I guess this just shows the Right doesn’t have a monopoly on arseholes

34 comments on “I guess this just shows the Right doesn’t have a monopoly on arseholes ”

• Comments are now closed

1. karol 1

   27 September 2013 at 8:24 am

   Ah, and this choice little sentence in Rogers’ article:

   Policy making processes and the selection of the parliamentary leader are two other high-profile targets of reform pursued under the banners of equality and democratisation.

   Interested observers could be forgiven for thinking Coatsworth and Barnett are no longer, if indeed they ever were, committed to winning the next election.
   […]
   With Coatsworth and Barnett at the helm, the newly elected leader of Labour’s parliamentary team, David Cunliffe, will largely have to fight the next election with one arm tied behind his back.

   The utu [buried] within [the article]

   And this little gem:

   Tactically, Mr Cunliffe could do worse than to characterise the Green Party as being “far left”, in the same way as Prime Minister John Key characterises the Act Party as being “far right”.

   Damien, Shearer has slipped back a bench or two. Cunliffe is leader now.
   • JK 1.1

     27 September 2013 at 9:10 am

     with reference to your comment, Karol “The utu [buried] within [the article]” – this looks to me like utu from ABCs coming out, and just because someone lists themselves as Labour doesn’t necessarily mean they are left or even centre-left – they could still be nastily conservative ! As Rogers appears to be.
2. Saarbo 2

   27 September 2013 at 8:52 am

   Yes, This (Damien Rogers Herald article) is a really ugly form of racism and quite frankly doesn’t reflect well on his employer Massey University. I had to read it a couple of times to try and understand exactly what Rogers was implying…its a shocker.

   Its par for the course as far as the NZ Herald is concerned with its right wing conservative bent, what a backward piece of shit The NZ Herald is, it contributes nothing to society.
   • Psycho Milt 2.1

     27 September 2013 at 10:20 am

     This (Damien Rogers Herald article) … quite frankly doesn’t reflect well on his employer Massey University.

     You seem confused. An academic isn’t an “employee” in the same sense that a factory worker or middle manager is. There’s this thing called academic freedom, which means that Damien Rogers is entitled to write whatever he wants in the newspaper. What would not reflect well on his employer Massey University would be an attempt to stifle his academic freedom for the sake of PR.
     • saarbo 2.1.1

       27 September 2013 at 1:56 pm

       whatever Psycho…in my view his opinion is a poor reflection, you know, backward and stuck in the dark ages. I think the women who is sometimes on the Q&A panel is from there also, she is as thick as 2 short planks, she also doesnt reflect well on Massey (sorry I can remember her name, she got cleaned up by Matt McCarten on Sunday, subsequently become very sour).
     • Rodel 2.1.2

       27 September 2013 at 5:20 pm

       ‘ There’s this thing called academic freedom, which means that Damien Rogers is entitled to write whatever he wants in the newspaper.’…..Not true.
     • newsense 2.1.3

       27 September 2013 at 6:14 pm

       Still have to go through a rigorous appointment process, including a grilling from their peers-to-be, to prove they are of the quality required.

       While there is academic freedom, there is also the University rankings (though I thought Massey was actually improving on these?) to be measured against.
3. dewithiel 3

   27 September 2013 at 9:03 am

   If Rogers is a leftie then I’m a bar of soap. As I read the article, it’s an hubristic piece insinuating that the Labour Party has been taken over by Feminazis and the Gayz and is doomed. And it’s the sort of rubbish we can only expect more of from the New Zealand Herald in the coming months.
4. Tracey 4

   27 September 2013 at 9:32 am

   Um… so now labour has to select white men to show they are being fair????

   Is that national’s rationale too?
   • Saarbo 4.1

     27 September 2013 at 9:51 am

     yes, I think that is what he is trying to say.
   • QoT 4.2

     28 September 2013 at 11:25 pm

     What we clearly need is a browngaywomanban.
5. Akldnut 5

   27 September 2013 at 9:34 am

   The only comment that really indicates this guy might be a lefty is

   Not for us are those extreme free-market ideas, Key says, while preaching an intellectually bankrupt fiscal policy of austerity, privatising public assets, and redistributing the tax burden from the well off to the not so well off.

   Otherwise the rest is straight from the “Tory writers guide” like trying to influence the structure of the Labour Party by pre-selecting an outcome on one scenario only.

   ……..both the Labour Party president and general secretary will have to resign if Labour does not hold Christchurch East in the upcoming byelection

   This dick has become a self anointed Judge, Jury and Executioner.
6. Blue 6

   27 September 2013 at 9:39 am

   It’s surprising to learn that the moron is left-wing. His article fits so neatly with the right-wing’s agenda it’s hard to believe it’s not deliberate.

   With Labour on the rise in the polls this exactly the moment you’d expect a right wing mouth frother to come out trying to paint Labour as being all about women, ethic minorities and gays and not focusing on ‘what matters to middle New Zealand’ etc. to drive the wedge in and scare people back to the wealthy white men’s party.

