Posts by Craig Ranapia
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Another feature of the new government will be the performance of of the deputy leader Julia Gillard. Isn't it great to see a woman close to the apex of federal leadershp in Australia?
Don't know about you, Charles, but you'd think this is one country where folks with vaginas in high public positions have lost their novelty value.
Anyway, the most interesting post-election item is that Rudd is not letting the caucus have any say whatsoever in choosing the front bench. Now, that's definitely Bliar-ite, and only time will tell whether it ultimately has the same outcome.
-
I'd try Chris Carter, myself, but I don't think this is meant to be a joke.
A young opponent of the Electoral Finance Bill was taken aback when Education Minister Chris Carter replied with a one-sentence email asking: "Are you a member of the Exclusive Brethren?"
Simeon Brown has emailed all MPs several times asking them not to support the bill and saying it restricts freedom of speech.
He twice got a response from Mr Carter asking if he belonged to the brethren.
Mr Brown, 16, said he was disappointed at the response, which bordered on religious discrimination.
"I asked him how my response to this provocative question would change his response to me. How would it be different if I was Exclusive Brethren, or just a concerned citizen, like me?
"You don't expect that from ministers. You expect them to be a little bit helpful, and outline their reasons for supporting the legislation."
Mr Carter did not know Mr Brown's age, or his religious affiliations - the teenager is a Reformed Baptist - but said Christianity was not part of the submissions he made.
A spokeswoman for Mr Carter said the question was the minister's standard response to messages against the Electoral Finance Bill.
"He was making a point about people trying to buy elections. He's trying to make the point that the Exclusive Brethren tried to influence the 2005 election secretly."
What a knob. The only point made here is how arrogant and paranoid some folks really are...
-
Sorry for thread jacking, but while we're talking about cultural brain death, the Qantas Media Award results were less than encouraging:
TV3 won the coveted Best News trophy. Campbell Live, 3 News and 60 Minutes each won their categories, and TV3's Duncan Garner was named TV Journalist of the Year...
Um... I'm still far from impressed with TVNZ's news and current affairs but IMNSHO there have been way too many occasions where TVNZ got the basics right while Three was tabloid-ing out to justify this result. And I don't think I'm the only PA reader who is wondering WTF is going on with Campbell Live?
-
Of course, once the federal government goes Labor, it's likely that the state governments will turn Liberal over the next few years.
Don't know about that... the NSW Liberals seemed determined to hand an unpopular and incompetent Labour Government another term by... well, running a campaign so piss-poor I wouldn't trust the people responsible to run a cake stall. Politics is a funny thing - though its often hard to tell whether you talking about funny ha-ha, funny peculiar or some kinky hybrid of the two.
-
I think this one should be pretty clear cut however - all the polling is consistent and has been for months.
Yeah, what a shame the Aussie media can't be voted out of office - or at least required to undergo remedial journalism training. I can only imagine what the coverage would have been like if a fraction of the resources and energy spent on polls, and poll-driven punditry had been expended on... say, some actual skeptical analysis of the 60 billion plus in new spending promises from Labour and the Coalition, coupled with a deficit of actual policy.
Oh well, I guess the one thing about a democracy is that you get what you deserve - in the end.
-
The idea that any publicity is good publicity is bollocks.
Well, yes, David and rodgerd but that wasn't really my point. I've been doing radio pieces for the last nine months, and while the money is nice, it's rather nice that they're heard by someone. Whether successfully or not is up to others to judge, but I'm trying to communicate to an audience, just as I don't think McCahon's ultimate aim was to have his work gathering dust in a climate-controlled storeroom in the depths of Te Papa.
Don't see where I gave the impression that I was in any way dismissive of actual intellectual property rights - or the idea that artists, musicians and writers should be properly compensated for use of said intellectual property.
-
I would have thought - regardless of how personal or not the view might be - that the book and the series was extending the reach of the museum and gallery collections and that was a good thing!
YYes, and while 'cultural sensitivity' is a damn fine thing, but I sometimes wonder if it isn't a thick layer of brownwash for institutional/academic power plays and (dare I say it) the kind of guilty white liberalism I find every bit as obnoxious, ill-informed and ultimately patronising as shameless white racism.
You're obviously more hooked into the arts scene that I, but could you point to any artist who doesn't want their work seen and discussed?
-
The government went into the EFB seeking the broadest coalition of parties it could - but the blunt fact is that if you are unwilling to contribute the numbers to help a bill pass, you get no input - it's that simple.
OK... I don't think I'm the one who's lost the plot on the realities of MMP. Seriously, Idiot/Savant, I thought a new electoral system was supposed to end - or at least mitigate - that kind of zero sum thinking. Once again, I find it really hard to feel much sympathy for people who are too clever for their own good and don't much like the consequences.
-
I'd find it easier to take National's complaints seriously if they'd ever tried to be constructive on this bill. They didn't, and were sidelined as a result.
Oh, come on Idiot/Savant... it seem pretty clear from the beginning that Labour wasn't interested in having National involved in the formulation of this bill from the beginning, which is not surprising but please spare me the faux indignation when someone has the gall to state the bleeding obvious.
There is simply no point in trying to seek "consensus" with people who have already indicated that they are not interested.
Yes, and I actually think 'consultation' involves seeking out - and paying genuine attention to - people you know aren't going to tell you what you want to hear.
-
Farrar is giving political comment, and he's a national party whatsit right? So the byline should be National Party Flunky or whatever.
Yes, Kyle, just as Sir Geoffrey should be identified as 'rich c**t lobbyist and big ticket Labour donor' if you want to throw around inflammatory language like that. So I'd stick to 'whatever'.
And I don't know if you've been paying attention over the last thirty or forty years, but Geoffrey Palmer regularly provides legal commentary on enormously politically contentious issues. Whether the quality of his discourse is enhanced by labelling him as a 'Labour Party Flunky or whatever' is really dubious.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 … 1235 Older→ First