Hard News: Something odd and unresolved
157 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Newer→ Last
-
Good one Dinah. It made me think this;
Herald: " What songs are currently on your iPod playlist."
Key: "iPod?" -
or Key: "play?"
-
Dinah, that's hilarious, thanks. I particularly like the faux-quote:
According to the Time reporter, work on the profile was often harder than he had anticipated, with Obama at times dodging questions about whether or not he played a musical instrument, and about what Monopoly piece he thought best represented his candidacy and why.
Which makes me wonder; did John Key play Poleconomy as a kid - the simple or hard version - and how'd he go?
-
I'm genuinely pleased to read that National would not significantly change the current IR laws. I think this is a good move on their part.
I know the Standard is already reviewing their policy more rigourously than I have time to (plus until we see the full detail, well...) but IR was once a fault line in NZ politics and too many people fell into the constantly shifting margin. Key's done the right thing electorally and substantively by agreeing to the status quo.
-
I know the Standard is already reviewing their policy more rigourously than I have time to
Um, let's not go overboard there, Paul.
-
Craig, let me just say this; they're subjecting it to exactly the same sort of analysis I might once have been capable of...
The serious point is that isn't it just jolly that we're no longer arguing about the fundamental rules governing the economic lives of the majority of our fellow citizens, neighbours, parishioners and employers/ees.
BTW, you must surely have been into Poleconomy or was it too low-brow :)?
-
A S,
I'm with Craig.
I don't think I'd call the analysis of the standard robust, particularly the post linked to above.
-
A S, fair enough - I enjoy the Standard and think they do some excellent analysis but they're entirely upfront about being partisan. Perhaps someone else might wish to comment on National's latest acquiesence to the status quo (not that I mind it however, I think they've got it right).
-
The Onion:
Sherwood was also fearless in his effort to paint the candidate as someone who is "surprisingly down to earth," a phrase that is used a total of 26 times throughout the feature.
The Herald:
Lawson says they met Key once and found him "very nice, down to earth".
and
She left impressed with what she believed was his sincerity and down-to-earth approach.
and so on.
-
'I know the Standard is already reviewing their policy more rigourously than I have time to
Um, let's not go overboard there, Paul."
the standard is one of the bravest political blogs in n.z. Thank god someone is blogging for the workforce of new zealand. They're the only blog consistently crunching the numbers....
Are they correct? Only debate will tell but hats off to the standard.
-
the standard is one of the bravest political blogs in n.z. Thank god someone is blogging for the workforce of new zealand. They're the only blog consistently crunching the numbers....
Oh, take that Idiot/Savant -- who I disagree with more often than not, but at least operates on a more thoughtful level than The Standard. But hey, if you think chanting "fire at will" and "secret agenda" is in-depth industrial relations policy analysis, who am I to decry the will of the marketplace of ideas?
-
"But hey, if you think chanting "fire at will" and "secret agenda" is in-depth industrial relations policy analysis, who am I to decry the will of the marketplace of ideas?"
Yes, stop decrying Craig.
I/S is a great blogger - agreed. I hope his feelings aren't hurt.The standard are 4 guys (?), who seem a bit younger , (maybe poorer?) than your average political blogger. They have a very passionate interest in the welfare of the participants in the workplace. You know the workplace , where the vast majority of new zealanders earn their money.I respect that.
They don't come across as particularly militant, just concerned.Our
workplaces are where we literally live. I'm not saying they're the gospel but they are a breath of fresh air with some solid perspectives on capitalism which is interesting to a proud capitalist like myself.Considering a vast majority of people who comment on political threads are anonymous in this country isn’t it time we made the exchange of ideas a little warmer and welcoming and in this particular case stopped belittling the huge work those guys are doing.
…and we know what crazies look like Craig, they look like your mates mate out in the easter suburbs but hey I suspect probably even he isn’t that bad.
-
…and we know what crazies look like Craig, they look like your mates mate out in the easter suburbs but hey I suspect probably even he isn’t that bad.
Oh, sod off Jeremy -- that's a cheap shot.
-
But hey, if you think chanting "fire at will" and "secret agenda" is in-depth industrial relations policy analysis
Craig, that's an unreasonably simple characterisation.
Their posts are overtly political, but they're far from insubstantial. They clearly lay out the basis for their views and link to primary data sources, the analysis is original, not a cut-and-paste of others, and is rigorous. Of course there's other perspectives and of course it's didactic, but it's not simplistic nor is it formulaic.
The fact that they believe National might not be telling the public the whole story is hardly unreasonable either. The leaks from Australian insurance commentators, the slips of tongue by junior spokespeople and the absence of policy detail gives rise to this speculation; I hardly think the Standard are at fault for asking what's going on.
Of course, it may be as simple as National deciding that policy isn't the best way to fight this election, perhaps they're right, but I think that's to the detriment of our democracy and the downside is that they are open to the charge that they're holding back important information - it's not the first time (for National or for Labour).
-
Anyone hoping that part two of the Herald's John Key piece would be hard hitting must be disappointed. The fawning tone detracts, with classics like:
Key has been a difficult target for Labour to pin down because he is acutely sensitive to public opinion and backs his instincts.
Right. Although it does at least answer one crucial concern:
The difference between the 2003 Key and the 2008 Key, however, raises the question of which John Key is the real Key. Which Key would be Prime Minister?
...
"My underlying philosophies remain the same."So his beliefs remain the same, the difference is in the language?
"Yeah, I think that's largely correct."
This is a startling admission which suggests that the real John Key is actually the John Key who originally entered Parliament, not the version we see today.
Given the amount of effort the Herald claims went into this "project", the writing seems embarrassingly junior in tone. I wonder if they feel they got their money's worth?
-
"Oh, sod off Jeremy -- that's a cheap shot."
Apologies Craig. Obviously that read the wrong way. I thought you were friends with the kiwiblog guy being party members and all.
I was trying to say that bloggers might have a lot more in common than they suspect, taking the ol jesus approach to things...but I didn't intend a cheap shot to you.
-
"This is a startling admission which suggests that the real John Key is actually the John Key who originally entered Parliament, not the version we see today."
In a nutshell this is the issue of John Key.It could actually be easily solved by asking him his opinions on past National economic styles starting with his old boss, Don Brash.
How comfortable does he feel about DB's now admitted 2005 moderation of his rather unpopular economic views? I mean if modern Labour can distance themselves from 1984-1990 Labour surely Key can do more to assure us that the views he presents are his new "fresh" 2008 views and not some watered down "don't scare the horses" talking points that hides a 2005 suspended agenda.God politics is bollocks. Why can't people just say what they want to do?
I'm actually trying to vote national but it's bloody hard.. I want fast and cheap broadband yesterday.
-
Jeremy, read the story - even the Herald is acknowledging those quotes from Key mean exactly what you fear.
-
Apologies Craig. Obviously that read the wrong way. I thought you were friends with the kiwiblog guy being party members and all.<quote>
David Farrar (like Russell) is a very good friend of mine, and has been for a long time. Folks like Cameron Slater, D4J and Redbaiter are not. Anyway, Jeremy, still a cheap shot and you can still sod off.
<quote>Given the amount of effort the Herald claims went into this "project", the writing seems embarrassingly junior in tone. I wonder if they feel they got their money's worth?
Indeed, Sasha, They should hire Ian Wishart, and start making up quotes. That should lead to plenty of hard-hitting "grown up" journalism. The funny thing is that I don't think my 'underlying philosophies" have changed that much, but I'm a hell of a lot less dogmatic and more willing to concede I don't necessarily have any kind of monopoly on insight or worthwhile ideas. And, yes, not ever damn thing has to be a hair-pulling, eye-gouging, crotch-kicking death match. That's a bad thing, how?
-
I'm actually trying to vote national but it's bloody hard.. I want fast and cheap broadband yesterday.
Oh, Jeremy, you're one of those voters.
-
"Jeremy, still a cheap shot and you can still sod off."
Oh jesus christ, you are a strange boy.
-
"I'm actually trying to vote national but it's bloody hard.. I want fast and cheap broadband yesterday.
Oh, Jeremy, you're one of those voters."
I'm trying to pretend I'm in a democracy and better broadband will be very important to an island next to antartica. ..but I know i wont be voting on one policy. Just trying to have an attempt at weighing things.
I'd like our national party friends to try and convince us why we should vote them in and not why we should vote labour out but the chaps on these threads seem reluctant to provide a vision of the brave new world of national other than suggesting it wont look that different.
-
Oh jesus christ, you are a strange boy.
Jeremy: I've not been a boy for a very long time, and if you want to engage in snide bitchery don't expect a bunch of flowers and a thank you note. That is all.
-
I'd like our national party friends to try and convince us why we should vote them in and not why we should vote labour out
Labour/National policy? I could understand a charismatic leader (even good looking like Barrack ;) but if adopting opposition policies is the direction that National is keen on, why the need to change?
-
"Jeremy: I've not been a boy for a very long time, and if you want to engage in snide bitchery don't expect a bunch of flowers and a thank you note. That is all."
Everyones a boy to me except girls, even Jesus christ.
Craig I get nothing out of these exchanges so once again I want to apologise for upsetting you. It's not my intention.
I am actually trying to moderate my posts on any subject you may be involved in even though it doesn't feel like the free speech I thought these threads may provide.
have a good day mate.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.