Posts by Riddley Walker
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
'dodgiest administrations we've ever had in terms of scandal'
you cannot be serious.
like corngate - the great scandal where in turned out the alledged corn never actually existed. like paintergate - where the PM signed the back of a painting to give to a charity auction. like speedgate - where the PM is not driving, but found to be in a motorcade escorted by police, that is driving too fast.
the field thing was bad, but i don't know you can blame any party for backing one of its members until there is a strong case against them. once there was, i don't think you could call field's treatment by Labour 'protection'.
if that's dodgiest administration ever, see (1) any history of NZ politics (2) any account of the National party in and out of government (3) any historical or contemporary account of politics anywhere abroad for a comparison of what constitutes dodgy politics.give me a break.
administration with the most dodgy beat-up claims of scandal thrown at it by the right maybe, yes.
-
having said all that, the Listener could avoid all these problems if they didn't just appoint cryptoconservative permanent staff with National or ACT associations.
i'm sure it's just coincidence that Young still toes a freemarketist line to the letter, often to the point of absurdity.
i'm sure it's just coincidence that Black trudges through anti-government redneck populist takes on every issue (from hitting kids to global warming to the joys of SUVs) and that the inaccuracies and misrepresentations she employs are really just reflections on her ability rather than ideology.
and i'm sure it's just coincidence that while Clifton pretends to be 'even handed' in her cynicism, some how the anti-Labour criticisms are more vicious even when they're quite misleading or unfounded, while her 'anti'-National criticisms are comparatively mild and only surface when the scale of the cock-up being commented can nolonger be ignored if she is to maintain any fascade of credibilty.
the whole issue of promoting political cynicism and voter disengagement, which she seems to do weekly (I wonder why she stays in the job if she hates it so much) is another bigger ball game, but can you guess which voters are most susceptible to alienation from vote participation? can you guess which parties benefit from the lower vote turn-outs engendered by ongoing exposure to hyper-cynical reportage? again, this is probably coincidence and drawing way too long a bow to assume any consciousness of this on Clifton's behalf, but it nonetheless suits the interests of her publishers.
-
it's a bit ironic that those who champion themselves as protectors of women's independence should then feel the need to sexualize the refutation. ho hum.
none of this has anything to do with gender or the possible influences of 'an orgasm and a bit of pillow talk'. it would be just as crap if you had an outlet pretending to be non-partisan only its political reporter was helen clark's husband, its business columnist was a 'former' PR man for the CTU and its senior journalist and frequent political commentator was Margaret Wilson's husband.
why Craig, you feel the need to assume this is somehow about the inferiority of women, or their supposed inability to to think independently of their partners is beyond me, unless its meant as an obfuscation, which i expect it is. the very presumption that this is about gender rather than conflict of interest is pretty patronizing to my mind.
-
maybe rickards is actually helen clark? it's rumoured that fran o'sulivan is actually garth george you know.
but anyway, i hear ms coddington is about to get rather seriously whacked by the press council over her asian invasion hysteria piece.
i wonder if she might be partisan?
-
yeah craig, but i don't think a PM's press sec is actually pretending to their audience that they're non-partisan?
as for wholesale public particpation in pharmac decisions! have you noticed how attentive to fine detail the majority of the public is? they nearly voted The Don in as PM for the hope of an extra $10 back in tax. citizen's juries on the other hand might well be a good thing (if you're talking about the process of having a sample that are presented with all the arguments over a considerable period of time before they decide). it's true Pharmac need to improve their public image aplenty.
-
come on... think hard now! put down that copy of Investigate
-
yes reece, i think the charming man from wairarapa definitely feels more comfortable on kiwiblog conspiracy nutter. the tone there is incredibly septic - seems like the 'Dykocracy' is conspiring to keep that nice man Mr Rickards out of power.
but tell me rossy, if 'you cannot prove a negative', then how can you prove that statement, hmm?
-
i know, that's what amazes me in any msm story about Pharmac, is that whatever pharmacy reps or their plants say is always taken unquestioningly as the voice of public interest. it's ridiculous.
actually come to think of it, the same happens with the RMA and property developers.
-
good attempt at obfuscation all the same ross
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/search/story.cfm?storyid=000D0D73-FC83-15E7-891583027AF1010E
-
No alright. I'd say the police would've tried every trick in the book to not bring the case to court, but in the end they failed.
Oh goodness, seems that is what they did, and that's why Dewar is now going to trial.