Hard News: A bit tacky, no?
69 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 Newer→ Last
-
Rupert era HC definitely a nastier vehicle and for that more enjoyable....kinda stink I won't be able to see the reunion, the Children's Hour one a few years back was awesome. CM has a great stage presence.
I still remember the first time they played gaskrankinstation, what a moment......and Do the Headless Chicken.........wow.....
-
Check out how the boys at "The Standard" handle the same theme, slightly better but it just proves that an election can bring out the worst in some.
Ugh... I guess we can take some comfort in the evidence that crass idiocy is bipartisan.
Then again, the MSM (or at least Three) wasn't much better. Yes, I'm sure it was a bloody horrible experience for her and everyone else in the party, but it might have been nice if tribute to Braun-Elwert (remember him?) had actually lead the bulletin.
Anne Braun-Elwert is one classy lady, though. What a shame a few other people didn't come up to her level.
-
I fear I've made him sound like some globetrotting backpacker. He was a psych nurse, often on crisis intervention, which is a whole other sort of adventure.
I know a couple of psychiatrist who deal with crisis - shitty job. One ended up fearing she'd contracted HIV when a patient attacked her (although the attack was very minor, it was very calculated... that is for someone who was quite insane). Fortunately she wasn't infected. And in case I create the wrong impression, I don't think for a second that everyone with mental health issues is violent or malevolent.
Check out how the boys at "The Standard" handle the same theme, slightly better but it just proves that an election can bring out the worst in some
I see there was a deletion of some sort made to the piece in question, it reads fine now so I guess at least they've acknowledged the transgression (not that I saw what it was).
-
<i>I see there was a deletion of some sort made to the piece in question, it reads fine now so I guess at least they've acknowledged the transgression (not that I saw what it was).</i>
Nope. Every blogger who's being at all honest with themselves is going to have a 'WTF was I on' hall of shame when you've been intemperate, unfair or flat out wrong on a point of fact. It's easy enough to sanitise the post; the real test of character is publicly eating crow with a side of humble pie.
-
It's easy enough to sanitise the post; the real test of character is publicly eating crow with a side of humble pie.
Craig, there's no real test, particularly not for anonymous blogging. I'd say the closest to a real test is simply to behave as you would if you'd mis-spoken in public, in which case I think a speedy retraction and, depending on what in fact was said, an apology is fine (though I agree, it will taint how others view any future comments). Also, I've now realised what was said; it was stupid and gratuitous and I hope that the author is sensible enough to apologise.
-
On a completely unrelated note, I just tried to view the media7 clips about the coverage of the olympics through youtube, and a message came up that "We're sorry, this video is no longer available". Was it something I said?
-
Craig, there's no real test, particularly not for anonymous blogging
You have a fair point, as far as it goes, but one might think that people who see Big Brother under every bed would resist the urge to resort to the double-click memory hole. :)
-
Paul Williams wrote of Whaleoil's relationship to his lumpen-commentariat:
...he needs them and, IMO, doesn't always mind their gutter commentary, particularly if it saves him from saying it.
Your "IMO" is prudent but sadly not necessary. If you require proof, witness this exchange on Whaleoil's report on the death.
One Monty writes:
God the thought of the bitch giving me mouth to mouth would be enough to ensure that I toughed out any heart-attack. Mind you when did she last Kiss (mouth to mouth) any male?
Now watch the bitch try and make political capital out of this death. On the positive one less Labour voter.
(Thank god you don’t give demerits Whale)
To which our magnanimous and even-handed replies:
On the contrary I’ll give you bonus points for those comments.
Truly, a voice for freedom.
-
Your "IMO" is prudent but sadly not necessary. If you require proof, witness this exchange on Whaleoil's report on the death.
My comments were about David Farrar but there's no doubt they apply to Whaleoil; the guy is a stupid, petty thug.
-
-
Commenting on the homogenity of the National Party list is not ok Craig? Why?
You mightn't like the writing, but it's an entirely reasonable topic - I thought National were trying to broaden their base also. Sure they're policies are an attempt to emulate Labour's, but their candidates do still look like they always have... I assume it's deliberate; that they know where they want to try to win and have selected candidates accordingly. Maori haven't historically voted for National, nor have PIPs. Your reaction to the criticism is more a suprise than the criticism itself.
-
Commenting on the homogenity of the National Party list is not ok Craig? Why?
Well, Paul, I find it rather ironic that The Standard gets to have a sneer each way about 'tokenism'. Personally, Paul, I think it says more about the opportunistic racism of certain sections of the commentariat than the National Party.
-
I think that's a long-bow.
-
Well, frankly Paul, if I'm drawing a long bow here you're pulling out a pretty insulting piece of lead pipe assuming that people like Hekia Parata, Paul Quinn, Simon Bridges, Melissa Lee, Kanwal Bakshi and Sam Lotu-Iig are only on the list as some kind of ethnic window dressing.
-
I don't think they're widow dressing - and I had another look at the list myself after my earlier comment and now think the Standard piece was a little overstated, not entirely but somewhat. Two quick things. First, I don't think ethnicity ought to be the definitive characteristic in candidate selection (and I don't know the personal details of all of the people you've listed). Secondly, you're only going to get the diversity that's in fact within your membership. Labour's membership has always seemed more diverse to me, I don't think that's changed either, perhaps I'm wrong.
-
First, I don't think ethnicity ought to be the definitive characteristic in candidate selection (and I don't know the personal details of all of the people you've listed).
Well, I've known Simon Bridges for over ten years, when we were both knocking around in the Young Nats -- and he was a regional chair. So, I don't think he's a token brownie. As for Hekia Parata, I was a volunteer on her campaign when she was Wellington Central candidate in 2002 -- which was one hell of a time to get blooded.
Secondly, you're only going to get the diversity that's in fact within your membership. Labour's membership has always seemed more diverse to me, I don't think that's changed either, perhaps I'm wrong.
*sigh* Perhaps I'm entirely the wrong person to be singing that song to.
-
Oh... just fuck off
Well Craig, you will read left wing Blogs. Wouldn't you be happier with a different sort?
-
"Winston's" blog site is in fact owned by - and undoubtedly written by - Frank Perry, the only speechwriter whose immunity to shame (or lack of better prospects, or both) has seen him remain with WP where others have fled.
As I have previously explained elsewhere Winston's familiarity with computers doesn't extend to turning on the mains, much less actually inputting anything.
It will be fun to read, though, as Mr Perry sees his hope of future employent following the party's polling down the plughole, when I expect the postings will become even more shrill and extemporaneous.
-
Well Craig, you will read left wing Blogs. Wouldn't you be happier with a different sort?
Well, I do have a non-partisan distain for hacky race-baiting of all stripes. And if Labour hacks really want to talk about "looking like New Zealand" I look forward to the majority female caucus after the election.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.