Hard News: Of course it's about the book
194 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 … 8 Newer→ Last
-
John Key as Daphne
Bill English as Fred
Katherine Rich as Velma (jinkies)
Murray McCully as Shaggy
Judith Collins as Scooby -
Actually, John Key is more like the kindly old caretaker's slick, greasy and over-eager son (and appointed heir).
-
So this is probably a conspiracy by Whitcoulls (which rich person owns them??) to stop Hagar making money...
Whoa, probably just smart (ab)use of monopsony power.
They're owned by Pacific Equity Partners, Australian-based. Now, can we find some links to Tasmanian logging interests...
kidding, of course.
-
too kind.
Judith Collins as Chickenstein
-
Clearly, when Brash talked of those who are not "mainstream" New Zealanders, when he says Labour colludes with Communists, when he calls Labour corrupt, clearly this is what he BELIEVES. Its not the gaffes of a kindly old gent. Its the gaffes of a hard right economic Pinochista whose mask slips when under pressure.
Brash was so convinced of his own righteousness that he allowed himself - and more seriously his party -to be actively drawn into a conspiracy with a secret organisation to circumvent the electoral laws of New Zealand. Then he lied about this to the people of New Zealand and further, when the election was lost to the right, he had the hypocritical hubris to try the big lie and accuse the Labour party of doing what he had done. I can see now why so many in National worked to undermine Brash and the political culture he brought with him.
What arrogance. What hubris. What contempt for our democracy. What cynical, morally hollow realpolitik. He does indeed stand tall in the company of De Cleene, Douglas, and Prebble.
-
Amid the hilarity, can I sound a note of caution? What do we know so far?
1/ Don Brash and the National hierarchy knew more about the EBs than they ever let on. Well, who hadn't guessed as much, really. It's good to see it confirmed and all, but ... is anyone actually surprised?
2/ Don Brash and the National hierarchy have some rich benefactors. Some are the usual suspects from the 80s. Again, this revelation has a certain "well d'uh" category.
I stand to be corrected as more info comes to light of course, but these are the two things I've "learned" so far.
-
Sorry, that should have been Crian Connell as Shaggy. He'a a bumbling fool but flicked the switch that started the shit storm.
And DC, let us enjoy our fun! The other side have had theirs over the past 12 months. As they say, who laughs last, laughs longest...
This is just part of the never-ending circle of (political) life, so hakuna matata...
-
Paul - fair point! I'm smiling broadly, but would like to enjoy it more and join you in hearty laughter!! :)
All the same, nothing so far has surprised me much. Most corrupt opposition in history and all that. :)
-
1/ Don Brash and the National hierarchy knew more about the EBs than they ever let on. Well, who hadn't guessed as much, really. It's good to see it confirmed and all, but ... is anyone actually surprised?
Not really, but it comes in the face of barefaced denials over a long period - and Brash actually dug himself in about twice as deep in the last two days. God knows what he'll say when he goes back on Campbell Live. He can't even claim to have not read the email, because he forwarded it to Long.
But there's material there that (a) makes National's noisy moral high ground as regards election spending look very cynical indeed, and (b) might well be of interest to the authorities.
Apart from that, there appears to be considerable embarrassment in it for a range of people.
As Craig suggested, Clark is presumably busy forgetting everything she didn't like about Kevin Brady. -
from the net where all is true .
Obligatory strange Scooby fact: The gang is 84% more likely to stumble upon a secret passage than to find it intentionally.
I know this is relevant I just haven't worked out why yet
-
All the same, nothing so far has surprised me much. Most corrupt opposition in history and all that. :)
LOL!
-
What I’d love to see is a lurch to the Greens from this whole fiasco:
- Labour and National have been playing a cynical game of race-to-the-bottom
- Winston’s losing his traditional Teflon
- United have conspicuously failed to transcend their leaderConversely environmental issues are suddenly mainstream, and the Greens who’ve been ridiculed and marginalised for years need to capitalise.
