left for a complex answer results in wriggling and evasion.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2010 • 310 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 9 10 11 12 13 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.