Radio NZ election debates - Page 2

scr · 23rd August 2005, 00:11

the exact same thing happened during the last election when holmes was hosting.

i don't think sainsbury did a very good job. he's an alright reporter, but he doesn't do a very good job at hosting. the debate didn't really have much direction. simon dallow might have been better.

Torka · 23rd August 2005, 00:13

Quote:

Originally posted by yem
I'll take the worm over those fuckwits. Look, the natural murmurings from an audience is fine, and actually not a bad thing for a debate. It needn't go as far as the farcical US presidential debates. But that was just ridiculous. Producer should have made em STFU at the first ad break, so we can only assume that's the environment TVNZ wanted

Urge to quote myself...rising..

yem · 23rd August 2005, 12:02

<g>

Nine to Noon mini-debate: Tax
with Michael Cullen and John Key.

Nambio · 23rd August 2005, 12:28

does someone have a video cap of last nights debate? mine didnt work

yem · 23rd August 2005, 15:31

http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/411749/606094 is there if you can tolerate streaming.

ipee · 23rd August 2005, 18:52

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?...ectID=10342090

Quote:

After the debate, Dr Brash told reporters he restrained his attacks because Miss Clark was a woman.

"Well, I think it's not entirely appropriate for a man to aggressively attack a woman and I restrained myself for that reason," he said.

"Had the other combatant been a man my style might have been rather different.

Wow, what a gentleman.

crocos · 23rd August 2005, 18:56

Quote:

Originally posted by ipee
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?...ectID=10342090
Wow, what a gentleman.

"Geet yoah beetch ass, back tuh dah keetchin', an' make meh sum piah!"
-Dr Donald Brash

Nambio · 23rd August 2005, 20:15

Just given the two debates (radio + tvnz), I can cast aside my political views completely, and instantly give my support to Don Brash. Why? Because Don Brash doesnt interrupt his opponent, nor does he shout over the top of his opponent, nor does he shout over the top of the mediator, nor does he make "jokes" at the expense of his opponent (followed by a manly "haw haw haw").

Helen gives the appearance of a desperate woman who realises shes about to lose the only part of her life worth living, where Don is calm and calculated in everything he does on the podium. Helen may be a better debater, but Don wins

Sgt Seb · 23rd August 2005, 20:18

Um, if Clark and Brash had a fight, no holds barred, I'd put money on Clarky.

Her manliness has to be useful for something right?

Brash's excuse that he is polite because 'she is a woman' is complete lol. He can't get a word in because he's a useless debater.

Farmer Joe · 23rd August 2005, 20:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Nambio
Just given the two debates (radio + tvnz), I can cast aside my political views completely, and instantly give my support to Don Brash. Why? Because Don Brash doesnt interrupt his opponent, nor does he shout over the top of his opponent, nor does he shout over the top of the mediator, nor does he make "jokes" at the expense of his opponent (followed by a manly "haw haw haw").

Helen gives the appearance of a desperate woman who realises shes about to lose the only part of her life worth living, where Don is calm and calculated in everything he does on the podium. Helen may be a better debater, but Don wins

lol, it's a political debate not a band camp singalong...

Omicron · 23rd August 2005, 22:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Nambio
Because Don Brash doesnt interrupt his opponent, nor does he shout over the top of his opponent, nor does he shout over the top of the mediator, nor does he make "jokes" at the expense of his opponent (followed by a manly "haw haw haw").

Amen to that. I don't like smug, and I imagine anyone who's voting purely along personality lines would see this and be turned off by it. Brash has come across rather weakly; he lets Helen put words into his mouth. He needs to be stronger, and stand up for himself otherwise he will always be on the back foot.

[disclaimer] I'm undecided.. I want to see more details on the plans are for public services. I won't decide on tax cuts / interest write offs alone. [/disclaimer]

yem · 24th August 2005, 09:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Omicron
[disclaimer] I'm undecided.. I want to see more details on the plans are for public services. I won't decide on tax cuts / interest write offs alone. [/disclaimer]

I think we all would. Brash just keeps repeating "we're gonna cut wasteful spending! wananga! hiphop!" with no explicit indication of what will be cut. Be afraid.

crocos · 24th August 2005, 10:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Farmer Joe
lol, it's a political debate not a band camp singalong...

