Posts by Steve Parks
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
In other news, Kevin Smith raves about Chris Pine.
The clip on that site misses the money quote from Smith: “"I'd watch that dude do anything… I'd watch that dude have sex with my wife at this point. He's such a good actor."
Also, looks like Smith might be able to see more of Pine in the upcoming Green Lantern movie that Russell mentioned a few posts back. Apparently Pine will be offered the role of Hal Jordan in the film to be directed by NZer Martin Campbell.
And that's all for Steve's celebrity gossip.
-
I for one am not joining until I get the five husbands I was promised.
3410, meet Amy. Amy, meet 3410…
-
-
... "had the opposite effect..." I meant.
-
(And did Clark ever agree to be interviewed for Investigate?)
No, Steve, which is my point. Of course, to a certain wing-nut consistuency that means she had something to hide. I'm of the school that suspects she decided that she had better things to do with her time.Yeah, but what I was getting at is that there's a categorical difference between the two examples. I doubt Clark ever even entertained the idea of contributing to Investigate's stories; she never pulled out of an interview because she never agreed to one. Lee, not surprisingly, agreed to be interviewed by Campbell Live to answer some allegations, and just pulled out.
I'm not the biggest fan of Campbell Live (I've blogged before about how I find some of their lead stories to be astonishingly dopey). But their story here wasn't baseless and is pertinent: they had an actual person willing to front up and make pretty specific allegations. I'm not saying the claims are necessarily true or accurate, but it was a reasonable story for them to pursue. It seems to me, Lee's actions had to opposite effect to those of Clark's in regard to Investigate.
-
Oh, and Stephen Walker,
(I think so)
is this a new anti-Greens religion?Is this the Greens idea of a clever come-back?
how is it limited and contained? who is going to indemnify?
and lots of research can be done without release. just get NASA to build a research farm on Mars.It’s good to see you acknowledge the absurdity of your position.
-
Going back to Craig:
All Lee had to do was front up and refute the allegations. She didn't.
I hope Lee knows the difference between refute and deny, Scotty. And if you know anything about the 'media game', then you might have heard the idea that the worse thing to do with false allegations is to give them the oxygen of your attention. Which is why the Wishart analogy is perfectly appropriate: Clark has consistently said that she would not dignify any of the man's allegations with a nano-second of her time. And good on her.Except that these allegations have had plenty of oxygen anyway. Helped by Lee’s actions of agreeing to appear on Campbell, then withdrawing. (And did Clark ever agree to be interviewed for Investigate?)
Graeme mentioned:
If by "discussion" you exclude a debate between DPF and former broadcasting minister Trevor Mallard on the appropriateness and legality of the matter, then I suppose this might be accurate…
Yeah let’s look at that. Here’s the salient part, were Mallard was summarizing the issues (my emphasis): “… Two the involvement of Ms Lee in the production of an election special. Three the donation of her company resources to the making of a video and whether that was properly declared. And four whether the expense in the ad was properly declared by the national party and/or Pansy Wong. Actually all pretty simple factual issues and easily cleared up if she did no wrong and fronted. The fact that she ran away from an interview yesterday certainly left a terrible impression of a candidate with something to hide.”
-
Wow. Away for a day, and what do I miss?
Any thread with a "pull my finger” joke just has to be fun…
Best quip of the day was from Shay:
When was the planet destroyed?
You missed a bitchin' party.Classic.
-
Craig,
Then why didn't lee just appear on Campbell live and deny any impropriety? -
I love coffee, occaisional cigars or a pipe (4-5 times a month); chocolate, single malts, & good wine. They're drugs. I'm sweet with that. And for those who enjoy a bit of cannabis now & then - why not.
Islander,
Then why not advocate for legalizing cannabis so that it has the same status as your drugs of choice? Why do you stop at decriminalization?