Posts by Alex Coleman
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
-
While flicking past tv3 this AM, saw the Bish correcting what some "commentators" had said with regard to what God told Moses. The commentator was an OT author.
-
Hard News: Someone has to be accountable…, in reply to Terry Baucher,
Maybe the rest of Auckland should send the bill to the good people of the Epsom electorate.
I was thinking that, but I'm not an Aucklander so not really my place to say.
Still though, if public whinging sessions are to be held, Epsom might be a good venue; if only to let the locals know that they aren't quite as clever as they let themselves think they are.
-
Hard News: The Political Lie, in reply to Russell Brown,
The neolibs are always implying that we’d become more like Australia by surrendering regulation and taking a brutal approach toward labour relations.
The BRT is endlessly dull on this.
They keep saying that we stopped reforming when Lange had a cup of tea, and Australia just kept on truckin with the reforming, and here we are and there they are, and what does that tell you? That we need to keep reforming that’s what!
They don’t mention that Australia only got around to doing anything similar to the Employment Contracts Act until towards the end, (not coincidentally), of Howard’s government. It took them nearly that amount of time to sell Telstra as well.
I sometimes think they are not very honest people.
-
Hard News: The Political Lie, in reply to recordari,
Page five, and no Mac attack?
Never mind the mac:
-
This is pretty awesome, and even related to the thread, without even having to squint...
http://www.buffalobeast.com/?p=6072
It involves a Green Party candidate for the NY-26 race in the US, manning the phones as a volunteer for the Republican candidate. The whole thing may of course be lies, but still.
“Um, Bob?” I beckon the supervisor.
“Yeah, Steve, what is it?”
“Some of these people are saying that Jane is going to end Medicare–just because that’s what the Wall Street Journal wrote. What should I tell them–should I lie?”
“Hmm…” Bob thinks about this for a few seconds. “They’ve been asking about Medicare?”
“Yeah.” And they were.
“Shit,” he mumbles under his breath. “Don’t lie. Tell them that, if they’re 55 or over, Jane’s plan won’t change their Medicare. And if they’re 54 or under tell them that Jane’s plan will…um…make things…better.” He walks away.
“But, Bob?” I call after him. “Some of these people are younger and they think Medicare is a problem…should I tell them that Jane’s plan will end Medicare?”
“Yeah, if it helps,” he says, running back to his desk.
-
That hardtalk interview really does show both sides of the issue.
Key simply isn't concerned about Truth there. The actual state of the rivers is completely beside the point. 'You've got your academics, and there are others.'
Whether or not there really are 'others' is beside the point.
That line is a piece of Frankfurtian 'bullshit', ( it might be true that there such academics, it might not be true, but either way it serves his purpose to say it and it's probable that Key didn't know if these 'others' exist*), all that matters is getting through the interview without being caught in a contradiction.
With the SAS story, the bullshit is about what does 'detaining' mean. Oh no, we just happened to be near by when others detained people. After that we get 'he said/she said' and the other side is left Explaining, which is Losing.
In the US, it was about 'what is torture really?', 'It's no different from SERE training' and 'That stuff we do that isn't torture works, and if torture works shouldn't we do it anyway?'
*if he did know of any he would have mentioned them, but instead he makes a general case that academics are like lawyers, therefore, what is the truth? meh. Come down for a swim sometime, you'll love it.
-
Hard News: The Political Lie, in reply to BenWilson,
Philosophers will say different things, but some of them can be right and some wrong.
Sure! Let's vote on which is which :)
I think the relevant philospher here might be Harry Frankfurt:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Bullshit
Politicians often don't really care about the Truth with regard to statements. They aren't really trying to get listeners to have an opinion about the world, but rather an opinion about the politician.
The media doesn't help, with it's focus on 'perception', which seems to be, again, what they think the listener might think about the speaker. Not much room for Truth to get a look in here.
Which is why, I suspect, 'contradiction' is a bigger failing than 'lies' for politicians as they exist in the system we have currently fallen into in somehow.
I'm not saying I like it. I just don't see how Truth is relevant, or how we might change the system to make it so.
-
What is the truth anyway? You could ask a philospher, but they are like lawyers, and another could be found to say something different. My truth is 100% pure in comparison to other truths. Explaining is losing, perception is reality, forever and ever amen.
-
Hard News: Some Lines for Labour, in reply to Russell Brown,
It was an infantile but effective line of argument.
Duncan Garner used to crack me up on this.
For what seemed like a month in the build up to the budget he'd be badgering Cullen about "Will there be tax cuts?", and Cullen would say, clearly enough, "No, and here's why...".
Garner would lead his budget night piece with "No tax cuts in the budget, even though...".