Posts by simon g
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Leighton Smith this morning compared Mayor Bob to Churchill and JFK. I shit you not.
A drunk and a serial shagger? (See Herald on Sunday exclusive ...)
-
This has actually been answered: the work she was undertaking as Associate Minister of Defence was largely on the value for money review (or something like that) and was basically complete.
An answer, but not the reason. Unless you believe that, by a total coincidence, the work happened to finish at exactly the same time that the Associate Minister lost 3-2 in caucus. And also believe, that if the vote had gone 3-2 the other way, the Associate Minister's job would still have disappeared, regardless.
-
The feud is fun ("Values, not Politics" - ACT slogan). But there's more to this than just spectator sport.
On Monday the country had an Associate Defence Minister. The Prime Minister had confidence in her. The Defence Minister had confidence in her.
Suddenly, not only has that Minister lost her job, but the job itself has disappeared altogether.
I'd like to know what happened overnight in the Defence Ministry to make this job suddenly superfluous. I'd like to know when the Prime Minister decided that it was. Did he just wake up and think "We need two Ministers for the Rugby World Cup, because that's really important - but for wars and that, we can get by with one"?
Maybe we don't need an Associate Defence Minister at all. I wouldn't know. But - call me crazy - I'd like that to be determined by the needs of the portfolio, not Rodney Hide's ego.
-
The Guardian is liveblogging discoveries amongst the files and responses to the news.
Are they checking the mini-bar tabs? Need some help from our press gallery?
War, snore ... let us know when you've got a story.
-
I can't believe none of the MSM has asked Snedden this question yet.
Compare and contrast:
6 pm TV bulletins: Coverage of the All Whites' parade, yesterday. Coverage of this story, today. And for good measure, coverage of Andy Haden's surrealist poems (or "inappropriate comments"), at any time.
TVNZ's Mr Flannery might want take a break from the "re-structuring" and ask how his own flagship news programme somehow manages to bury the lead, when it's sitting there in the same building.
-
What was that line quoted by David Slack, once of this parish? "There go my people, I must find out where they are heading so I can lead them there".
Stuff reports:
This evening, Prime Minister John Key said he had not spoken to Mr McCully yet, but had seen his statement.
"I think the language is extremely direct. He has essentially said it's incompatible to be a shock jock and an ambassador for the Rugby World Cup."
The implication of Mr McCully's statement was that Mr Haden would have to choose between remaining as an ambassador and being a "shock-jock", Mr Key said.
"I'm sure those two [Mr Haden and Mr McCully] are having a conversation and where it goes, I guess we'll leave in the hands of Mr McCully."
(emphasis added)
The Apprentice, by John Key: "You're fired ... when ready."
-
If the All Blacks win the World Cup, Party Central will be a success. Whether it's on a windy wharf or in a hundred city bars.
If the All Blacks don't win the World Cup, Party Central will be a failure. Missed tackles and beaming Springboks don't look any better on a big screen.
Can't we just pool all the tax and rates dollars available and use them to buy the refs?
-
We're just arguing definitions here.
If it's the broad definition - to break the rules - then Suarez cheated, and so do many other players in nearly every game. And in many other sports (batsmen who don't walk, rugby players in the ruck, etc).
Some don't get punished for it. Suarez did. Rightly so.
That's about it, really.
(There is the separate issue of Suarez behaving like a dick afterwards, rather than looking sheepish and/or delivering a PR-scripted fake-apology, but I can't get too worked up about that myself).
-
Germany were great fun, but then they were generously helped by another comedy routine from the opposition defence. It's nice to see minnows like Argentina and England having their moment in the sun, but it's only when Germany come up against a tough, well-drilled professional defence like New Zealand's that we'll see a true test of their attacking prowess.
-
Sacha, people have handled the ball on/near the goal-line since the dawn of time - or cameras, anyway. England's Jack Charlton did it in 1966, at the World Cup. There have been many instances in big games (e.g. Liverpool in a League Cup final at Wembley).
As a consequence, the rules have changed: it is now an automatic red card and penalty, whereas before it was a lottery.
You won't see it "again and again" because this context - the 120th minute - is very rare. It's very unusual to see such desperation while a team can still win and a player can stay on the pitch.