Armstrong reviews Key’s DVD (2 out of 5)

35 comments on “Armstrong reviews Key’s DVD (2 out of 5) ”

• Comments are now closed

1. The Double Standard 1

   28 November 2007 at 9:33 am

   Yawn!

   If you are looking for real excitement and a statement of what a real politician stands for, try this link

   http://www.labour.org.nz/labour_team/mps/mps/helen_clark/biography.html
2. Billy 2

   28 November 2007 at 9:35 am

   You guys are just out of ideas. Counting backwards, you have posted about: John Key, DPF, John Key, John Key, John Key, EFB, the Australian Election, DPF, the Australian election, poultry, Family First, DPF, DPF, a poll and John Key.

   Basic mathematics discloses that over 31% of posts are about John Key. 25% of posts are about DPF. Poultry comes in at over 6%, a massive 6% higher than posts about the Labour party’s policies.
3. The Double Standard 3

   28 November 2007 at 9:41 am

   Billy – I quite liked this ranking that Milo posted a wile back

   http://www.thestandard.org.nz/?p=586#comment-2472

   1 The John Key attack site.
   2 The John Key attack site with a few other posts.
   3 Labour supporting blog with some attacks and interesting links.
   4 The left wing site that can acknowledge bad news.
   5 The left wing site that can criticse it’s parliamentary wing.
   6 The left wing site that can laugh at itself from time to time.
   7 The left wing site that provides a forum to improve policy.

   Milo rated them a 4, but I think they have slipped back to 2- recently.
4. Tane 4

   28 November 2007 at 9:45 am

   I’m not sure how this is so hard to understand – it’s John Key’s one year anniversary and the Nats have just launched a major propaganda campaign. Of course we’re going to talk about it. If you want to read a left-wing perspective of something else why not pop over and have a look at No Right Turn?
5. The Double Standard 5

   28 November 2007 at 9:58 am

   Tane – of course you will talk about it – but 5 posts in 2 days?

   I guess you are implicitly admitting that this blog is here to attack JK/National and DPF? along with a few amusing links from time to time.
6. all_your_base 6

   28 November 2007 at 10:10 am

   Whew. Tough audience. Some people are so hard to please. Lucky for us we have more readers than the two of you…
7. The Double Standard 7

   28 November 2007 at 10:12 am

   How about posting this cartoon?

   http://www.stuff.co.nz/663325a17217.html
8. Tane 8

   28 November 2007 at 10:17 am

   TDS- probably because it’s a stupid cartoon that fails to understand that Rudd won on exactly the opposite platform that John Key’s campaigning on. Blogblog’s tackled this kind of simplistic analysis over here:
   http://kiwiblogblog.wordpress.com/2007/11/26/tracy-watkins-you-suck/
9. Phil 9

   28 November 2007 at 10:36 am

   Actually Tane, the only stupid part of the cartoon is your indignation toward it.

   The Aussie Libs and our own Labour party have a great deal in common… let me reword that; the populace in general SEE a great deal in common.

   It’s all about perception management. In this area Labour are struggling at the moment.
10. Matthew Pilott 10

    28 November 2007 at 10:41 am

    AYB, I think it’s time for a customer satisfaction survey, I mean if Billy and teh duoble satndard aren’t happy when who will be? They are the most placid among us!

    P.s Billy, instead of that, take a look at the left, you might be able to do a substantitive analysis worth of critique. Here’s a start – out of 447 tags, only 47 are at least partially related to Key. It’s the single highest topic but anyone with two cents worth sharing will realise the vast majority of posts are on other topics.

    P.P.S, as you’ve kindly pointed out Billy, a lot of those Key posts are recent because of the one year anniversary – good spotting.

    P.P.P.S maybe youse fullahs need to try another attack on TS – this one don’t quite stack up (and basic mathermatics maybe isn’t your forte…).
11. Tane 11

    28 November 2007 at 10:41 am

    Phil, I agree Labour are struggling with perception management – their spin is frankly awful. Having said that, I thought National were doing pretty well with theirs until I saw that dreadful DVD.

    And for the record, I actually like Moreau’s cartoons. I just think this one wasn’t up to his usual standard.
12. Billy 12

    28 November 2007 at 10:53 am

    Matthew Pilott,

    Let’s take a look at those tags, shall we? 62 posts about National. 47 about John Key. 22 about Labour.

    That’s fine. The Standard has set itself up as a site to attack the National party, rather than promote the Labour Party. Let’s just not pretend it is anything else, though.
13. Robinsod 13

    28 November 2007 at 11:01 am

    Or the standard has set itself up to attack the right and push left views. About time someone did. So what’s your opinion of KiwiBlog, Billy?
14. Billy 14

    28 November 2007 at 11:13 am

    I don’t like it so much, Robinsod. Why? Have you simplistically assumed that, if I am right wing I must enjoy Kiwiblog?

    You have the admit, there’s bugger all pushing of left views here. To compensate, there’s lots of National-bashing. As I said above, that’s fine. Let’s just not pretend you’re here to promote anything.

    By way of example: three posts on the economy, all of them attacking National. Three posts on education, one of which is a strange fluffy piece about student councils and the other two attacking National. Two posts on health, both of which attack National.
15. Matthew Pilott 15

    28 November 2007 at 11:13 am

    Billy,

    You have accounted for about 130 posts – perhaps two sevenths of the blog’s content.

    “Let’s just not pretend it is anything else, though.”
    Do you normally make assumptions and vacuous statements based upon such little information, when the rest is readily available?
16. Billy 16

    28 November 2007 at 11:36 am

    Matthew,

    You are, of course, 100% correct. I am an idiot. In future, whenever I am addressed by a lefty, let’s all just take that as read so we don’t have to go through the pantomime.

    Just point me to a post in the last week outlining some aspect of the government’s policy programme. Any one post since 21 November.
17. Tane 17

    28 November 2007 at 11:49 am

    Billy, I don’t know why you think we’re responsible for advertising the govt’s policy programme. We’re a bunch of dudes who have some left-wing opinions. We don’t like much John Key or the National Party and most of us support Labour. Throw that all together and you have a blog. If you think we’re somehow supposed to be something more than that then you’ve deluded yourself.

    As usual, I suspect this is an attempt to misdirect rather than face the fact that John Key blew $50,000 on a piece of boring, vacuous propaganda just to show us he’s an ordinary bloke.
18. Matthew Pilott 18

    28 November 2007 at 11:54 am

    Billy, will do, right after you point out where i said that a) That Standard is dedicated to outlining the Government’s policy programme (isn’t that more up to the government? How could a 3rd party outline their policy programme anyway? Try the Labour website.)
    b) Where I referred to 21 November. Point it out in any post of mine, I don’t mind. No selective date limit here.

    If you can’t you might wish to recall that I was talking about every post on The Standard, not picking and choosing to fit… Basic maths or not, arbitrarily selecting a week and using that as a basis from which to critique a blog’s entire content isn’t exactly compelling!
19. PhilBest 19

    28 November 2007 at 12:58 pm

    Let’s see you lefty spin doctors do a propaganda video passing HELEN off as “an ordinary bloke”. (No chance of passing her off as an ordinary gal of course).
20. Tane 20

    28 November 2007 at 1:00 pm

    Why would we need to when that kind of misogynistic filth is coming from the right?
21. Billy 21

    28 November 2007 at 3:12 pm

    Thank you Tane.

    You see, Matthew, Tane is confirming that the purpose of the site is to attack National and Key. That is fine. I kinda like it.

    Just so evryone knows. And poor Matthew seemed mis-informed, so I am glad Tane and I were able to sort it out for him.

    Incidentally, I took up the suggestion and visited the Labour party’s website. It is interesting to note that, under the banner: Our latest achievements, the most recent achievement occurred in May. Perhaps this is what is limiting my friends at the Standard to attacks on Key and DPF.
22. the sprout 22

    28 November 2007 at 3:16 pm

    and there’s this

    http://kiwiblogblog.wordpress.com/2007/11/28/free-speech-for-the-rich/
23. Matthew Pilott 23

    28 November 2007 at 3:18 pm

    Billy you can read into that comment as much as you wish but it’s nothing far from what I said – don’t like key and support Labour. If you continue to blinker yourself to half of that statement and continue to ignore five sevenths of the material on the blog then by all means stick to your guns! I’ll just keep your post from 11:36 in mind and suggest others do the same.
24. Tane 24

    28 November 2007 at 3:22 pm

    Billy, you don’t need to misrepresent what I said. You’re usually pretty sensible – don’t let yourself down.
25. The Double Standard 25

    28 November 2007 at 4:09 pm

    Actually, most of Labour’s site dates back to 2005, although I see that the Campaign Site link on initial entry has disappeared since this morning. Have you been on the blower to the webmaster Tane?

    Maybe they are awaiting a “companion” organisation like moveon or getup to lead the (electronic) way?

    I wonder what it could be called?
26. Billy 26

    28 November 2007 at 4:13 pm

    Matthew,

    I am sorry if I have not made myself clear. This is not for want of trying, but I will try once more.

    I accept that the Standard supports Labour. Where have I said anything different (or “blinkered” myself to use your favourite phrase)?

    I accept that the Standard doesn’t like Key.

    All I have been saying is that I have detected a bias towards attacking what you don’t like, rather than promoting what you do.

    It seems that Matthew thinks I have made this up. Tane is more equivocal. Matthew, you sucked me into wasting half an hour checking back through all of the posts. 58% are about Key, National, the Brethren, the EFB or generally moaning about right wingers. I wish I had counted the number of posts about the Labour party instead, but I have now run out of time. It does not follow that 42% are about Labour. When you take into acount the international stuff, the sport, the fun stuff and the pultry, bugger all were.

    Let me say immediately that I enjoy bitching as much as the next guy (fuck off, Nih). I also accept that I have no more right to tell the Standard how to conduct itself than the Standard has to tell the National Party how to spend its advertising dollar.

    I am saying that you guys are spending a lot of time saying what you are against and not much saying what you are for. To my eyes, you are coming off as unbalanced and obsessed.

    That is my perception.
27. Tane 27

    28 November 2007 at 4:20 pm

    Well, thanks for that Billy – I’ll bear it in mind. I’ve also been looking through National Party press releases recently, and I’ve found they’re spending a lot of time saying what they are against and not much saying what they are for. To my eyes, they are coming off as unbalanced and obsessed. Would you agree?
28. Billy 28

    28 November 2007 at 5:15 pm

    If that’s what tehy’re doing, yes.

    Bear in mind, they’re nothing to do with me.
29. Billy 29

    28 November 2007 at 5:20 pm

    Oh, and remember, they are the opposition. Structurally, that does require a certain amount of, well, opposing.
30. Matthew Pilott 30

    28 November 2007 at 5:21 pm

    That was better Billy, better than “the purporse of this site is to attack National” and “The Standard has set itself up as a site to attack the National party”. Those were the bits I thought you made up (claims which incidentally you’ve ommitted from your last post).

    I took the simple option and checked out the tags and as a broad indication, with more than twenty posts each, are Labour, International, Workers Rights, Climate Change and Election Funding. It follows that those aren’t all about National…except maybe the last one…

    The ‘blinker’ bit came from where you turned “We don’t much like John Key or the National Party and most of us support Labour” into “Tane is confirming that the purpose of the site is to attack National and Key”.

    I still find it amusing that chaps such as yourself and Lee find it odd that there would be posts critiquing the performance of the opposition?

    Given their performance you may have a good point – it’s a bit too damn easy to criticise National!
    What’s it called – target rich environment (or the absence thereof that makes it easy i.e.policy, substance…)?
31. Matthew Pilott 31

    28 November 2007 at 5:24 pm

    Opposing yes, but there comes a point where they might want to point out what they’d do better, Billy. The difference is that a blog such as this doesn’t need to point out what Labour is doing, since they’re the government and are actually doing it, in reality. However, it would be nice to know, in the minds of the opposition, what they’d be doing about a few things they’re not happy with.

    Subtle but crucial difference.
32. Billy 32

    28 November 2007 at 5:31 pm

    Matthew,

    Stop making stuff up. Where have I ever said that I “find it odd that there would be posts critiquing the performance of the opposition”?

    I expect, welcome and encourage that. It gives me an opportunity to tell you where you are wrong. It also puts the focus on National, which rather makes it like they are setting te agenda.

    It’s just that 5 of the last 16 posts…oh fuck it, even you must get it by now.
33. The Double Standard 33

    28 November 2007 at 5:45 pm

    “Labour, International, Workers Rights, Climate Change and Election Funding. It follows that those aren’t all about National.except maybe the last one.”

    I think you better look a little close. Almost anything posted here that touches on domestic politics includes at least a token dig at National or John Key.

    I do recall one post where Bill was attacking Cullen for his “tax cut” language though.
34. Lampie 34

    28 November 2007 at 9:39 pm

    This could be an interesting challenge, why don’t some of you come back with credible evidence in where the current Govt. is doing right and wrong. Also credible evidence for why or why not,the opposition would be a suitable replacement for the position. Wiki, blogs, political websites, Herald (and other media) would not be counted as credible. Ministry websites, stats, OECD and other impartial information sites can be used. This challenge is open to both left and right supporters. Bring forth your arguments for and against i.e. must be balanced.

    Just an idea as you righties are just going around in circles trying to score imaginary political points, bit like if one of these lefties was trying to convert the supporters on the National website.
35. PhilBest 35

    29 November 2007 at 1:31 pm

    Apologies Tane, that comment was beneath me. Nevertheless, is there no extent to which a feminist can go beyond which she forfeits the right to the “misogyny” defence?

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS