Hard News: It is your right and duty to vote
464 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 6 7 8 9 10 … 19 Newer→ Last
-
I don't think that editorial could be more condescending if it tried.
Indeed. As a student of newspaper editorials, and Herald editorials in particular, I can say it is a particularly horrible little effort. Glib, poorly informed and patronising.
It does amuse me how the Herald arrogates the role of protest for itself. Last year it was going freaking nutso over a policy it deemed "an attack on democracy"; now it's telling teachers to shut up and fall in with legislation denied select committee scrutiny.
I'm actually trying not to be absolutist on the national standards issue; direct comparisons with the debacles overseas seem perilous. But reading something as feckless as that Herald editorial is depressing.
-
But reading something as feckless as that Herald editorial is depressing.
Why? When you have no expectations you can't be disappointed; it's the occasional glister of insight from that black hole of intelligent thought that really gets me down.
Sadly, I do expect a lot more of Audrey Young than this-- and was I the only person who mentally added to the headline " 'cause I say so"? If anyone -- or anything -- is a threat to race relations in this country, it isn't John Key or a scrap of fabric.
-
Why? When you have no expectations you can't be disappointed
True. Most of the time I don't hate myself enough to care about their editorials. But when they pick up on something I happen to care about it's difficult to not be disappointed by the tone and the underlying hate/distrust/disrespect of teachers and principals. (Disclaimer: I am not a teacher, but used to be one a long time ago. Some of my best friends are teachers.)
-
If anyone -- or anything -- is a threat to race relations in this country, it isn't John Key or a scrap of fabric.
It does seem lazy to invoke "race relations" in that context, yes. But I do agree with her characterisation of the process as somewhat half-arsed. Key's talent for personal resolution of political problems is notable, but as others have noted here, he does seem to miss the gap between the personal and the official and constitutional.
-
The man is shrewd, though, isn't he? That strikes me as a very smart move.
-
It does seem lazy to invoke "race relations" in that context, yes. But I do agree with her characterisation of the process as somewhat half-arsed.
Which is one thing, but writing not one but two lazy pieces about "resentments" that exist because Audrey says they do -- and the only evidence she can muster is Dover Samuels obligingly giving good soundbite? Strikes me as not only a dog-whistle but a wonderful case of circular jerk reasoning.
UPDATE: Could anyone tell me WTF Shane Jones is on, and why it's not banned?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/3160406/Maori-flag-symbol-of-protest-opponents
I think the media (and the Labour Party) really need to sit down over the Christmas break and ask themselves whether it would be wise to go on a tea-bag free diet.
-
I'm on my second coffee and thought this might hold some relevance.
I see it as a good transition from the NZ Flag & Tino Rangatiratanga Flag to my favourite, the Hunterwasser Koru Flag.
-
Audrey Young: "It would be my fervent personal hope that the flying of the two flags works out well, that no one is too upset, and that it marks the start of a more hopeful sort of Waitangi Day."
Lies - it's clearly your (and Labour's) "fervent personal hope" that you can stir that "upset" because it makes for easy newspaper coverage/political wedge making.
-
It does amuse me how the Herald arrogates the role of protest for itself. Last year it was going freaking nutso over a policy it deemed "an attack on democracy"; now it's telling teachers to shut up and fall in with legislation denied select committee scrutiny.
I wouldn't get too upset - give it a couple of days and the editorial voice will be praising the teachers for their courageous stand. The only thing more consistent than it's idiocy is it's inconsistency.
-
Lies - it's clearly your (and Labour's) "fervent personal hope" that you can stir that "upset" because it makes for easy newspaper coverage/political wedge making.
Gareth: But you've got to have a bit of concern trolling in the mix for plausible deniability when faced with the very ugliness you've been beating up...
Meanwhile, hat-tip to Danyl for this fascinating backgrounder:
The second part of a 3 News Reid Research poll shows that voters are questioning Phil Goff’s motives for making his recent race relations speech.
Mr Goff accused National of pandering to the Maori Party – and it had the potential to divide Maori and Pakeha relations.
But the Labour leader found himself defending the speech as not everyone in his own party agreed with his approach.
Party hierarchy tried to gloss over the division, so 3 News asked 1000 people if they agreed with Mr Goff's speech.
A significant 43.6 percent said they agreed, but 47.5 percent said they disagreed with Mr Goff's approach.
Almost 9 percent did not know.
3 News also asked: ‘Why do you think Mr Goff made the speech’.
Just 24.8 percent thought Mr Goff had genuine concerns for future Maori-Pakeha relationships.
An overwhelming 61.1 percent said it was just to get more media attention as Labour's leader.
Just 14 percent did not know.
Ouch...
-
I wouldn't get too upset - give it a couple of days and the editorial voice will be praising the teachers for their courageous stand. The only thing more consistent than it's idiocy is it's inconsistency.
That reminds me, did they ever follow up on their hysterical demands of any and all MPs who voted for the Electoral Finance Bill? I seem to remember at one point they were going to post their pictures every day in the lead up to the election. Funnily enough, that's the moment I stopped reading the Herald, so I wouldn't know if they went anywhere with it...
-
UPDATE: Could anyone tell me WTF Shane Jones is on, and why it's not banned?
I'll have to disagree with you there. I thought his interview on RNZ, quoted in that link, was reasonably thoughtful. What in particular was your problem with it?
I don't have a problem with the tino rangitira flag per se, but I do have a little bit of a problem with one Maori Party MP running an unofficial process that elevates to semi-official status the flag that the party has adopted to symbolise itself.
John Key kept referring to it as "the Maori flag" on Morning Report today. It now seems clear that more than a few Maori don't see it that way.
-
Up to a point, Rich. But I understand that later this week I'll be attending a function with a certain Philip Goff, who is richly deserving of a proper bitch slapping until he bleeds likes a haemophiliac garden sprinkler. Someone else will have to have the pleasure, though, because I don't roll like a thug. And I'm the kind of naive old whoopsie who still thinks it's really cool that I've got an on-line American acquaintance who walked up to Helen Clark on Lambton Quay, shook her hand and didn't get shot for his troubles. :)
Well, I still really can't bring myself to feel even the smallest iota of sympathy or guilt. I don't roll like a thug, either, so i'm not going to go out and cut his brake cables. But if he died in a car crash, I wouldn't be losing any sleep.
And part of that is because we do live in a society where the only thing preventing you from giving Goff a (metaphorical) ear-bashing is good manners, and where Helen Clark can be acosted by strangers on Lambton Quay. If either of them had got away with half the stuff Berlo has, then I'd rather hope for their sakes that the DP guys were on their toes.
-
It now seems clear that more than a few Maori don't see it that way.
There's been plenty of stock placed in the 80% approval rating it got through a series of hui - do you think these were stacked in Maori Party favour somehow?
-
I'll have to disagree with you there. I thought his interview on RNZ, quoted in that link, was reasonably thoughtful. What in particular was your problem with it?
Apart from the thick clouds of concern trolling, and elevating the poisonously bad political blood between Labour and the Maori Party into a "divisive" threat to race relations? Nothing at all.
Perhaps Hone and Dover need to get a motel room and fuck the pain away; but if anyone is really playing a nasty and dangerous game of Hori Roulette (like the Russian variety -- but much slower), it's not Key.
And to be brutally cynical about it Russell, I know you've got sincere concerns about the process. I'm not inclined to be equally generous to Labour, Winnie Peters or The Herald.
John Key kept referring to it as "the Maori flag" on Morning Report today. It now seems clear that more than a few Maori don't see it that way.
As I said: Maori not Te Borg on any damn subject. I know the MSM have a learning disability when it comes to grasping that notion, but tell me something I don't know, and have the bite marks to prove it... :)
Meanwhile, there are plenty of people who see New Zealand's flag as a relic of now politically and culturally irrelevant colonial ties with Mutha England. Can't really be bothered getting my republican panties in a wad about that, and neither can The Herald. But when those bloody Maaaris are involved, it's all on.
-
There's been plenty of stock placed in the 80% approval rating it got through a series of hui - do you think these were stacked in Maori Party favour somehow?
Yes, perhaps John isn't the only one who struggles to distinguish the personal, the official, and the constitutional (or doesn't care enough to try). The apprentice (Pita) is just learning from the master (John).
Speaking of John, is anyone else mildly surprised he's put up with these late-night textses from that Williams idiot? I can't imagine HC would have. Presumably PMs have security people who can convince others not to be annoying (and yes, Craig, I know it's nice that PMs in New Zealand are relatively approachable - even by self-styled Maori radicals who want to twist their arms off. But I don't expect to get away with repeated late-night texting).
my favourite, the Hunterwasser Koru Flag.
Yes, the Hundertwasser flag's brilliant.
-
Maori is plural
-
But I don't expect to get away with repeated late-night texting.
But even there, Key was smart enough not to take the bait. Though the real money quote came from Wayne Mapp:
Dr Mapp said he had received many texts from Mr Williams and agreed they could be aggressive in tone.
"The Prime Minister is entirely accurate. I know that Andrew feels strongly about issues. Let us put it this way, if you receive a text that is largely in capital letters with multiple exclamation marks, you are reasonably confident that the person sending it is feeling particularly aggrieved about the point."
He sometimes replied to Mr Williams, "but not in the same style, I hasten to add".
Personally, I'm more worried about allegations I've heard about Williams' rather... shall we say truculent attitude toward other councillors and council staff. To use a civil service euphemism, that's not a particularly helpful approach.
In the end, Williams is a great rentaquote but I don't know anyone else who takes the guy particularly seriously. The problem is that I live in a city where the Mayor is a not terribly funny joke.
-
In the end, Williams is a great rentaquote but I don't know anyone else who takes the guy particularly seriously.
Someone will probably give him a radio show at this rate.
-
There's been plenty of stock placed in the 80% approval rating it got through a series of hui - do you think these were stacked in Maori Party favour somehow?
That seemed to be Jones' contention -- that they were essentially Maori Party hui, and poorly-attended at that. I have no way of knowing whether that's true, but it does seem an oddly ad hoc way of doing things.
Most of it's not my argument, but I think it's perilous to equate the Maori Party with the voice of Maori in general. For all the talk of the tactical success or otherwise of the Goff speech, that dog whistling probably helped put off a Maori support base that actually doesn't want to be subject to the internal politics of the Maori Party. That's one reason it was a dumb speech.
-
Someone will probably give him a radio show at this rate.
So long as it's on at 3am, I see no harm in that.
-
Perhaps Hone and Dover need to get a motel room and fuck the pain away; but if anyone is really playing a nasty and dangerous game of Hori Roulette (like the Russian variety -- but much slower), it's not Key.
Is there anything they could have said that wouldn't have occasioned a spray of sexually-themed scorn from you though?
You seem to be denying them the right to their own argument.
-
There's been plenty of stock placed in the 80% approval rating it got through a series of hui - do you think these were stacked in Maori Party favour somehow?
Fair question, Gareth.
As Eddie on The Standard has just commented :
Sharples only offered four choices – the flag of the United Tribes, the New Zealand Flag, the New Zealand Ensign, and TTR. The first is the flag of only some iwi and the next two were joke options. TTR was the only real option, but that doesn’t change the fact that it has represented one strain of Maori activism until this point and is the flag of the Maori Party.
-
Perhaps, at this time of evaluating which Maori flag Maoris really want, we could turn our attention to the other flag flying on the Harbour Bridge on 6th Feb.
Because I’d be surprised if you got anything close to an 80% approval rating there.
-
I see you've all pretty much moved on from this topic, but I'm going to persevere:
Earlier I noted that I'd considered telling the school that I refused to allow my children to be assessed, but that other sources (not the school) had told me the school wouldn't have any choice because it was the law.
So I read the law (I tend to find laws easier to understand than policies). And as someone else has pointed out upthread, school boards just have to have in their charter "the board's aims, objectives, directions, priorities, and targets" in regard to "student achievement, including the assessment of students against any national standards...".
That's a slightly different thing from saying "boards/principals/teachers must ensure every student in their school is tested against national standards".
Now, I gather (trying to find the quote...) Mrs (?) Tolley has declared that opposition to the new regime is based on ideology rather than evidence. I disagree, but if that's what the government position is, I'm going to work with it.
Ideology is political opinion. Freedom from discrimination on the grounds of political opinion, in the area of education, is protected under the Human Rights Act 1993. Therefore, as a parent, I can say that it is my politiical opinion that I disagree with the new national standards, and that I therefore refuse to allow my children to be tested (or alternatively, refuse to allow my children's results to be forward to the Ministry of Education), in the same way that parents may refuse to allow their children to participate in swimming classes because it is against their religious beliefs. The HRA protects both me and my children from suffering any adverse treatment because of this refusal, and, more importantly, protects the school and the board from being required to enforce testing on my children.
Can anyone think of anything I've missed? If not, I think I'll run with it.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.