Well, well, well - it was a storm in a teacup
Brilliant opinion piece by Rudman in the Herald today that really does show what a storm in a tea cup the Mike Williams comment was, hell Rudman even says it's a storm in a teacup. Very interesting reading and good to see some will be backpedling a wee bit today.
posted by Bomber @ 2:40 pm
15 comments
15 Comments:
Doesn't rudman usually comment on matters of city planning?
Do we give a fuck?
No.
Just because some left wing blog tries to spin it away doesn't means it over.
hell Rudman even says it's a storm in a teacup.
You say that like Rudman is some doyen of the new right movement.
Would this only be a storm in a tea cup if the a National Government had passed the EFB and president of the National party was snapped lying about their own statements where they suggest breaking the rules they had made was a bloody good idea?
Of course not, your indignant screeching would be deafening.
...
Doesn't rudman usually comment on matters of city planning?
He now writes on national issues as well, this was his first great column.
Do we give a fuck?
Yes
No.
Ok, you don't.
Just because some left wing blog tries to spin it away doesn't means it over.
Well, a left wing bog plus an excellent artocle written by Rudman.
You say that like Rudman is some doyen of the new right movement.
No he is seen as very center and very sensible.
Would this only be a storm in a tea cup if the a National Government had passed the EFB and president of the National party was snapped lying about their own statements where they suggest breaking the rules they had made was a bloody good idea?
Ummmmmm - did you even read the thing? Why are you saying this in light of what he wrote?
Of course not, your indignant screeching would be deafening.
Well that would depend if I had then read a very compelling counter which suggests you actually haven't read this.
No he is seen as very center and very sensible.
Oh sure he is, especially when he says something that you agree with, if he came out against Williams you'd call him a tired right-wing hack, typical of what we can expect from self interested granny herald.
yes I have read it and it isn't some great revealing, all he's doing is trying to play it down.
From the article:
The tape indicates Williams showed similar caution. After acknowledging the proposal from party councillor, Martin Ward was a "damned good idea" he qualified his support by adding "we will have some generic stuff out for you to hand out pretty soon, once we work out the Electoral Finance Act".
That's his defence? doesn't sound like much of a cautionary qualifier to me.
Then this:
In other words, rather than use departmental propaganda, the party organisation would prepare canvassing material of its own in due course.
No Brian, not in other words, that's just some pretty piss poor spinning from you.
You say its only a storm in a tea cup, yet Helen Clark sees it differently, why else would she work to so fast to put distance between herself and Williams?
Look how long she stood by DBP and PTF after their fuck-ups, yet here its just one so called slip of the tongue from Williams who has until now had a pretty good record and she's running for the hills.
Sounds like Bobers trying to convince himself.
Interesting that Rudman, just like you Bomber, has studiously ignored the fact that the "damn good idea" came from Mr Martin Ward, husband of Social Development Minister Ruth Dyson and a member of Labour’s ruling council.
Why is that?
Because it's a inconvenient truth.
This comment has been removed by the author.
...
Wow your need to find a conspiracy is very funny guys, and I find this...
Oh sure he is, especially when he says something that you agree with, if he came out against Williams you'd call him a tired right-wing hack, typical of what we can expect from self interested granny herald.
...so fucking desperate that I wish to hammer you on it because it is soooooooo fucking desperate of you.
Sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo fucking desperate.
Sooooooooooooooooo desperate.
How desperate.
There's no inconvenient truth in who asked the question boys, Rudman points out the usual ideas that bounce off a floor, Clark is reacting because she sees the way it's been whipped up, she does that, she should chill. Funny how you boys don't look for the conspiracy when it slaps you inh the face when you are all hanging out so badly for it - you want a real conspiracy, go read trhe Hollow Men - tell me boys, what's the haps with the 'Grand Plan' - now there's a conspiracy - take it you kids didn't read that huh?
whoooooooa!!! struck a raw nerve there did we Bomber? Still ignoring that this idea 'bouncing off the floor' came from a senior party member I see. And, as usual, changing the subject and jumping behind your usual Hollowman rubbish when the going gets tough.
diddums
...
oh love, no I'm just pounding the point through your slow thick skull that making this point you made....Oh sure he is, especially when he says something that you agree with, if he came out against Williams you'd call him a tired right-wing hack, typical of what we can expect from self interested granny herald.....was soooooooo wrong, that wasn't my intent at all, and I brought the column to your attention because Rudman makes some bloody good points and is seen as a pretty honest broker, and I threw the Hollow Men comment in because you are so obsessed by a conspiracy from the floor, yet when a real conspiracy walks past you use the word diddums - I mean COME ON BRO, aren't you grasping a wee bit here - it's a conspiracy when Labour do something you thunder from on high is a blight against democracy yet when a real conspiracy is committed by your party less than 3 years ago it's diddums? You kids on the right have all the answers don't you.
I think the issue is that Williams is a liar - not that he supports dodgy campaigning because that issue is a storm in a teacup and I don't care too much about that either. But Williams said on agenda something like "arguably" I didn't say that. Which (if true) indicates that he's just a damned sloppy liar - pure and simple. The question is then is it appropriate to have a damn sloppy liar as your Party president.
The second issue for this thread is the credibility of Rudman on this matter. I love what he has to say on municipal affairs and so on, but he is an old lefty - and sometimes lets it show when he relitigates the campaigns of the past. After leaving the Lange memorial I saw Rudman in deep conversation with Williams - I take it they are mates. Perhaps that explains his defence.
...
1: I doubt Williams even remembered the incident as it was so petty which explains the lie.
2: Everyone was friends at Lange's funeral.
Why don't the New Zealand media sneak a recording device into one of National's congresses and see what kinds of comments go on behind closed doors there?
"1: I doubt Williams even remembered the incident as it was so petty which explains the lie.
Nice try. Considering Helen Clerk said "she was baffled at Mr Williams' denial on Agenda, because he had confirmed it to her when she first spoke to him after the Herald revealed it last week."
So he remembered the incident when he spoke to Clark before the interview and then 'misremebered' the incident when he was interviewed. Curious.
Why are you sticking up for this guy so much?
Post a Comment
<< Home