   That’s certainly what the Herald are using him for, but why he’d play into their hands like that I don’t know.
7. BeeDee 7

   27 September 2013 at 9:40 am

   “Not for us are those extreme free-market ideas, Key says, while preaching an intellectually bankrupt fiscal policy of austerity, privatising public assets, and redistributing the tax burden from the well off to the not so well off.”

   Is Key really preaching the redistribution of the tax burden from the well off? I thought that was Labour policy…Damien – you’re all mixed up!
   • Akldnut 7.1

     27 September 2013 at 9:52 am

     BeeDee – a quick breakdown.

     redistributing the tax burden from the well off to the not so well off.”
     From the rich to the poor(or not so rich). Good only for the wealthy.

     Definitely not Labour policy.
     • BeeDee 7.1.1

       27 September 2013 at 10:53 am

       Thanks – operative word “burden”. Got it.
   • Lightly 7.2

     27 September 2013 at 11:30 am

     what Rogers’ is incompetently trying to say is that Key is taking taxes off the rich and putting them on the poor.
8. karol 8

   27 September 2013 at 9:56 am

   Good response to the article from Dimpost. (Title labels Rogers’ piece as “High Trotterism”)

   I suspect Dr Rogers is about to have a number of robust conversations with his female colleagues and students over his allegation that gender equality was won in the early 1980s (why the early 1980s? Because that’s when 9 to 5 starring Dolly Parton came out?) and I wish him luck there because he’s going to need it.
   [..]
   In 2005 – the last election won by the Labour Party – 48% of eligible female voters voted for the Labour Party. In 2011 only 25% gave their party vote to Labour. So targeting female voters isn’t so much a frivolous politically correct waste of time, as it is vital to Labour’s chances of winning back government. Finally, according to the NZES a plurality of female voters would like to see more female MPs in Parliament. I thought that the ‘man ban’ was a terrible idea. But trying to use the lists to increase the number of female MPs in the Labour Party is a smart thing to do. Women vote! More than men! And women want more female MPs in Parliament!

   On the thing of gender equality having been won – what a major fail, given the ongoing gender pay gap, and many structural factors that disadvantage more women than men (eg single mothers taking the biggest hits from Bennett’s bennie bashing).

   I think there is a bigger underlying issue of which gender (im)balance is more of a symptom: the continuing dominance of traditional masculine values embedded within the political culture and infrastructure. Helen Clark was pretty adept at negotiating it, but she worked to counter the ways her sex was used against her, rather than significantly change the underlying culture or infrastructure.

   Since Clark left NZ parliament, it has become more male/masculine dominated in the most powerful roles. This is especially evident in the NAct cabinet, but also was seen in team Shearer.

   I was hoping for a female deputy for Cunliffe, but am pleased he brought more women into higher positions in his team. Good on him for giving Annette King such a significant role, and for enabling more women to get experiences that open opportunities for more significant roles in the future.
   • expatriot 8.1

     27 September 2013 at 12:43 pm

     That Dolly Parton line was fantastic.
   • Puddleglum 8.2

     27 September 2013 at 8:56 pm

     ‘High Trotterism’ might be a bit unfair, given Trotter’s post on the matter.
     • karol 8.2.1

       27 September 2013 at 9:15 pm

       Ah, yes. Trotter appears to have had a make-over before writing that post. Must be the Cunliffe glow of inclusiveness.
       • Puddleglum 8.2.1.1

         27 September 2013 at 9:48 pm

         🙂
   • Rhinocrates 8.3

     28 September 2013 at 12:04 am

     Since Clark left NZ parliament, it has become more male/masculine dominated in the most powerful roles. This is especially evident in the NAct cabinet, but also was seen in team Shearer.

     Yeah, I was always facepalming at that “Shearer is a nice guy” bullshit. He always acted as a vindictive, 70s-era misogynist prick, dismissing women, longing for the era of Holden Kingswoods and Old Spice and when Shirl knew her place as a baby factory and could be allowed to be a hairdresser, but no more.
9. miravox 9

   27 September 2013 at 9:59 am

   What makes anyone think he’s a leftie?
   • Lightly 9.1

     27 September 2013 at 11:17 am

     “Not for us are those extreme free-market ideas, Key says, while preaching an intellectually bankrupt fiscal policy of austerity, privatising public assets, and redistributing the tax burden from the well off to the not so well off.”
     • miravox 9.1.1

       27 September 2013 at 6:30 pm

       That was hypothetically quoting Key, and he hypothetically says Cunliffe can describe the Greens as far left – full para:

       Tactically, Mr Cunliffe could do worse than to characterise the Green Party as being “far left”, in the same way as Prime Minister John Key characterises the Act Party as being “far right”. Not for us are those extreme free-market ideas, Key says, while preaching an intellectually bankrupt fiscal policy of austerity, privatising public assets, and redistributing the tax burden from the well off to the not so well off.

       Says nothing about his own political views.He could be a leftie, but it’s not shown in this paragraph.
10. Delia 10

    27 September 2013 at 10:41 am

    That article rendered me speechless. The Herald truly went to the bottom of the barrel there.
    • MeToo 10.1

      27 September 2013 at 12:47 pm

      “The Herald truly went to the bottom of the barrel there.”

      It will be an unsolicited unpaid opinion piece. A cheap way of filling column cms. Anyone can submit these pieces to the Herald, heck, they’ve even published things I sent in!

      So why not write a reply to Dr Rogers? 800 words or less, make it catchy and readable to a 12 year old and preferably opinionated or controversial and hey presto! You’re published in the NZ Herald.
11. Puddleglum 11

    27 September 2013 at 4:30 pm

    Rogers’ speculations – if they have any impact at all on people’s thinking – may work themselves out differently in different places.

    In Christchurch East, for example, there were 6 nominees, four of them women. Most were strong, apparently, including long-time local Tina Lomax, Principal of Kingslea school and long-serving community board member.

    At least from one eye witness report, the selection meeting was “robust” and the selection process well run.

    In the by-election, however, it probably won’t help that Poto Williams self-described as an “outsider looking in” (and as having been there “in spirit” during the earthquakes) as that has now been taken up by The Press. The paper also saw fit to dredge up and mention, heavy with implication, that:

    “Christchurch East Labour electorate committee chairman Andrew McKay said earlier the electorate needed an MP who understood what the electorate had been through.

    Spokesman for the Wider Earthquake Communities’ Action Network Mike Coleman previously said Labour’s candidate needed to have a strong understanding of earthquake issues.” [my emphasis]

    The same concern has also been echoed in several letters to the editor (some from people in Christchurch East). It’s worth remembering that those in the east have had to sustain a lack of understanding from people elsewhere in Christchurch, let alone the rest of New Zealand, so they may well be sceptical of self-declared “outsiders” from beyond Christchurch who claim they understand but haven’t actually lived through it.

    In that context, the notion that she was ‘imposed’ from outside and from above – rather than any concern that she is a woman or Cook Islander fulfilling some kind of quota – could find fertile soil. [One other nominee works for Ngai Tahu and at least one other appears to have Pacific Island heritage and, as mentioned, fully four out of the six were women so the odds were always that one ‘quota’ or another could, by critics, be claimed to be being filled just about whoever was selected. That mix of nominees, of course, is also not out of place in relation to the Christchurch East constituency.]

    Against that, Williams seems to have just the right kind of experience and credentials to advocate for the hardest hit from the earthquakes and their aftermath. Therefore, with time and commitment, there’s no reason why she couldn’t win over any doubters in her electorate. Turnout – rather than ‘defection’ – may be affected in the by-election by any perception of her outsider status, but presumably she will retain the seat.

    Other Christchurch East Labour nominees (e.g., James Caygill) – I understand from the second link above – were not even residents in the east when they put themselves forward (as Williams was) but, I presume, were nevertheless at least still ‘in town’ when the quakes struck and have lived in the broader area before and since.

    The real problem with speculations like Rogers’ is that, irrespective of their validity, they have the capacity to hook onto and then piggy-back on concerns already present in voter-land.

    Which, I guess, is the point of speculating in this politically charged way: The speculations gain credibility by association with emotionally powerful sentiments already present.
12. Dumrse 12

    27 September 2013 at 7:47 pm

    “I guess this just shows the Right doesn’t have a monopoly on arseholes.” I was surprised to read this particular article and not find Paul Findlays name. What went wrong or did I just miss it somewhere?
13. irascible 13

    27 September 2013 at 9:27 pm

    Does this dick head know anything about policy formation by a political party? This statement takes the cake for inflated MSM self importance and belief that policy platforms are created by the media and not from the aspirations of the people.
    “Mr Cunliffe’s recent performance in the House of Representatives and his reshuffling of caucus into a shadow Cabinet, show he understands the next election will be fought on the battleground prepared by the mainstream media and not among the internal workings of the Labour Party.”
    I need no reminder not to take a Political Studies class at Massey’s Albany campus.
    • Rhinocrates 13.1

      28 September 2013 at 12:16 am

      Well, having once had the misfortune to work for Massey, let me assure you that the institution is intellectually and morally corrupt to the core.

      Their employment practices are criminal, their treatment of students is cynical in the extreme. I can speak of the trauma of students nearly raped due to cost-cutting on security, life-threatening injuries due to cost-cutting on safety equipment, OSH violations, suicide attempts due to stress directly attributable to workload and lack of support, a supposed “Associate Professor” whose presentation to colleagues consisted entirely of photos of toilet signs without explanation.

      The whole institution has become a scam in my opinion.

      For legal reasons, I can not mention any specifics, but do not have anything to do with it, do not seek employment there, do not encourage your children to enrol there.
      • Murray Olsen 13.1.1

        28 September 2013 at 12:59 am

        Without mentioning specifics, I do not hold Massey in high regard as a tertiary institution, despite the quality of some employees. In my area, Otago has become the leader among Kiwi institutions.

        Damien Rogers’ opinion piece makes me wonder if a drunk from the local RSA had access too his computer. The low standard of analysis and lack of insight, plus the yearning for a new bottle of Old Spice, hardly say high quality academic.
    • Rogue Trooper 13.2

      30 September 2013 at 4:41 pm

      Agreed irascible. just pathetic.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS