Island Life: Let’s learn English, with John Key.
310 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 … 13 Newer→ Last
-
The taped comments are clearly code.
Bill calls the voters "punters". Lockwood thinks they're "horses".
Translation: we Nats know our racing, and we're a better bet than Winston. Just make sure the cheques come in under the limit.
-
We in the National are full of virtue when making capital out of the secret taping at the Labour Conference earlier in the year. However this time, taping conversations at a National Conference is disgusting, devious, and so like those nasty Labour people who also steal e-mails. Shame!
-
those nasty Labour people who also steal e-mails
Or, according to John Key this morning, listen to e-mails.
I'm such a technophobe, I have no idea how to do that.
-
I understand it is de rigeur on private jets to have a flunky read out the Internet to you.
-
We in the National are full of virtue when making capital out of the secret taping at the Labour Conference earlier in the year.
And listening to Cullen to Morning Report, I think he came this close to screaming "it's payback time, bitches!" which I thought was really grown-up. Then again, I think Cullen would have perfectly legitimate grounds for complaint if I sildled up to him at a cocktail function and recorded a conversation without his knowledge or consent.
Of course, Duncan Garner could settle the question one way or another by outing his source, and disclosing exactly how those recordings were obtained.
-
No no no, you've got it all wrong. Labour have trained Nicky Hager to translate that sound that modems make and planted listening devices in National's computers.
'Dee dee do! KEEEERIISSSSSHHHcracklecrackle'
'They're planning to sell some state farms, Helen.'
'Those bastards!'
-
A further thought:
Rodney Hide is holding a meeting here in Devonport next week. I'm looking forward to it. I would expect that whatever I might pick up on tape while he's being privately candid would be unlikely to vary terribly much from what he has to say in public. I like that in a politician. -
Rodney Hide is holding a meeting here in Devonport next week. I'm looking forward to it. I would expect that whatever I might pick up on tape while he's being privately candid would be unlikely to vary terribly much from what he has to say in public. I like that in a politician.
Then again, David, I would expect you'd actually identify yourself and shove the recorder in Rodney's face before asking him what ACT's position on granny-kicking is? I also hope the next time we're at a party at Russell's place, he's not getting his Nixon on. :)
-
Rodney Hide is holding a meeting here in Devonport next week.
Will you resist the urge to yell "Hi Di Hi Campers"
-
Steve, I can resist everything but urges.
Craig, I am not given to subterfuge, but I don't condemn what has been done. It has served to enhance the democratic process in the face of a determined effort to constrain the conversation.
-
Only a dawdling fool like that silly old bugger James thinks that sort of thing still matters.
Sorry missed MP this morning - who is James? Bolger?
-
I mean Morning Report.
-
Craig, are you actually comfortable with National doing "Whatever It Takes" to form a government, while at the same time harbouring intentions that they refuse to make public because it would "scare the horses" ?
One of the strengths of the Greens is that the MPs are bound by ratified policy (which is created by the members), unless they declare otherwise when submitting their candidacy.
Like David, I prefer WYSIWYG to smoke-and-mirrors any day.
-
It has served to enhance the democratic process in the face of a determined effort to constrain the conversation.
David: If you're going to tug on that leg, at least kiss me on the lips first. If you really think (not to put too fine a point on it) spying on people either encourages candour or "enhances the democratic process", I'd like you to have a think about the company you're keeping. Seriously.
-
Sara, I was referring to Colin James.
Context here
-
Craig, are you actually comfortable with National doing "Whatever It Takes" to form a government, while at the same time harbouring intentions that they refuse to make public because it would "scare the horses" ?
Mikaere:
With all due disrespect, I'm going to take a great deal of pleasure rubbing your nose in this if the Greens actually get some policy concessions from National after the election. If Russell and Jeanette won't be trying to serve up as much 'dead fish' as humanly possible, they've not really got their heads around the MMP thing.
And when are we going to see the end to the organic fudge about who the Greens would and would not get into bed with after the election?
-
If you're going to tug on that leg, at least kiss me on the lips first
Permission sought to use this expression in my dreary office existence?
Truly brilliant.
-
Spying on people, Craig?
Bugging a caucus meeting - most definitely. Unethical, presumably (not a lawyer etc) illegal.
Turning up at a cocktail party with a cellphone (or whatever it is) in your pocket? The cocktail party where Winston admits he knew about Owen Glenn's donation, for example?
I wouldn't destroy that tape, and nor would you.
-
Despite my leftish leanings, I have to say it's moderately concerning that this sort of recording skulduggery is playing out.
What difference here between this and surveillance of our phone calls? (yes I'm painthing a worst-case-scenario but I'm trying to take this out of the political field and back into reality for a moment).
Do the ends justify the means?
-
__However, it does seem a little dodgy how a good quality tape-recording of a closed session at the Congress ended up in a journalist's hands who then didn't declare that he had it when interviewing Williams.__
Oh, so the issue isn't that Williams lied, but that he wasn't given a sporting warning that he could have been caught out? Anyone want to point out the flawed moral reasoning there?
sorry craig, but you didn't have issues with mike williams being caught out by a secret recording back in april (per your words above). i don't recall seeing a single comment from you about the ethics of secret taping. nor do i recall hearing anything from you regarding guyon espiner airing a pre-interview conversation with michael cullen without cullen knowing he was being taped, although i may not have been paying close attention. so why the all the angst now?
just to be contrary, i don't feel comfortable about what happened at the labour party conference nor with what happened at the national party conference, which i've commented about on my own blog. but the way national have been dealing with the issue since the weekend is creating even more problems for them. time to sack their PR experts, i think.
-
However this time, taping conversations at a National Conference is disgusting, devious,
On this point John Key are quite right. I think private conversations with public figures should remain that, unless clearly indicated that they are "on the record".
And listening to Cullen to Morning Report, I think he came this close to screaming "it's payback time, bitches!"
Craig, I'm going to call bullshit on that one having actually heard the report. The only person "close to to screaming" was Plunket who could not get past his one scripted question and repeated it a dozen times only to get the same, very clear answer. Pathetic technique.
-
And when are we going to see the end to the organic fudge about who the Greens would and would not get into bed with after the election?
What organic fudge ? The position is that we'll make a decision based on our analysis of each party's policies. And we can't do that until National actually releases some (and no, I don't count half a page of bullet points as an actual policy document). We've committed to stating our position well before the election day.
As it happens, I have informally (i.e. over beers) raised the question of what our wishlist would be in a hypothetical support arrangement with National with some Green party members. No cries of "heresy !", but I did have some interesting discussions about what we could get done if we Green ministers held Transport, Housing, and Energy portfolios and some ring-fencing of areas we wanted to keep safe (key aspects of RMA, employment law etc).
Sure, there are some who loathe what National did in the 90s, but there are also those who could see an opportunity to advance Green solutions whilst protecting important gains made under the Labour government.
Anyway, Craig, you haven't answered my question: are you cool with National's smoke-and-mirrors act ? If so, why ?
-
I wouldn't destroy that tape, and nor would you.
Simon: You're right that I wouldn't, because I wouldn't have that tape in the first place. As far as Winston is concerned, I want him under oath before the Privileges Committee (with a full press bench and a camera in the room) giving straight answers to straight question on pain of perjury charges. But he's as entitled as anyone else -- including Cullen and Williams -- not to be covertly recorded.
Let me put it this way: What do people remember Richard Nixon for? The moon landing? Establishing the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Endowment for the Arts? His (deeply unpopular on the right) support for the Civil Rights Act? Nope - Watergate and those secretly recorded conversations. Unethical but not illegal? Perhaps. Profoundly creepy. Hell yes.
-
Watergate and those secretly recorded conversations. Unethical but not illegal? Perhaps
He set up the recordings himself, though, right?
-
Craig, I'm going to call bullshit on that one having actually heard the report. The only person "close to to screaming" was Plunket who could not get past his one scripted question and repeated it a dozen times only to get the same, very clear answer. Pathetic technique.
I'd be close to screaming if someone persisted in asking me to deny that X group of people did something when I didn't know who had done it.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.