Posts by simon g
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I'm not writing because I'm bored, I write because I can. My columns are carried in six countries. My last book was published in several languages and is in its third edition. I've written more books than Anderton's read.
And I have a website! It's like a blog. I get feedback almost daily. And did you see me on Agenda? Was I good? Was I? Also, when I was at school ...
-
Re: Mike Moore's use of code words.
No Right Turn picked up another:
Exactly what does the "consort" Judith Tizard and the legion of Ministers outside Cabinet actually do?
The dykeocracy again ... and Moore has previous here. You'd think the commentators would point out his own history of personal abuse, but really, the NZ media are a pushover for any politician who wants to pretend the past never happened. Do they throw out all files that predate the internet or something?
-
But wouldn't it be a refreshing change to have a politician admit to past pot use and not immediately rush a qualifier like "I'm not proud of it" or "I regret it now" or "it was foolish of me" or "I didn't inhale"?
Yes. And I'd take that further.
What the politicians in Aus and NZ have done (not only Key) is deal with the issue by placing it in their distant past. The same often happens with stories about drug use, Groser being the latest example.
Now let's say they are all telling the truth, so apparently there's no problem. But ... what they (and the media) are effectively buying into is the idea that "sins" are forgivable as long as they predate their political lives.
That means that when a more recent case emerges of "inappropriate" behaviour, the "distance defence" cannot be used. The rules are being tacitly set. You can sin in your youth but must be pure now.
Anybody who's spent five minutes reading a history book will know that plenty of world leaders have been doing Great Deeds (or wicked ones) while bonking, toking and God knows what else. Roosevelt and Churchill - respectively an adulterer and a piss-head - would surely be deemed unsuitable for public office today. They were still at it.
A combination of intrusive media and religious right (and spin doctors?) have moved the boundaries, so that now we focus on finding disqualifications instead of qualities. And that's much to be regretted, I feel.
-
John Key did go to a strip club, but he was the most junior member of the group, and just went along with the majority. He did not actually support going to the strip club himself, but supported their right to go to the strip club, and anyway it was a long time ago and he doesn‘t recall. Today he says he would not go to the strip club and insists he has no plans to join his old friends in the Coalition of the Willies.
-
Keywatch update: if you saw the news tonight, you might have noticed that when the Next Prime Minister made his grand entrance to the National party conference, he did so to the young-but-safe sound of Coldplay. Which seemed a bit odd, given Chris Martin's well-known lefty political leanings.
But perhaps it was another attempt to follow the UK example set by David Cameron's cool Conservatives, who recently recruited Martin themselves, as this Guardian article explains:
In a coup for the Conservatives, the lead singer of Coldplay, Chris Martin, has declared his backing for David Cameron, releasing a song that the party hopes will become the Tory answer to Labour's 1997 anthem, Things Can Only Get Better.
...
"Coldplay's music shines with the kind of optimistic vision I want to bring to Britain as a whole," Mr Cameron said yesterday, at an impromptu press conference outside his local organic microbrewery. "And a forward-thinking party can't ignore the 'information superhighway'. So to anyone who cares about the future of this country, I say, look, let's not get bogged down in the old ideologies. Just click on to the world wide web, and listen to what Chris has to say."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1744447,00.html
So clearly the choice of Coldplay today was to send a message - Cameron and Key are singing the same song. (And only a spoilsport would point out the date of the story ...)
-
As we know, what finally did for old B-P was not misleading the PM or the public or even Sean Plunket, but taking on the might of Audrey Young. There are some things up with which we will not put.
So John Key is in trouble on this one ...
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10455127
A bit too soon to be dusting off the Cromwell quote, but still good for a giggle, as novice leader learns Media Lesson One: the tape recorder is not your friend.
-
I listened to today's exchange live on the radio. What's intriguing is that B-P volunteered the "new" information. It wasn't another slip of the tongue.
Presumably he knows there's more to come from other sources and he'd rather drip-feed it himself. A few days late to switch tactics though.
-
To clarify: the current Listener, not the ones mentioned up-thread.
-
I agree, Merc. But then, that is John Key. We have nothing to go on, so we can all invent our own version, conquering hero or bogeyman.
In that Listener article, in 7 pages (minus the space for glossy pin-ups) John Key says the following about policies/beliefs/substance:
1. We will spend more money.
2. I agree with the government.He repeats these sentiments several times. And that's it - the sum total of content.
Remember this is not a One News soundbite, but supposedly an "in-depth" article. Now it could be that Key said more and Ralston didn't bother sharing it with us, but I doubt it. It seems there really is nothing there.
-
Can we get back to John Qui?
From today's Marlborough Express:
"I went on the campaign trail from the day I became leader," he said, adding that he has not read a book since Nicky Hager's The Hollow Men last year.
Books, eh? So 20th century. No, John relates to the youth, and he can't be doing with the long sentences and ideas and shit.