Looking forward to the weekend

31 comments on “Looking forward to the weekend ”

• Comments are now closed

1. RedLogix 1

   5 June 2009 at 9:23 pm

   The other media plonker I’m really getting sick of is RNZ’s Sean Plunkett. This morning just before 8am he tangled with Phil Goff over the Worth affair. Pulled all his usual stunts, asking a question, then interupting 3 seconds later, aggressively talking over Goff, taking every chance to slime him with the worst possible interpretations of motives and actions. (Fortunately Goff is exceedingly competent at this sort of thing and in the end wiped the floor with Plunkett.)

   Ten minutes later he’s interviewing Steven Joyce over some puffed up PR piece that NZRail has been recently given a book value by PWC at about at about $380m. For the next five minutes Plunkett has a happy, warm-fuzzy, deferential little chat with Joyce, feeding him lines prodding along the main message along the lines, ‘wasn’t Cullen a fool for paying $680m’…etc,and how happy the Aussies must have been to get so much more than they were asking for. (When I know for a fact that Plunkett and Joyce BOTH know that Toll’s initial asking price was $1b, but of course Plunkett didn’t even blink at the blatant lie… but connived with Joyce make a joke of it. ) A total blow job. The contrast with the Goff interview could not have been more stark.

   Frankly it’s time this Tory PR hack Plunkett was ditched for Brent Edwards.
   • jarbury 1.1

     5 June 2009 at 10:25 pm

     And the fact that he let Steven Joyce get away with the lie that all roads are self-funding through petrol taxes.

     While that may be true (if we ignore hidden subsidies) for state highways, it’s definitely not true for local roads. These are either paid for by councils (through rates) or by developers (so therefore through increased price of the property when sold).

     But I guess no matter how many times you scream “roading does not fund itself” at Steven Joyce he’ll never get it.

     *sigh*
2. mike 2

   5 June 2009 at 9:37 pm

   Lol – shit you guys are getting desperate.

   One pre-emptive strike followed by a whinge about a lefty host on a lefty station not following the script.

   You know its turning to custard when a promising week ends in attacking the media
   • Ari 2.1

     5 June 2009 at 9:58 pm

     Personally, I’d have rather that nobody was harassed by ministers of the crown than that National is on the run, but perhaps I am lacking the requisite shadenfreude here 😛
3. Craig 3

   5 June 2009 at 10:24 pm

   The Media is full of these hacks( Holmes, Henry, Rolston,) I wouldn’t mind if they actually talked politics and policy. But they just give opinion after opinion of unsubstantiated crap.
   But I have to agree it actually is so ridiculous now that you do wait to see who will crawl up Keys arse the most.

   I think Henry is probably the worst maybe because you actually see his face as he sucks up. What makes me laugh is Georgina gave him such a good bitch slapping and he still behaves like he is the stig, honestly!

   Mike you talk about being desperate because we can see what these hacks are up to I have two words for you buddy( Melissa Lee). Now theirs desperate I hear she has been yelling at people in 2 double seven again, classy.

   Hey now theirs an option for Worth !What do you think Mike?

   I love nothing more than seeing how low the Nats will go!
4. jarbury 4

   5 June 2009 at 10:26 pm

   Melissa Lee is a Korean businesswoman….
   • calltoaccount 4.1

     5 June 2009 at 10:54 pm

     Yeah, I thought that but it was too incredible to actually say. But there again, he “got fresh” (Prebble) with a Labour Party member (and knew it), so absolutely anything is possible I guess.

     Oh, that was a joke right? Hard to tell these days… 😉
   • doc whose asking 4.2

     6 June 2009 at 10:15 am

     ta-soh for this morsel.. saith our Texan, the Varied Thrush..

     adding in its most literary style that like Bennett’s “bountiful sparrows” VT shall put the chirp out..
5. forgetaboutthelastone 5

   5 June 2009 at 10:28 pm

   What is Trotter on about?

   http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.com/2009/06/grown-up-stuff.html

   Is it that:

   He doesn’t like left-wing women because they complain about sexual harassment.
   They should just wake up to the reality that they are a target of sexual harassment and instead of complaining learn to tell the man to f*ck off.

   ?

   Is it that:

   It is proper and correct that Worth’s political career lies in ruins because of his present misdeeds but it is improper and incorrect to have any “simpering and mewling and tut-tutting and isn’t-it-awfulling” from left-wing women because they need to learn how to deal with the reality of sexual harassment.

   ?

   Having some trouble getting my head around this one.
   • Anita 5.1

     5 June 2009 at 10:46 pm

     Chris Trotter doesn’t like women. He is repeatedly offensive about women, sexual violence and now sexual harassment.

     He is a pathetic sexist hangover of the old left men’s club.

     Once again I wish he wasn’t, supposedly, on “our side”.

     Bah!
     • Pascal's bookie 5.1.1

       5 June 2009 at 11:09 pm

       You forgot, “and no one really cares what he thinks anymore”

       He’s the political columnist version of the Garfield comic strip.

       Harsh? mebbe so. He knows his narrow version of history. It’s the present that confuses him.
       • RedLogix 5.1.1.1

         6 June 2009 at 10:33 am

         He knows his narrow version of history. It’s the present that confuses him.

         Spot on. Despite everything I still have a big fat soft spot for Trotter. When he’s on song, he sweet like 69 Chevy. Inspiring, heart-felt and straight for the jugular… there are none from his generation who can match him on a good day.

         For that I can forgive him his bafflement when faced with GenX/Y.
         • Anita 5.1.1.1.1

           6 June 2009 at 10:39 am

           In terms of his blindness to anything but class politics, I agree it’s about his age and his inflexibility and his heritage, and I can forgive him that.

           But he’s been loudly sexist and anti-women. One can be blind to identity politics without being part of the problem. Unfortunately Trotter is part of the problem.
   • Ari 5.2

     5 June 2009 at 11:19 pm

     Victim-blaming at its finest.
6. bobo 6

   6 June 2009 at 3:31 am

   Hey Key(I’m the Piggy in the middle) is the victim in all this, seems to be the spin hes been pulling the last few days, the media should be ripping into him by now but that’s hard work. I was watching media 7 on freeview which had Duncan Garner as a panelist complaining that MPs don’t give him well documented scoops these days… like it has to be gift wrapped for him or he wont bother to actually do some journalism and find out facts for himself.

   Surely it must have been known Mr Worth had a drink problem or do so many MPs have drink problems that he doesn’t stand out … Well politicians aways bang on about having more transparency in politics.. Worth just likes his in the bedroom..
7. Doug 7

   6 June 2009 at 5:52 am

   Looks like one of the ladies in the Worth scandal is a serial Claimant.

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10576788
   • simon 7.1

     6 June 2009 at 8:17 am

     Which is why we need a court case.

     I’ll enjoy seeing Worth in the stand saying

     “I did not have sexual relations with that woman”

     (or any woman, not even my wife!)
   • Zetetic 7.2

     6 June 2009 at 10:59 am

     Doug thinks this must mean that she is lying and Key made a mistake in firing Worth then. You moron.
8. simon 8

   6 June 2009 at 8:09 am

   plunkett just wants to get on the nact junkett train (like Rankin)

   i heard the interview, another knife in the back of balanced unbias journalism
9. tsmithfield 9

   6 June 2009 at 10:22 am

   I can see precisely why Key is getting cold feet over meeting the woman. A careful analysis shows that either the woman, Goff, or both have been lying.

   To start with lets look at Goff:

   Firstly, when it was reported there were e-mails and phone calls from Worth.
   Then it was downgraded to texts and phone calls.
   Then last night on TV3 news Goff was saying that the texts themselves do not incriminate Worth. Only the phone calls do.

   Now lets examine the womans statement in some detail:

   She said:

   the texts were carefully worded but need to be read in context with the phone calls

   That would seem likely. Someone would be incredibly stupid to put this sort of stuff in writing. This would explain why Goff also seems to think that the texts in themselves do not explain anything, and why he thinks it is unreasonable for Key to demand the texts before seeing the woman.

   However, the woman contradicts herself:

   Around this time he started ending his texts with xxx…

   and

   There were also texts asking when we were going swimming together.

   So, the woman has clearly contradicted herself. She says that the texts were carefully worded implying that no adverse inference could be taken from the texts themselves. But, on the other hand, she gives examples of texts that clearly would do just that.

   Further she says that:

   I am happy to provide copies of the text messages which I still have and phone records to Mr Key and meet with him if that would help.

   So, according to the womans own statement she should have copies of texts that clearly implicate Worth, even though she denies it in her own statement. Goff backing down on supplying the texts suggests that he does not believe the texts exist even though the woman explicitly states that they do exist. This is all getting very murky. No wonder Key is getting suspicious about it all.

   Further more she has offered in sequential order to:

   1. Supply the texts and phone records.
   2. Meet with Key.

   Key is simply asking her to do in sequential order what she has promised to do.
   • Anita 9.1

     6 June 2009 at 10:36 am

     Let’s try a different analysis.

     1) Key said to the media he would meet with the woman.
     2) Key refused to meet the woman until she provided the txts
     3) Key refused to meet the woman until she provided the txts, met with Wayne Eagleson, and satisfied Eagleson the meeting with Key should go ahead.

     Whatever you think of Goff’s actions, Key is looking like, at the very least, like he’s trying to back away from his commitment to meet with her.

     Why doesn’t he just name a place and a time and do it? What is the down side?
     • tsmithfield 9.1.1

       6 June 2009 at 10:46 am

       I think he has probably seen the inconsistencies I have pointed to in my previous post. So he is just asking the woman to do what she has offered to do.

       I note you don’t dispute any of my logic.
       • Anita 9.1.1.1

         6 June 2009 at 10:54 am

         I didn’t set out to dispute your logic, I set out (as I said) to show a different analysis. I think your logic is flawed, but I don’t think that’s the point.

         Whatever the reasons (flawed or valid) for Key’s actions, he looks like he’s trying to avoid the meeting he’s publicly committed to having  it’s a bad look, and I can’t see any benefit for him in creating that perception.
         • tsmithfield 9.1.1.1.1

           6 June 2009 at 10:59 am

           I have reposted this on the new topic as it is most relevant there. I would be interested in your comments there. I agree, the way the media is portraying it, it is a bad look for Key at the moment. However, I think my analysis above gives some context.

           I am interested as to why you think my analysis is flawed.
         • Anita 9.1.1.1.2

           6 June 2009 at 11:09 am

           To go over to the dark side for a moment, let me suggest that Key meets with the woman asap and then says:

           I met with the woman in question this morning, and I am grateful she took the time to discuss the situation with me and show me the txts she has from the time.

           The issue, as I think everyone is aware, is that the txts don’t show the full picture of the conversations Dr Worth had with her, so it’s hard to be absolutely sure about what did happen.

           That aside, it is clear that she was very distressed by Dr Worth’s behaviour, and I am strongly of the opinion that none of my cabinet ministers should act in a way likely to cause that kind of distress. I was happy to reaffirm my previous statements that Dr Worth will not be returning to cabinet, and that I have serious concerns about his conduct.

           I have taken the opportunity to remind cabinet and all the National MPs that I expect the highest standard of conduct from them and that they should consider carefully the way they behave and the impressions they give in their personal capacity.

           See, kills the issue while being publicly respectful of the woman and her complaint, showing an appropriate attitude to sexual harassment, and reasserting his authority and standing as an ethical moral man we can trust to lead the country.
         • The Baron 9.1.1.1.3

           6 June 2009 at 1:52 pm

           Oh that is good, Anita…

           Far, far more capable (as usual) than these retards at the standard. What’s your blog again?
10. Zetetic 10

    6 June 2009 at 11:12 am

    Give it up smithfield. You’re defending a man whose boss, your hero Key, believes is a sexual offender. Sure, you’re a partisan tool. But have some pride.
11. The Baron 11

    6 June 2009 at 1:56 pm

    Ahh predictions. When they don’t come true, you end up looking like a fool. I look forward to your response as to how many of these vain, paranoid horrors actually occur.
12. doc whose asking 12

    7 June 2009 at 10:33 am

    And as the weekend unfolds allow me add here – quicker than email to likely concerned – the very good quality blog and comments to avail yourselves with.

    ps: TSM, as refered to on other threads could find his “logic” disturbed somewhat. Nothing like a factual matter to challenge the fixated… heh
13. doc whose asking 13

    7 June 2009 at 10:36 am

    oops! helluvah link title.. bad html.. apols.
14. BDB 14

    7 June 2009 at 10:55 am

    Are you mocking me?
    I am not as smart/clever/coherant as you.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS