Credit where it’s due

28 comments on “Credit where it’s due ”

• Comments are now closed

1. vidiot 1

   24 September 2008 at 12:34 pm

   Paul Henry’s correct. I also don’t want my tax dollars spent on digging dirt, unless the digging is related to the building of a new & better infrastructure for NZ.

   But hell, Key does comes across as a bumbling, mumbling git when he’s backed in to a corner. He might have a good head for business, but an orator he is not.
2. Tane 2

   24 September 2008 at 12:49 pm

   The implication from Key that his taxpayer-funded researchers don’t spend their time digging dirt is absurd.

   (Aside from the fact that verifying the accuracy of your opposition’s public statements is hardly ‘dirt’)

   Anyone who knows anything is aware that the research behind most ‘investigative’ reporting comes from political parties, and judging by the number of beaten up mini-scandals that have plagued Labour over the last few years I’d say National digs more dirt than most.

   Note also that former National researchers David Farrar and Michael Laws have said respectively that the Tranzrail stuff is legitimate work, and that National researchers are instructed to dig dirt on Labour.
3. Draco T Bastard 3

   24 September 2008 at 1:08 pm

   So, Paul Henry’s been employed to teach JK how to be a politician?
4. infused 4

   24 September 2008 at 1:10 pm

   NZPA reports:

   Maori Party co-leader Pita Sharples says a New Zealand First staffer and Government minister tried to put pressure on his party over how it would vote in yesterday’s censure motion against Winston Peters.

   “I personally had two separate phone calls from a senior minister urging me to vote in favour of Winston, and suggesting that there would be unpleasant repercussions from Maori people if I didn’t,’ he said in a statement .

   “Both (fellow co-leader) Tariana Turia and myself were disgusted with this kind of activity, aimed at perverting the course of justice and fair play.’

   Yep. Ok then, back to your hole please. Which one is going to make the news tonight? Hrmmm
5. Chris 5

   24 September 2008 at 1:12 pm

   Good job paul, I didn’t realise we still employed journalists here
6. Stephen 6

   24 September 2008 at 1:27 pm

   Draco, it did seem like a bit of tough love from Henry didn’t it…still pretty savage though.
7. r0b 7

   24 September 2008 at 1:36 pm

   OK he didn’t let Key off the hook, but it was “more in sorrow than in anger” so to speak. The subtext was all pro National – “you’re an honest guy” (uh huh), “you’ve got to be better than this”, “labour are spending all their time digging this dirt” and other such right wing framing.

   Key was interesting at 5mins 54sec in that video when he said – “actually you know what that was a genuine mistake” – and he was (in that moment) perfectly believable. There’s a strong contrast between how he speaks of that genuine mistake, and all his other non genuine “mistakes”.

   John Key can’t be trusted.
8. Stephen 8

   24 September 2008 at 1:51 pm

   Feel free to join ‘I bet I can find 1000 people who distrust both National AND Labour’ then r0b.
9. infused 9

   24 September 2008 at 1:51 pm

   And Labour can? lol
10. randal 10

    24 September 2008 at 2:13 pm

    this election is about trust and its obvious that john keys cannot be trusted. it is beginning to look like his word is your bond and after he’s clipped your coupon dude it aint worth very much!
11. Ianmac 11

    24 September 2008 at 2:47 pm

    Thanks for the Agenda item. I missed it live and like Mary Wilson on Checkpoint last night Paul Henry did get to grips with the issues. JK use of words like “digging the dirt” “real issues” are straight out of the”Hollow Men”.
    His figures re loss overseas should read 33,000 and the newest Listener has a very good article (surprise!!) showing the facts and trends of crime in New Zealand, and these show dropping since 2002. Therefore “crime going through the roof” doesn’t seem right. Should be challenged on this also.
12. Janet 12

    24 September 2008 at 3:26 pm

    What an extraordinary interview. It comes across like a grumpy media trainer telling off his student for stuffing up. You can almost hear Paul H saying – Get back on script, John.
13. Dom 13

    24 September 2008 at 4:06 pm

    Note that Henry prefaces it all by emphasising that Key is honest – so I don’t give Henry credit for being unbiased since that’s a little salve to assist the ‘attack’ that follows.

    But yeah, whomever is training Key needs to be sacked – he stinks in interviews. And I swear he’s shrinking every time I see him – he looked like a child here!
14. jo zinny 14

    24 September 2008 at 5:53 pm

    Tane wrote:— Anyone who knows anything is aware that the research behind most ‘investigative’ reporting comes from political parties, and judging by the number of beaten up mini-scandals that have plagued Labour over the last few years I’d say National digs more dirt than most.

    Aided one can reasonably presume by wouldbe allies, affiliates, associates (in government) .. not name-dropping y’understand..
15. DeeDub 15

    24 September 2008 at 8:45 pm

    IMHO Paul Henry is a selfish, biggoted, greedy, right wing little maggot. But for once he ALMOST did his job.

    Apart from the usual obvious language bias (well documented by rOB), he asked some good questions and stuck at it. Bet he hated doing it thoough… he’ll be off Key’s xmas card list now.
16. Danny 16

    24 September 2008 at 9:09 pm

    I disagree,

    That was an poor interview. Nothing Paul said hit the issue on the head.

    Key was awful too, he has a whingey bickering tone. I didn’t know that.
17. jcuknz 17

    24 September 2008 at 9:42 pm

    Well it is no big deal for me and for somebody with his resopurces I’m not suprised he didn’t either know how many he had or gave a ball park figure
18. Matthew Pilott 18

    24 September 2008 at 10:02 pm

    “Well it is no big deal for me and for somebody with his resopurces I’m not suprised he didn’t either know how many he had or gave a ball park figure”

    Since you’re trying to make out like nothing’s wrong I’m not surprised to see you overlook that Key knew exactly what the number was, without prompting, after having just prefended he had far fewer shares.

    So he did know, he lied, and then made it obvious he lied by showing he knew the true answer all along – you missed quite a bit of what happened there.
19. Felix 19

    24 September 2008 at 10:44 pm

    Danny:
    “Key was awful too, he has a whingey bickering tone. I didn’t know that”

    Is this the first time you’ve heard him speak?

    (serious question)
20. RT 20

    24 September 2008 at 10:49 pm

    The week previous Paul was talking to JK regarding trust. Paul asked JK if he was honest. He looked him in the eyes and asked him if he was an honest man(twice).
    A week later this episode happens and Paul is peeved because he felt he was lied to.
    His disappointment showed.
21. Felix 21

    24 September 2008 at 11:08 pm

    RT I think you’re right, Henry seemed genuinely pissed.

    I think we’ll be seeing more of this from those in the media who have been openly supportive of Key.
22. appleboy 22

    24 September 2008 at 11:11 pm

    note the spin and deflection and desparation – Labour are spending ‘all their time’ digging dirt…as if finding this info took long…what a whinger…the truth hurts Johnny…
23. Paul Williams 23

    24 September 2008 at 11:26 pm

    Its like watching a stupid 3rd former being told off by the head prefect. Still, I suppose it’s better than the usual script where Henry’s the examiner slipping his favourite pupil the answers.
24. Sam Cash 24

    25 September 2008 at 2:06 pm

    The Nats have had their own research unit minnions ‘speding taxpayers money’ digging around for dirt on Helen Clark for over a decade. Yet John Key whines like a child about the Labour Research Unit catching him out telling lies. Key looked shiftier than a cornered mouse. Perhaps that’s because he doesn’t want to be asked why it was that he BOUGHT 50,000 shares at the time (May 2003) when, he tells us, he’d supposedly decided to sell his holding. Since when do you reduce a shareholding by doubling it? Perhaps when you think a takeover bid might be imminent?

Links to post

1. You lying bastard « Concerned of Linwood: posted on 24 September 2008 at 2:14 pm
2. Lies upon lies « g.blog: posted on 24 September 2008 at 3:03 pm
3. The Standard 2.01: Questions over Key’s handling of Tranzrail: posted on 24 September 2008 at 10:54 pm
4. Standard Scoop: Key exposed again on secret shares and Tranzrail at The Standard 2.02: posted on 26 October 2008 at 11:19 am

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS