First as tragedy, second as farce

Written By: - Date published: 4:54 pm, February 11th, 2009 - 11 comments
Categories: articles, roger douglas - Tags: ,

After Roger Douglas’ big comeback speech was accidentally released two days early on the Internet due to inept media handling, then parodied on youtube by a sockpuppet before it had even been delivered I didn’t see much point in bothering with the actual content.

Funnily enough, not many others have either. But one person who has is Gordon Campbell, who’s done an excellent critique over at Scoop. It’s well worth a read – that is, if watching the tragic decline of a discredited right-wing ideologue is your kind of thing.

[Update: the hilarity continues – according to a person who was there, Douglas didn’t use his speech because it had been leaked. The Herald, however, quoted from the speech as if he had given it, they didn’t bother sending a reporter. If a tree doesn’t fall in a forest but our newspaper of record reports it has, did it really fall? SP]

11 comments on “First as tragedy, second as farce ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. djp 1
    11 February 2009 at 5:13 pm

    phew.. he must have pricked a nerve eh

  2. Tane 2
    11 February 2009 at 5:23 pm

    Na, I just find it interesting how flat and utterly uninspiring his comeback has been. There’s something comforting about seeing a person who caused so much harm to ordinary New Zealanders become so utterly discredited and irrelevant.

  3. northpaw 3
    11 February 2009 at 6:55 pm

    Tane,

    what do you suppose Campbell meant with the ..

    neo-Victorian morality which runs through the entire (Orewa) speech.

    Victoria’s reign was a melting pot for politics and it would be nice to know which neo— is which.

  4. Ag 4
    11 February 2009 at 8:07 pm

    The only reason this guy gets a pulpit is because his ideas benefit rich people. If he were to compete on a level playing field, he’d be downtown standing on a street corner with those guys who rant about the jetstream conspiracy, or 9/11 truth.

    I guess it is testament to the fact that anything becomes a “serious idea” if you have enough money to get it on the television.

    I met Douglas once. He’s as thick as two short planks, and I don’t think he even understands the ideology he’s claiming to profess. Mind you, he isn’t the only one.

  5. Tane 5
    11 February 2009 at 9:34 pm

    northpaw, the meaning seems pretty clear to me, but if you need clarification i suggest you go ask gordon in his comments section.

  6. djp 6
    11 February 2009 at 10:11 pm

    well, for what it is worth… I am happy he gave me the freedom to buy a cheap and reliable jap import.

    I think he was worth it just for the free trade policies he enacted.

  7. Chris G 7
    12 February 2009 at 11:43 am

    I found it very funny when Douglas was on Backbenches and he and the other MPs were on a leaner table infront of – Roger himselfs head like an animal trophy on the wall of past MPs

  8. Draco T Bastard 8
    12 February 2009 at 1:36 pm

    I met Douglas once. He’s as thick as two short planks, and I don’t think he even understands the ideology he’s claiming to profess. Mind you, he isn’t the only one.

    Yep, I haven’t met an economist yet who has taken their free-market ideology to it’s logical conclusion.

  9. toad 9
    12 February 2009 at 1:48 pm

    Tane said: …Douglas didn’t use his speech because it had been leaked. The Herald, however, quoted from the speech as if he had given it…

    Reminds me of an election speech that Muldoon gave to a public meeting in Christchurch in 1981. Muldoon was absolutely trolleyed, and stumbled and rambled his way through an incoherent diatribe about unions, Springbok Tour protestors, and the rule of law.

    But as far as the MSM were concened, he got away with it, because they just reported his speech notes, rather than what he actually said. Only Canta (the University of Canterbury Students Assn newspaper) had the guts to report the actual speech a week later – under the banner headline “A Pig full of gin does not a statesman make”.

    Wouldn’t get away with it these days, thanks to blogs.

  10. lukas 10
    12 February 2009 at 2:50 pm

    Ag
    February 11, 2009 at 8:07 pm

    The only reason this guy gets a pulpit is because his ideas benefit rich people. If he were to compete on a level playing field, he’d be downtown standing on a street corner with those guys who rant about the jetstream conspiracy, or 9/11 truth.

    You mean with trav?

  11. northpaw 11
    12 February 2009 at 6:30 pm

    Tane,

    the meaning seems pretty clear to me, but if you need clarification i suggest you go ask gordon in his comments section.

    Did that, Tane, tks – (didn’t know there was a comments section there in the first place which is why I asked you).

    Unfortunately the comment form advised me of something which was not the case resulting in a final recommendation that I advise Gordon Campbell and/or host that they need consult their technical support. Result, no comment or question possible.

    Not your problem I know though in the circumstances of your clarity on the term and my lack of it perhaps you’d like to help..

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.