Hard News: National Exuberance
118 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 Newer→ Last
-
if it were some more amenable political party said request might have been seen more favourably.
That last bit didn't strike me as a very clever thing to say.
No, it's not especially clever, but it's also not terribly relevant. He didn't ask, he just suddenly got announced as an Act candidate. So what may or may not have transpired if he had asked is beside the point.
-
I'm fairly sure I/S was calmer at the previous election.
I agree totally.... I was just wondering if lack of calmness was a side effect of not getting contrary feedback (of a rational nature, not the wingnut variety).... or if in fact it might have been an intentional 'persona' taken on to push your version of the truth against competing blogs of an opposite view?
-
What strikes me is is how you can attend at Green Party AGM in June, and then contrive to number 10 on the Act party list a little over 10 weeks later. Fascinating.
And what is the Act Party up to? Stirring up a situation ripe for a nice bit of union bashing just before the elections? Yum!
-
I call it bizarre .
Well, I think the Greens and ACT are rather weird, but I'm sure they feel exactly the same about we Tories. There's also a school of thought that anyone who seeks political power is exactly the kind of person who shouldn't be allowed to have it.
All of which might make Mr Tan a couple of kumara short of a full hangi, but that's somewhat beside the point, isn't it?
I'm fairly sure I/S was calmer at the previous election.
I don't think anyone was in a state of zen-like calm three years ago.
-
I agree totally.... I was just wondering if lack of calmness was a side effect of not getting contrary feedback (of a rational nature, not the wingnut variety)....
I'm going to call bullshit on that, Fletcher, because there is a contact link on the sidebar of No Right Turn. And I'll tell you from experience that (time and energy permitting) I/S will respond quite calmly and rationally to calm and rational critiques. There's a difference between being open to feed back, and deciding you don't really want to run a public troll farm. He's certainly not the only blogger that either doesn't allow comments, or will hold them for moderation before posting. The only problem with the latter option is that takes more time than you think, especially if you're reasonably high traffic and/or have a hardcore of persistent flamers, trolls and outright stalkers who wouldn't take a hint if it was rolled in chocolate and called a bon-bon.
-
But they haven't, which is all that they ever ask of their members' employers - you're welcome to sack people who breach the terms of their contracts, but you're not allowed to do it out-of-hand and without due process.
Mattew's very succinctly put the point I wanted to make (plus I'm thankful to Peter for clarifying the legal issues earlier).
Well, I think the Greens and ACT are rather weird, but I'm sure they feel exactly the same about we Tories.
But that's not, I don't think, the point Craig. It's his conversion that's bizarre; from hard-out lefty to hard-out righty. It's been so rapid, he's even been unable to align what he does 9 - 5 to fit with his new found faith. He must be in such turmoil!
I don't misunderstand, or think weird, Tories or any others who take a different political perspective compared with mine, I simply disagree. But I've never understood people who's politics seem as changeable as the whether on a long weekend in Auckland.
-
.... should have been 'weather'...
-
Craig calling bullshit.... fair enough. I'll try and explain what i mean...
Maybe I'm projecting some of my own issues (ego?)into this.... I dont feel inclined to send him questions or alternative viewpoints if they are not going up on the site... He's always answered mine well and convincingly when I did (back when he did have commentss).
I doubt I'll ever persuade him otherwise from his points of view as they are obviously very firmly held (much like yourself), so I dont see much point in disagreeing with him in private.... whereas, if my comment is answered in public, others get to see it, and yet others still may provide an alternative take either on a comment or its reply..... its the whole sharing of ideas and balancing the shades of grey that I really like in a comments section like here....
But yeah, I totally get the not wanting to be a troll farm or invest the time needed to moderate against becoming one.
So, lets say you're correct that he hasnt gone more (I said feral before, that was unfair), lets say 'extreme' because of lack of comments... do you have an alternative explanation or do you not agree with the observation at all? (I know I'm not the only one to have made the observation in various blog comments).
-
Should have been any weekend in Auckland. :)
-
I heard (or did I read) that there'd been no dry weekends in Akl since something like April... depressing. It's been a long while since I lived in Akl, twenty years or thereabouts, and I do recall it being wet but not that wet!
-
But that's not, I don't think, the point Craig. It's his conversion that's bizarre; from hard-out lefty to hard-out righty. It's been so rapid, he's even been unable to align what he does 9 - 5 to fit with his new found faith. He must be in such turmoil!
*blink* I'm sorry, what was the point again apart from someone behaving in a manner you considered unseemly or something?
-
Sick of sogginess, I tell ya.
-
Yes, unseemly - unseemly to have converted so far and so quickly. Not however, unseemly that he might have a view different from mine, your's or even his employer's.
-
I wonder if the Business Roundtable or the Employers and Manufacturers Association would be happy with finding they've hired a member of RAM? Or Density Church with employing a Satanist (or even a genuine Christian).
-
Yes, unseemly - unseemly to have converted so far and so quickly. Not however, unseemly that he might have a view different from mine, your's or even his employer's.
Or naive.
-
But that's not, I don't think, the point Craig. It's his conversion that's bizarre; from hard-out lefty to hard-out righty. It's been so rapid, he's even been unable to align what he does 9 - 5 to fit with his new found faith. He must be in such turmoil!
I think it's inaccurate to describe the Greens as "hard-out lefty", single-dimension left/right paradigm isn't a great fit for Green politics, you really need to include the liberal/authoritarian dimensions as well.
There are plenty of liberal aspects to our policies, so there will be some overlap with the liberal aspects of Acts policies too. Ergo, Shawn may have found sufficient overlap to consider moving to Act as being a non-extreme progression.
What I find fascinating is that he managed to get to number 10 on the list in such a short time. Is Act short of candidates or something ?
-
Paul,
When I'm incorrect, I convert fairly quickly when presented with facts... :)
-
Rich, if they can demonstrate that the RAM or satanist membership was interfering with their duties (as the EPMU would likely have been able to at some stage), then as I understand it they would have a good case to ask the person to deal with the situation, and if no improvement is forthcoming then to dismiss them. But that's not what's being fought over here. The EPMU alleges breach of employment agreement, and the other side alleges the agreement was unlawful anyway. There are of course other complications, but that's the heart of the matter as I understand it.
-
So, lets say you're correct that he hasnt gone more (I said feral before, that was unfair), lets say 'extreme' because of lack of comments... do you have an alternative explanation or do you not agree with the observation at all?
I'm not really sure I'm down with the observation at all. Even the most temperate and dispassionate people (and I'm not just talking about bloggers, political or otherwise) have subjects they get... well, cranky about. As long as the signal-to-noise ratio is high (and while I disagree with I/S more often than not, I think he does so) I'll make allowances. Personally, I'd like to put a fart tax on I/S every time he caps "National" with "and their rich backers", but he generally stays on the right side of my bullshit allergy.
I honestly don't think there's a causal relationship between Idiot/Savant flagging comments on No Right Turn, and levels of crankiness. But now that I think about it, I wonder if for some the real issue isn't that he's putting the stick about, but that he's not swinging it to the right. You know, the same kind of vitriol DPF gets from the usual suspects when he has the gall to show insufficient ideological rigour. Remember, when politics becomes a secular religion (and a fundamentalist cult of one, at that), the only thing worse than an infidel is a back-sliding apostate.
And as I said upthread, if Chris Trotter really wants to get into a blog-feud (which is about as boring as listening to your elderly aunts bicker at Christmas time), I really don't think that 'courageous corruption' column is a worthwhile battlefield. I get that a large part of Trotter's persona is the cold-eyed battle-scarred warrior in the political trenches, the plain-speaking shit-cutter, and the Socialist cuckoo in the right-wing corporate media nest. But any profession provocateur runs the risk of crossing a line into just being a shock jock. Either they don't believe a word of it, which is bad enough. Or they do, which is worse.
-
I think it's inaccurate to describe the Greens as "hard-out lefty", single-dimension left/right paradigm isn't a great fit for Green politics, you really need to include the liberal/authoritarian dimensions as well.
Fair point. Thanks.
Paul,
When I'm incorrect, I convert fairly quickly when presented with facts... :)
Me too, but each time I realise I'm wrong about one thing, I'm less certain about the next... there's a wonderful quality to the certainty I once had, but it's gone, gone, gone...
-
right side of my bullshit allergy
Hope you're stocked up on antihysterics then, 'cause the season's starting...
if Chris Trotter really wants to get into a blog-feud
It could simply be that he's wrongly assessed that he needs a blog-feud to kick-start his blog; God knows the blogosphere needs more polemicists!
-
I wonder if the Business Roundtable or the Employers and Manufacturers Association would be happy with finding they've hired a member of RAM?
Probably not, but if my memory serves neither the EMA or BRT does all their policy work in-house. And I certainly hope an organisation that provides advocacy and advice to its members on employment issues, wouldn't actually be breeching human rights and employment law by getting all HUAC on potential contractors. "Have you now or have you ever been..." "A member of the Communist Party? No, and shall we move on before you say something you'll regret?"
-
Hope you're stocked up on antihysterics then, 'cause the season's starting...
Well, maintaining my sobriety one day at a time. Certainly might be time for another purge of the RSS feeds, just to keep me out of temptation's way. :)
-
Or, perhaps you believe Hide's assertion that it's really about racial discrimination?
I forgot to mention that in my post. Hide saying that was truly, unforgivably cynical. It seems that Shawn Tan's conversion is genuine, and good luck to him -- Act would be better for a few more idealists.
But I fear that Rodney gave his new recruit a glimpse into the real soul of the party.
-
Lyndon Hood @ 2.23pm
We-ll, firstly he's only announced his intention to run so far AFAIK.
Secondly I heard (Andrew Little?) on the radio saying that given the amount of time involved he would have had to ask permission. And that if it were some more amenable political party said request might have been seen more favourably.
That last bit didn't strike me as a very clever thing to say.Nope. He has been announced as the number ten candidate on the ACT Party list. He did not seek the consent of his employer to do so, and this is required by his collective employment agreement. The EPMU is reviewing this breach of the CEA (not seeking the Union's consent), as any party to any contract is entitled
If one party to a contract breaks their part of the deal, then surely the other party must consider whether it still wants to be a party to the contract.
On Little's comments, I think that it would be very strange for a trained lawyer, as Little is, to say something that on the face of it indicates an intention to discriminate in respect of the terms and conditions of employment on the grounds of political opinion. I'd like to see a transcript of the whole interview. If he meant to communicate that he would discriminate in that manner, I'm very much inclined to agree with you about it not being clever. That would be an understatement.
The question of whether it is morally wrong for any employer to refuse soemone consent -- including large amounts of unpaid leave -- that is another matter, albeit related. I/S's original post included a whole lot of stuff about the HRA, and seemed rather confused as a result.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.