Who’s clueless?

50 comments on “Who’s clueless? ”

• Comments are now closed

1. higherstandard 1

   12 September 2008 at 8:54 am

   AYB

   Nice to see John Key offering sincere condolences on the murder of a fine police officer ?

   Disappointing to see that you’d prefer to continue with cheap smears.

   [Tane: HS, lighten up. It’s just a bit of fun on a Friday.]
2. Anon 2

   12 September 2008 at 8:56 am

   You need to select ‘pages from NZ’ to avoid feeling unlucky and ending up at the Clueless movie site. That means the screen shot on the blog is also incorrect.
3. forgetaboutthelastone 3

   12 September 2008 at 8:56 am

   I think you need to select “pages from New Zealand”…
4. randal 4

   12 September 2008 at 9:07 am

   JUST SELECT joHN kEYS AND IT WIL COME BACK CLUELESS!
5. lprent 5

   12 September 2008 at 9:08 am

   Added a note to that effect. Looks like a google bomb.

   Kind of cool John Key = clueless

   Seems appropriate bearing in mind his way of mangling his own parties polices
6. Tane 6

   12 September 2008 at 9:10 am

   I’ve fixed the image
7. Dom 7

   12 September 2008 at 9:11 am

   higherstandard – sincere? The condolances are practically an afterthough. He actually stresses ‘yet another death’ more than the death of Wilkinson. Key actually goes for the political shot here – which isn’t sincere at all.

   Actually I was surprised to see how small and old Key is looking in this video. He looks terrible!

   And how is this a cheap smear? Key has put himself online – this is a comment – the fact that ‘cluelss’ brings this up isn’t a cheap shot – it just is what it is.

   Want to hear something else funny – the Captcha words to post this are ‘United annoying’…which sums up Dunne nicely in my opinion…
8. Brett Dale 8

   12 September 2008 at 9:13 am

   Oh dear, I didn’t think anyone over the age of 18 would be bothered doing a Google bomb. I guess the same people who watch Bro town would that is the height of wit.
9. higherstandard 9

   12 September 2008 at 9:19 am

   Tane

   If it’s just a bit of fun Tane perhaps the buffoon who posted it should take the time to look at the video and see it leads with condolences about the murder of a police officer.

   Perhaps next time they should be a bit more careful with their attempt at humour.
10. Tane 10

    12 September 2008 at 9:23 am

    HS, it links to johnkey.co.nz. That Key’s PR people happen to have that particular video up right now is neither the point of the post nor is it relevant. I think you’re being a bit precious mate.

    Anyway, isn’t it the left who are supposed to be offended all the time?
11. Felix 11

    12 September 2008 at 9:24 am

    hs it goes right to the front page of his blog. You do know what a blog is, don’t you?

    Anyway, don’t you have some pretend patients to attend to?

    edit: snap, kinda.
12. Crank 12

    12 September 2008 at 9:24 am

    I wonder how funny you would find it if someone did the same thing with the words “ugly lesbian” linking to Helen Clarks site.
13. Tane 13

    12 September 2008 at 9:26 am

    If you can’t tell the difference between calling someone “clueless” and calling them an “ugly lesbian” then I do worry about you Crank.

    It’s official, the right are utterly humourless. Except for Billy.
14. weka 14

    12 September 2008 at 9:29 am

    Yeah but Helen Clark isn’t an ugly lesbian (although I’m not sure exactly what is meant to be wrong with being an ugly lesbian), whereas John Key is actually clueless ;-P
15. Tim Ellis 15

    12 September 2008 at 9:33 am

    I thought it was quite funny, in the way that fart jokes are quite funny.
16. randal 16

    12 September 2008 at 9:33 am

    tane…dont worry. being offended is a sign of immaturity and the last defence of idiots who cant logically defend their position or accept that what is is. i.e. it is just an excuse.
17. ghostwhowalks 17

    12 September 2008 at 9:35 am

    Crank you should try putting Cruella de Clevedon into google.co.nz and see what comes up
18. Phil 18

    12 September 2008 at 9:35 am

    Did anyone else get the video error on his page saying “this show is empty” ?

    Comic gold
19. monkey-boy 19

    12 September 2008 at 9:35 am

    It wasn’t so long ago that it was considered acceptable for racists homophobes and sexists used to accuse people of ‘lacking a sense of humour’ when their jokey bigotry was dressed up as ‘just a bit of fun’.

    Just saying, that’s all.

    [Tane: Na, you’re not “just saying”, you’re implying that calling a politician ‘clueless’ is akin to racist bigotry. That’s a wee bit silly, MB.

    When did the right (with some notable exceptions) become so humourless and easily offended?]
20. Tim Ellis 20

    12 September 2008 at 9:36 am

    And while this was clearly a google bomb, if you google the word “bluster” in New Zealand you get an interesting result, too.
21. ghostwhowalks 21

    12 September 2008 at 9:40 am

    The irony is , comsidering the background to the video blog, this looks like a promo for The Office
22. Tim Ellis 22

    12 September 2008 at 9:41 am

    How about if you google: labour blog ?