Whether they manage to or not, surely a good chunk of the electorate has to be giving up faith in red/blue and thinking about going wider. -
I'm trying to remember what things look like on email headers, but...
When I look at the beginning of that email image, I see to: Don Brash (Don's email address...) and to: John Key ("John Key"). To me that would either imply that Ron's written to John before (because he's got his email address in his address book) or that John's email address never got typed in, so maybe he didn't see it after all, or that it means something about whose copy (Don's or John's) this was. Or maybe it means nothing much at all.
Anyone else who actually knows anything about this care to comment?
-
dc_red has a good point - or at least I tend to agree with his summation. Plenty of fodder for consipiracy theorists but nothing new or suprising.
It seems that the smoking gun email might have been collected along with one tabled in Parliament in May (along similar lines):
**TREVOR MALLARD** [...] I have an email from Ron Hickmott, who was writing on behalf of Andrew Simmons, Phil Winn, Matt Goudie, and himself. He states that he represents a group of Christian businessmen concerned with the course and direction of the current Government: “Accordingly we have put together an election programme with a budget of $1.2 million with the goal of ‘getting party votes for National’ ”
So perhaps we get to see what the Govt knew all along.
-
Lucy, I think it means that Key was on his outlook contact list.
-
@Lucy: It depends on a lot of things. Those are the ʻfauxʻ headers you see inside an email program. The real headers would have shown the exact addresses. Depending on how the address was initially typed in, it may be that Ron created a contact entity called John Key and then selected it from from within the email. No real evidence of anything, based on the jpg on scoop.
Someone who uses Outlook, feel free to correct me by does it open attached word docs within the email? Or is that licence in the printing of the book?
If anyone out there has REAL copies of the emails and not just photocopies of the printed items, then itʻs trivial to check the addressing
-
"Anyone else who actually knows anything about this care to comment?"
I'm waiting for humphries to start questioning the kerning.
As for Michael, "I wrote the speech before I praised it", Basset
Is there even a term for that sort of contemptuous hackery? 'Inverse sock puppetry' perhaps? -
Thanks.
-
Been trying to find a column by Basset saying what a great speech Orewa 1 was (without disclosing he wrote it)
Try this:
The recent floods could have been a path to the high ground for Helen Clark's beleaguered ministry.Instead it responded late because ministers were too preoccupied with U-turning in response to Don Brash's Orewa speech. In the process Cabinet forgot the catastrophic polls resulting from David Lange's back-track on Rogernomics in 1988. He never recovered, and it will be a miracle if Helen Clark survives the current panic attack. Why follow a leader who loses the way?
Don Brash touched a raw nerve at Orewa. All the warnings Labour has been given by friends, and by their own polling, were ignored. Race-based policies don't command broad public support. Labour's recent sudden collapse in the polls was an accident waiting to happen.
http://www.michaelbassett.co.nz/articleview.php?id=5
Or this:
Helen Clark is hoping history repeats itself. An inquiry into race-based policies that she brushed aside not long ago suddenly looks attractive. Her ministers are making contradictory statements on Maori policy, her Maori MPs contemplate walking the plank, and National has taken the high ground. An inquiry might shut down debate over race-based social funding. The fatally flawed foreshore and seabed legislation could be put to one side, if Maori co-operated. Other victims of Don Brash, like United, also want an inquiry. Anything to take the heat out of that Orewa speech.
http://www.michaelbassett.co.nz/articleview.php?id=54
That Orewa speech ... wot I wrote ...
-
Ok....
Hi everybody. Since you not got book and I have you can ask me questions....
And for starters you get this gem... (page 147)
"You need to know now that the experienced people you have will NOT work in a government run by McCully. I and others will not tolerate him exercising the same influence he does now."
Guess who said that....
-
DPF! ;-)
-
Guess who said that....
Michelle Boag?
-
Was it Roger Kerr?
-
Jane Clifton? (I considered using an alias to post that one...)
-
Guess who said that..
Someone with good sense? McCully really is a prat. :)
Post your response…
This topic is closed.