Brash the tenor, Helen the bass?

TnT · 24th August 2005, 10:54

Quote:

Originally posted by Farmer Joe
lol, it's a political debate not a band camp singalong...

What I saw screened on TV1 on Monday night was not a debate under any definition of the word. It was a joke. Interupting your opponent when they are speaking goes against the idea of both sides be able to put their argument across.

And the audience? Shut the fuck up. Whoever decided to let partisan audience participation be allowed should be fired. I don't care what a bunch of biased supporters think. I'm only interested in what the two debaters have to say.

Nobody won that 'debate' and the loser was us, the voter.

yem · 25th August 2005, 12:08

Just for fun, Nick Smith being interviewed this morning along with Chris Carter, on the subject of National's forestry and logging policy. Smith claimed the policy had not been released and didn't know where Carter or the interviewer were quoting from despite it being on the front page of the Herald today. Pretty funny

Farmer Joe · 25th August 2005, 12:42

Whoa, wtf... resuming native logging on the west coast is the WORST IDEA EVER..... goddam even the Buller District Council Mayor thinks it's stupid.

"I would have to say we were better off getting the $120 million because private companies have had a go at [sustainable beech logging] and they have had fairly limited success," he said.

"I would be extremely sceptical if what they are proposing is a sustainable beech scheme. Beech trees are very hard to mill."

yem · 25th August 2005, 21:19

Rowdy debate leaves TVNZ unshaken

Quote:

TVNZ plans to have even larger crowds at its next two political debates, despite the hostile response to audience behaviour at its first leaders' square-off.

..

Mark Jennings, head of news at TV3, said it would have no studio audience at its debate between Clark and Brash on September 15.

yem · 28th August 2005, 14:24

Smaller Party Leader's debate (90 mins)
w/ Jeanette Fitzsimons, Rodney Hide, Jim Anderton, Pita Sharples, Peter Dunne.

Notice someone missing? Winston Peters wanted to be included in the first debate with Helen & Don (even though he's currently polling the roughly same as the Greens). RNZ said sod off, so he boycotted the "smaller party" debate. haw haw. As someone pointed out in the post-debate analysis, he probably wouldn't have done well anyway since much of the discourse involved who could work with who - a topic Winston doesn't really have a public position on.

Anyway, this debate is pretty interesting

Sorry I f'd up and missed the earlier one on the economy (though the NtN tax debate covered the main issue fairly well).

Mabd · 28th August 2005, 16:59

Quote:

Originally posted by Nambio
Just given the two debates (radio + tvnz), I can cast aside my political views completely, and instantly give my support to Don Brash. Why? Because Don Brash doesnt interrupt his opponent, nor does he shout over the top of his opponent, nor does he shout over the top of the mediator, nor does he make "jokes" at the expense of his opponent (followed by a manly "haw haw haw").

Go for it. Because if this is the limit of your political interest then the Nats are welcome to your vote.

That statement's about as stupid as saying I'll vote for Helen because she's got hair. Ridiculous.

yem · 28th August 2005, 17:37

The other NtN debates from last week:

Education
Trevor Mallard, Bill English, Metiria Turei, Rodney Hide

Race Relations & Treaty
Trevor Mallard, Jerry Brownlee, Winston Peters, Atareta Poananga

Foreign Affairs
Phil Goff, Jerry Brownlee, Peter Dunne, Keith Locke

Immigration
Tony Ryall, Paul Swain, Winston Peters

Sgt Seb · 28th August 2005, 18:35

cheers yem, listening now.

yem · 30th August 2005, 20:23

Hospital Waiting Lists
w/ Annette King and Paul Hutchison

yem · 7th September 2005, 14:09

Issues Debate: Health
- Heather Roy (Act)
- Sue Kedgley (Greens)
- Annette King (Labour)
- Charles Joe (Maori)
- Paul Hutchinson (National)
- Barbara Stewart (NZ First)
- Jim Anderton (Jim's party

)
- Judy Turner (United Future)

yem · 7th September 2005, 14:11

Good long interview with Don Brash this morning, covering all areas.

[WanG] Wandarah · 7th September 2005, 14:19

It's quite simple.

You can trust Helen, because no one that ugly can be bullshitting you about anything.

yem · 7th September 2005, 18:43

That Don Brash interview is quite a cracker..

emails..

<lc> roger douglas warned you not to get painted as "hard right". why would he be worried about that?
<db> i've got no idea, you'd have to ask him that question
<lc> well he's a man who knows you well, knows your views. why would he say that to you?
<db> i think because he was concerned that if i follow a hard right agenda i would not get elected.
<lc> but why would he think you would follow a hard right agenda?
<db> i've got no idea to the answer of that question

owned on health subsidies..

<db> no reason why working age individuals on good incomes need a subsidy to go to the doctor
<lc> well its hard to judge that policy at the moment because we still haven't been given your definition of "good incomes". we don't know where the threshold.. the cutoff.. comes in.
<db> i accept that. we're working on that. we would expect the threshold to go up by at least $10,000 on the current level. we'll double the subsidy from $15 to $30.
<lc> so if the threshold goes up by $10,000 - correct me if i'm wrong - that would take it up to what, the high 30[,000]'s early 40's, wouldn't it?
<db> errr.. no i think the threshold is currently very low.. from memory it's about 21[,000]
<lc> so then if you take it up by 10,000 that would take it to 31,000
<db> correct
<lc> so $31,000 - by your measure - is a good income..?
<db> no no no no i didn't say that - i said this figure has not yet been determined. i said it would go up by at least 10,000
<lc> but if it goes up at least 10,000 lets put it up 11, lets put it up 15. you're saying 34,000.. 33,000 is a good income?
<db> what we're saying, linda, is if you want to provide a decent subsidy to those who most need it, don't give the same subsidy to someone who is on a high income.
<lc> but 35,000 is less than the average wage. it's not a high income.
<db> i accept that. we're not.. i'm not.. i'm explicitely not telling you what the threshold is going to be.
<lc> ah but why would you not tell us something as basic as that. because if we're about to vote for national, getting tax cuts on one hand, we want to know that the money we're getting through one door isn't going out the other to pay for our doctor's visits.
<db> let me be very clear indeed. there is no intention at all to cut the health spending..
<lc> that's not the point..
<db> that is the point you're raising - you're implying the tax cuts are an offset..
<lc> no no, i'm talking about my personal household budget. if i get $10 a week back from your tax cuts, but because i earn $34,000 a year i'm not eligible for free or subsidised medical care, then the $10 you're giving me through tax cuts, i'm spending to go to the doctor
<db> how many times a week do you go to the doctor?
<lc> well if i'm a mother, if i'm raising a family..
<db> that's the question linda! your tax cuts at $30,000 are worth about $500 a year. we're talking about a loss of $27 per doctors visit.
<lc> but you're leaving it open that on an average wage, i could be paying more for my gp visits
<db> you could be.

housing..

<db> .. we want to deliver that benefit primarily through the accomodation suppliment.
<lc> which is what national did in the 90s
<db> and we did it very effectively..
<lc> do you know what the impact of that policy was in the 90s?
<db> ..
<db> i'm not sure what you mean by that
<lc> well do you know what the social impact of that policy was in the 90s? pretty straight forward question..
<db> i don't have a comprehensive study, but i know that it got many people into affordable housing.
<lc> the Child Poverty Action Group, which was formed essentially on the back of that policy, says that when market rents came in last time under a National government, the level of child poverty in this country was tripled.
<db> i certainly don't regard that group as an objective.. ah.. group assessing any policy, certainly not the national party's..
<lc> well one of the health researchers, who's involved in the menb campaign for the ministry of health, said about three years ago that the meningococal epidemic began at the same time as market rents were introduced.. and one of the complicating factors.. the consequences of market rents was overcrowding; and one of the contributing factors to that epidemic was overcrowding.
<db> weeell we've still got the epidemic, linda. and we've had income related rents for the last six years..
<lc> so you don't accept that poverty was increased by that policy?
<db> i.. want.. a situation where every new zealand family has access to healthy and affordable housing..
<lc> well everyone wants that..
..
<lc> have you ever studied the policy in the 90s?
<db> ah.. not in detail, no.
<lc> do you not think it would have been a good idea to study the policy before you went back to it?
<db> linda.. we've committed to ensuring that new zealanders have access to affordable, healthy housing and we're committed to make nobody, who's currently getting subsidised housing [through the housing corp] worse off.
<lc> well by housing new zealand's own research shows that during the period of market rents, 58% of families paid more than 50% of their weekly income in rents. that is unsustainable, isn't it? that's a recipe for poverty.
<db> AND got an accomodation suppliment to offset that rent
..

Helen Clark gets the same treatment soon I think.

Funny Man · 7th September 2005, 18:43

thanks yem!

Mabd · 7th September 2005, 19:59

That's some funny shit, yem, but the truth of the matter is that in the majority the people who will vote National don't give a rats ass about social issues. Poverty line means nothing to them because they have no short term impact on their own lives because of it.

yem · 7th September 2005, 23:55

WTF? Just saw on the news that Sean Plunket has been stood down (presumably a temporary suspension) over his interview with Jeanette Fitzsimons this morning. Listeners complained about it afterwards, but really that one seemed pretty tame to me - at least compared to some previous interviews SP has done. Weird.

MoP · 8th September 2005, 00:49

jeez - he really doesn't have a clue at all does he?

Edit: referring to brash

yem · 8th September 2005, 12:24

SP suspension. Even Fitzsimons didn't think such a response was necessary.

Sgt Seb · 8th September 2005, 14:27

yeah, he doesn't have any respect. i don't think it was unbalanced though?, just confrontational...

lange would have sorted him out =)

Mabd · 8th September 2005, 18:00

The only person allowed to be confrontational is Paul Holmes... cos he tells it like it is. Just ask the darkie.

yem · 9th September 2005, 13:08

Good long interview with Helen Clark this morning, covering all areas.

chiquelet · 9th September 2005, 14:07

Thanks Yem for posting the Don Brash text.

Sounds like he handled it calmy. Had that been Helen, she would have called Linda a little prick or something

But who can honestly take Brash seriously? He's an intelligent man, and to claim that he has no clue of the negative repercussions of National's housing policy during the early 1990s is absolute rubbish.

I know politicians and liars, but Don and Helen are so blatant about it!

yem · 9th September 2005, 14:14

That's the bottom line. Anyone who claims to be ignorant of the negative outcomes of those reforms has absolutely no business meddling with it.

Full transcript of that interview is here BTW: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0509/S00100.htm

Sgt Seb · 9th September 2005, 17:09

Quote:

Originally posted by chiquelet
Thanks Yem for posting the Don Brash text.

Sounds like he handled it calmy. Had that been Helen, she would have called Linda a little prick or something

But who can honestly take Brash seriously? He's an intelligent man, and to claim that he has no clue of the negative repercussions of National's housing policy during the early 1990s is absolute rubbish.

I know politicians and liars, but Don and Helen are so blatant about it!

Because if he admitted problems, then it would be front page news the next day. He would be hounded relentlessly by the media for wanting to go back to a system which he himself admits has problems.

There is no room for constructive debate in our media.

yem · 14th September 2005, 11:04

Issues Debate: Education
- Deborah Coddington (Act)
- Metiria Turei (Greens)
- Trevor Mallard (Labour)
- Monty Ohia (Maori)
- Bill English (National)
- Brian Donnelly (NZ First)
- Megan Woods (Progressive)
- Bernie Ogilvy (United Future)

Evoke · 14th September 2005, 11:16

Quote:

Originally posted by yem

Full transcript of that interview is here BTW: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0509/S00100.htm

THIS ITEM HAS BEEN REMOVED PENDING DISCUSSIONS WITH RADIO NEW ZEALAND ON MONDAY

yem, can you make snippets with helen clark like you did with don brash?

yem · 15th September 2005, 13:05

Drag. I wish Radio NZ would get it together.. but that's another rant.

I only transcribed that part of the DB interview because it filled me with pure rage. The absolute gall of the man to profess ignorance of the effects of National's last housing policy is unforgivable.

Will have another listen to the HC interview and grab some bits if anything is particularly interesting.

23rd August 2005, 00:11	#41
scr SO'S YOUR FACE!	the exact same thing happened during the last election when holmes was hosting. i don't think sainsbury did a very good job. he's an alright reporter, but he doesn't do a very good job at hosting. the debate didn't really have much direction. simon dallow might have been better.

23rd August 2005, 12:02	#43
yem	<g> Nine to Noon mini-debate: Tax with Michael Cullen and John Key.

23rd August 2005, 12:28	#44
Nambio	does someone have a video cap of last nights debate? mine didnt work

23rd August 2005, 15:31	#45
yem	http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/411749/606094 is there if you can tolerate streaming.

23rd August 2005, 20:15	#48
Nambio	Just given the two debates (radio + tvnz), I can cast aside my political views completely, and instantly give my support to Don Brash. Why? Because Don Brash doesnt interrupt his opponent, nor does he shout over the top of his opponent, nor does he shout over the top of the mediator, nor does he make "jokes" at the expense of his opponent (followed by a manly "haw haw haw"). Helen gives the appearance of a desperate woman who realises shes about to lose the only part of her life worth living, where Don is calm and calculated in everything he does on the podium. Helen may be a better debater, but Don wins

23rd August 2005, 20:18	#49
Sgt Seb Up Unt At Dem!	Um, if Clark and Brash had a fight, no holds barred, I'd put money on Clarky. Her manliness has to be useful for something right? Brash's excuse that he is polite because 'she is a woman' is complete lol. He can't get a word in because he's a useless debater.

25th August 2005, 12:08	#55
yem	Just for fun, Nick Smith being interviewed this morning along with Chris Carter, on the subject of National's forestry and logging policy. Smith claimed the policy had not been released and didn't know where Carter or the interviewer were quoting from despite it being on the front page of the Herald today. Pretty funny

25th August 2005, 12:42	#56
Farmer Joe Word To Your Motherboard!	Whoa, wtf... resuming native logging on the west coast is the WORST IDEA EVER..... goddam even the Buller District Council Mayor thinks it's stupid. "I would have to say we were better off getting the $120 million because private companies have had a go at [sustainable beech logging] and they have had fairly limited success," he said. "I would be extremely sceptical if what they are proposing is a sustainable beech scheme. Beech trees are very hard to mill."

28th August 2005, 14:24	#58
yem	Smaller Party Leader's debate (90 mins) w/ Jeanette Fitzsimons, Rodney Hide, Jim Anderton, Pita Sharples, Peter Dunne. Notice someone missing? Winston Peters wanted to be included in the first debate with Helen & Don (even though he's currently polling the roughly same as the Greens). RNZ said sod off, so he boycotted the "smaller party" debate. haw haw. As someone pointed out in the post-debate analysis, he probably wouldn't have done well anyway since much of the discourse involved who could work with who - a topic Winston doesn't really have a public position on. Anyway, this debate is pretty interesting Sorry I f'd up and missed the earlier one on the economy (though the NtN tax debate covered the main issue fairly well). Last edited by yem : 28th August 2005 at 14:26.

28th August 2005, 17:37	#60
yem	The other NtN debates from last week: Education Trevor Mallard, Bill English, Metiria Turei, Rodney Hide Race Relations & Treaty Trevor Mallard, Jerry Brownlee, Winston Peters, Atareta Poananga Foreign Affairs Phil Goff, Jerry Brownlee, Peter Dunne, Keith Locke Immigration Tony Ryall, Paul Swain, Winston Peters

28th August 2005, 18:35	#61
Sgt Seb Up Unt At Dem!	cheers yem, listening now.

30th August 2005, 20:23	#62
yem	Hospital Waiting Lists w/ Annette King and Paul Hutchison

7th September 2005, 14:09	#63
yem	Issues Debate: Health - Heather Roy (Act) - Sue Kedgley (Greens) - Annette King (Labour) - Charles Joe (Maori) - Paul Hutchinson (National) - Barbara Stewart (NZ First) - Jim Anderton (Jim's party ) - Judy Turner (United Future)

7th September 2005, 14:11	#64
yem	Good long interview with Don Brash this morning, covering all areas.

7th September 2005, 14:19	#65
[WanG] Wandarah	It's quite simple. You can trust Helen, because no one that ugly can be bullshitting you about anything.

7th September 2005, 18:43	#66
yem	That Don Brash interview is quite a cracker.. emails.. <lc> roger douglas warned you not to get painted as "hard right". why would he be worried about that? <db> i've got no idea, you'd have to ask him that question <lc> well he's a man who knows you well, knows your views. why would he say that to you? <db> i think because he was concerned that if i follow a hard right agenda i would not get elected. <lc> but why would he think you would follow a hard right agenda? <db> i've got no idea to the answer of that question owned on health subsidies.. <db> no reason why working age individuals on good incomes need a subsidy to go to the doctor <lc> well its hard to judge that policy at the moment because we still haven't been given your definition of "good incomes". we don't know where the threshold.. the cutoff.. comes in. <db> i accept that. we're working on that. we would expect the threshold to go up by at least $10,000 on the current level. we'll double the subsidy from $15 to $30. <lc> so if the threshold goes up by $10,000 - correct me if i'm wrong - that would take it up to what, the high 30[,000]'s early 40's, wouldn't it? <db> errr.. no i think the threshold is currently very low.. from memory it's about 21[,000] <lc> so then if you take it up by 10,000 that would take it to 31,000 <db> correct <lc> so $31,000 - by your measure - is a good income..? <db> no no no no i didn't say that - i said this figure has not yet been determined. i said it would go up by at least 10,000 <lc> but if it goes up at least 10,000 lets put it up 11, lets put it up 15. you're saying 34,000.. 33,000 is a good income? <db> what we're saying, linda, is if you want to provide a decent subsidy to those who most need it, don't give the same subsidy to someone who is on a high income. <lc> but 35,000 is less than the average wage. it's not a high income. <db> i accept that. we're not.. i'm not.. i'm explicitely not telling you what the threshold is going to be. <lc> ah but why would you not tell us something as basic as that. because if we're about to vote for national, getting tax cuts on one hand, we want to know that the money we're getting through one door isn't going out the other to pay for our doctor's visits. <db> let me be very clear indeed. there is no intention at all to cut the health spending.. <lc> that's not the point.. <db> that is the point you're raising - you're implying the tax cuts are an offset.. <lc> no no, i'm talking about my personal household budget. if i get $10 a week back from your tax cuts, but because i earn $34,000 a year i'm not eligible for free or subsidised medical care, then the $10 you're giving me through tax cuts, i'm spending to go to the doctor <db> how many times a week do you go to the doctor? <lc> well if i'm a mother, if i'm raising a family.. <db> that's the question linda! your tax cuts at $30,000 are worth about $500 a year. we're talking about a loss of $27 per doctors visit. <lc> but you're leaving it open that on an average wage, i could be paying more for my gp visits <db> you could be. housing.. <db> .. we want to deliver that benefit primarily through the accomodation suppliment. <lc> which is what national did in the 90s <db> and we did it very effectively.. <lc> do you know what the impact of that policy was in the 90s? <db> .. <db> i'm not sure what you mean by that <lc> well do you know what the social impact of that policy was in the 90s? pretty straight forward question.. <db> i don't have a comprehensive study, but i know that it got many people into affordable housing. <lc> the Child Poverty Action Group, which was formed essentially on the back of that policy, says that when market rents came in last time under a National government, the level of child poverty in this country was tripled. <db> i certainly don't regard that group as an objective.. ah.. group assessing any policy, certainly not the national party's.. <lc> well one of the health researchers, who's involved in the menb campaign for the ministry of health, said about three years ago that the meningococal epidemic began at the same time as market rents were introduced.. and one of the complicating factors.. the consequences of market rents was overcrowding; and one of the contributing factors to that epidemic was overcrowding. <db> weeell we've still got the epidemic, linda. and we've had income related rents for the last six years.. <lc> so you don't accept that poverty was increased by that policy? <db> i.. want.. a situation where every new zealand family has access to healthy and affordable housing.. <lc> well everyone wants that.. .. <lc> have you ever studied the policy in the 90s? <db> ah.. not in detail, no. <lc> do you not think it would have been a good idea to study the policy before you went back to it? <db> linda.. we've committed to ensuring that new zealanders have access to affordable, healthy housing and we're committed to make nobody, who's currently getting subsidised housing [through the housing corp] worse off. <lc> well by housing new zealand's own research shows that during the period of market rents, 58% of families paid more than 50% of their weekly income in rents. that is unsustainable, isn't it? that's a recipe for poverty. <db> AND got an accomodation suppliment to offset that rent .. Helen Clark gets the same treatment soon I think.

7th September 2005, 18:43	#67
Funny Man	Re: Radio NZ election debates thanks yem!

7th September 2005, 19:59	#68
Mabd	That's some funny shit, yem, but the truth of the matter is that in the majority the people who will vote National don't give a rats ass about social issues. Poverty line means nothing to them because they have no short term impact on their own lives because of it.

7th September 2005, 23:55	#69
yem	WTF? Just saw on the news that Sean Plunket has been stood down (presumably a temporary suspension) over his interview with Jeanette Fitzsimons this morning. Listeners complained about it afterwards, but really that one seemed pretty tame to me - at least compared to some previous interviews SP has done. Weird.

8th September 2005, 00:49	#70
MoP	jeez - he really doesn't have a clue at all does he? Edit: referring to brash

8th September 2005, 12:24	#71
yem	SP suspension. Even Fitzsimons didn't think such a response was necessary.

8th September 2005, 14:27	#72
Sgt Seb Up Unt At Dem!	yeah, he doesn't have any respect. i don't think it was unbalanced though?, just confrontational... lange would have sorted him out =)

8th September 2005, 18:00	#73
Mabd	The only person allowed to be confrontational is Paul Holmes... cos he tells it like it is. Just ask the darkie.

9th September 2005, 13:08	#74
yem	Good long interview with Helen Clark this morning, covering all areas.

9th September 2005, 14:07	#75
chiquelet Mrs Colin Farrell	Thanks Yem for posting the Don Brash text. Sounds like he handled it calmy. Had that been Helen, she would have called Linda a little prick or something But who can honestly take Brash seriously? He's an intelligent man, and to claim that he has no clue of the negative repercussions of National's housing policy during the early 1990s is absolute rubbish. I know politicians and liars, but Don and Helen are so blatant about it!

9th September 2005, 14:14	#76
yem	That's the bottom line. Anyone who claims to be ignorant of the negative outcomes of those reforms has absolutely no business meddling with it. Full transcript of that interview is here BTW: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0509/S00100.htm

14th September 2005, 11:04	#78
yem	Last one Issues Debate: Education - Deborah Coddington (Act) - Metiria Turei (Greens) - Trevor Mallard (Labour) - Monty Ohia (Maori) - Bill English (National) - Brian Donnelly (NZ First) - Megan Woods (Progressive) - Bernie Ogilvy (United Future)

15th September 2005, 13:05	#80
yem	Drag. I wish Radio NZ would get it together.. but that's another rant. I only transcribed that part of the DB interview because it filled me with pure rage. The absolute gall of the man to profess ignorance of the effects of National's last housing policy is unforgivable. Will have another listen to the HC interview and grab some bits if anything is particularly interesting.