    [Tane: I get Salient:
    http://www.salient.org.nz/blog/the-labour-list-has-been-announced

    Labour party blog brings up:
    http://www.labour.org.nz/learning_centre/index.html

    National party blog is interesting though :)]
23. higherstandard 23

    12 September 2008 at 9:42 am

    Tane

    I have no problem with the mickey being taken out of politicians – God knows most of them deserve it and set themselves up all the time.

    Perhaps I am being overly sensitive in relation to the officer who was murdered yesterday I just thought it was in this instance in bad taste – although I accept that may have been an accidental oversight in terms of the post on this site.
24. Matthew Pilott 24

    12 September 2008 at 9:46 am

    This post remonded me of one of these “I’m feeling lucky” words a friend suggested I try.

    Please, everyone, for the love of god, try it with the word ‘specious‘, in New Zealand.

    Look it up in the dictionary first if you’re not entirly sure of the meaning. It’s a beaut.
25. Tim Ellis 25

    12 September 2008 at 9:47 am

    [Tane: Now you’re just being a dork.]
26. bill brown 26

    12 September 2008 at 9:54 am

    Nice power pylon though…
27. Dom 27

    12 September 2008 at 9:55 am

    higherstandard – I think you are being a bit sensitive here. No one here is making fun of Wilkinson being killed. But I am more than happy to make fun of Key politicising it the way he does here. The first part is all about ‘another death to the scourge of P’ and it totally railroads the fact that a police officer died. If you want the draw the long bow here I think it’s Key who is being insensitive. I mean, Key DOESN’T EVEN MENTION WILKINSON’S NAME IN THE VIDEO. Sorry to shout but really, how sincere is Key here?

    Hey, the clueless thing doesn’t work for me now…which of your righties tipped off National… 🙂
28. Tim Ellis 28

    12 September 2008 at 10:04 am

    [Tane: Read the About and Policy. Your comments here are welcome and usually very constructive, but we have a low tolerance for repetition of Kiwiblog/Whaleoil smears.]

    [lprent: Especially me. I have a habit of just permanently banning on the basis of it it being a personal attack on me and someones wants to enhance their martyrdom points . ]
29. illuminatedtiger 29

    12 September 2008 at 10:10 am

    The only insult to Wilkinson’s memory here is those on the right trying to score political capital. The searchterm probably linked to JK’s site before the tragedy and it will likely continue linking there for the forseeable future.
30. bill brown 30

    12 September 2008 at 10:11 am

    Dom, he’s still clueless here…

    Tim, maybe you should stick to the long earnest posts instead of trying to be funny.
31. Dom 31

    12 September 2008 at 10:15 am

    LOL – thanks Bill, it went back to working for me…damn, I so had a conspiracy argument going on there…
32. Tim Ellis 32

    12 September 2008 at 10:21 am

    Tane I wasn’t repeating smears and I object to you saying so. This post is about making a dig at John Key through what is clearly a deliberate google bomb. I thought the google bomb was funny. Slightly embarrassing if you’re a National supporter, but anybody with a light sense of humour would see it as funny. You then pointed out, quite rightly I thought, that people who were offended by it should lighten up and be less sensitive.

    I pointed out another phrase that was slightly embarrassing to you. It wasn’t a smear. Your reaction shows a level of sensitivity and heavy-handedness that was overkill, and then accuse me of smearing the Standard, which you know not to be true.

    Tane you have my email address. If you were overly sensitive about what I thought was a light-hearted dig at the standard, you could have emailed me and told me that you thought I’d crossed the line and that you were sensitive about it, and politely request that I desisted. Instead you are basically saying I am smearing the standard which is completely untrue.

    [lprent: Tim. I’m totally humourless about that topic. I’ve had it all year despite explicitly denying the accusations many times (where possible under our policy). Our About says who we are (everything except the actual names of contributors) and why we run the site the way we do.

    So I regard any comments on the topic as accusing me of being a liar, and whoever makes them as attacking the site. Therefore they’ve simply looking for fast martyrdom and I’m happy to oblige with a permanent ban and as much vitriol I can squeeze into a comment.

    Tane did you a favour, because I don’t override other moderators. ]
33. bill brown 33

    12 September 2008 at 10:22 am

    Tim, see, that’s better….
34. Thomas the Unbeliever 34

    12 September 2008 at 10:27 am

    I assume you chaps at the Standard also endorse the views (and humour) of your fellow traveller – Jim Anderton – on the Progressive blog. In a move from the Ron Mark school of political smears the Progs think it OK imply John Key is a paedophile.

    Hey, but it’s all in good fun!!! Let’s all laugh along.

    http://prog-blog.blogspot.com/2008/09/young-people-are-group-im-passionate.html

    (thanks for the alert on Keeping Stock)

    [lprent: probably depends on the sense of humour of the writer or commentator. ]
35. Tim Ellis 35

    12 September 2008 at 10:36 am

    Thomas I don’t know what relationship that blog has with the progressive party, because it’s quite ambiguous. It says it’s the unofficial blog by the progressive party. I’m assuming it’s just a blog by a supporter of the progressives.

    It isn’t my job to defend the standard but I don’t see why they should take responsibility for something written on another blog. There are extreme things said on all sorts of blogs. Just because somebody is your friend doesn’t mean you endorse everything they say.

    That was a horrible thing for prog-blog to say. It looks like he’s getting his just desserts in the comments section though.
36. Thomas the Unbeliever 36

    12 September 2008 at 10:37 am

    It is possible to laugh at humour that crosses the line (which I did) – but also think less of the person who told the joke.

    That mix is dangerous if you are advocating a political view – and then your joke ends up backfiring. But hey – if you guys want to continue a joke which is only slightly funny, but also diminishes you and the people you represent – good luck to you.

    DPF learned to his cost a few years ago that a good joke can impact on your political credibility.

    I suspect that the guys who run the Prog Blog will learn that today. Their paedophile smear on John Key is slightly amusing – but I suspect that Jim Anderton will not be smiling at the backlash that he is deservedly getting.
37. Tane 37

    12 September 2008 at 10:38 am

    Thanks Tim.

    Thomas, I don’t think anyone on this blog has ever even mentioned Prog Blog, let alone endorsed it. That’s a pretty cheap shot on your part.
38. Dom 38

    12 September 2008 at 10:39 am

    But Key is passionate about young people. He wants to send them all to boot camp! And Iraq.
39. Pascal's bookie 39

    12 September 2008 at 10:42 am

    Good for you Tim, while we’re doing the etiquette tango, perhaps you might like to apologise for rather directly implying I was making shit up over at Hootens blog.

    http://www.policy.net.nz/blog/?p=314#comment-891
40. Billy 40

    12 September 2008 at 10:45 am

    Matthew Pilott,

    That’s the funniest thing I have seen for weeks.
41. Thomas the Unbeliever 41

    12 September 2008 at 10:46 am

    Tim, I agree it is hard to believe that Prog Blog has any official sanction or oversight – but as a recent entrant into the blogosphere I have discovered it is a blurred line between offical blog – and the loosely endorsed supporter.

    The “unofficial blog” is all too often just a tool to give some political deniability for content that goes too far.

    If politicians want to enjoy the fruits of having champions in the blogs (sanctioned or otherwise) – they also need to accept the risks.

    If the Progs are not endorsing that site then at the very least they will know it exists (it has been there a while). That means that they have some responsibility for its content – but no control.

    The Progs needs to come out today to strongly reject its content and to apologise – even if they claim no control over what their supporters are saying.
42. monkey-boy 42

    12 September 2008 at 12:18 pm

    [Tane: Na, you’re not “just saying”, you’re implying that calling a politician ‘clueless’ is akin to racist bigotry. That’s a wee bit silly, MB.

    When did the right (with some notable exceptions) become so humourless and easily offended?]

    What is interesting about that, Tane is that I deleted the latter part of the post and replaed it with the term [deleted for being ‘too precious’] but what has been shown is the first thought I had, but not the edited vsn.

    [lprent: depends how fast the moderation is.
    If a moderator starts editing before you finish your edit, then they will get an ‘old’ copy to edit. If they save after you, then their copy with their updates is the one that goes to the database.]
43. Matthew Pilott 43

    12 September 2008 at 12:28 pm

    Billy, it was a screen-wiping moment for me. I mean I know all the tricks about houses, cozy=16sq/m, ‘character’ means ‘no roof’, and so on, but what was meant by that? Who knows… “This house looks nice but will kick you in the nuts and run away laughing”?

    Jeepers, prog-blog? Was that posted at 3am?
44. monkey-boy 44

    12 September 2008 at 12:30 pm

    But anyway, Tane, I’m sure you would allow me the right to reply to the charge that I’m being ‘silly’, Tane, as you are a fair-minded kind of chap. I’m not likening ‘racist bigotry’ with your views, just pointing out that when rebutting someone with ‘lighten-up’, or having ‘no sense of humour’ if they are offended by a particular form of humour has historically been the recourse of cowards. Amongst such types, racists, homophobes and sexists have been prominent. I know tht you are none of the above, but the tactic reeks of the same attempt to employ a similar power-differential, to quell objections.
45. randal 45

    12 September 2008 at 2:03 pm

    the last post just reeks period. no humour, no levity,no point, no nothing.
    just wasting ink and trying to bore us all to death!
46. monkey-boy 46

    12 September 2008 at 2:41 pm

    Bully…
47. Uroskin 47

    12 September 2008 at 4:10 pm

    The Real Estate site has changed its booboo to spacious now/.

Links to post

1. Glen Barnes: posted on 11 September 2008 at 10:04 pm
2. The Standard 2.01: A new champion: posted on 12 September 2008 at 11:19 am
3. The Standard 2.01: Rochelle, that was pretty good.: posted on 15 September 2008 at 11:32 am

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS